LIST OF DEFENDANTS + APPLICABLE CHARGES ETC:
"Each defendant has knowingly and/or perhaps unknowingly participated in the operation and management of the Enterprise, and has committed numerous acts to maintain and expand the Enterprise. In order to avoid discovery of their fraudulent conduct and the possibility that they might be called to account for their conduct, defendants engaged in a widespread scheme to frustrate public scrutiny by making false and deceptive statements and by concealing evidence in the form of documents etc that they knew would have exposed their public campaign of deceit. This scheme included making false and deceptive statements to the public etc. Defendants' tortious and unlawful course of conduct has caused plaintiff to suffer dangerous diseases and injuries. As a consequence of defendants' tortious and unlawful conduct, plaintiff has depleted all life insurance monies left to plaintiff by plaintiffs’ deceased brother and lost gainful employment. The effect of defendants' fraudulent scheme and wrongful conduct continues to this day; as defendants are continuing their unlawful and tortious conduct; and, unless restrained by this Court, defendants are likely to continue their unlawful activities into the future..."
"After experiencing 20+ years of police corruption and nonfeasance, malfeasance, misfeasance then seemingly endlessly expounding upon the harm caused thereafter; I am left with no other option than holding all defendants responsible for their relentless infliction of harm amounting to both irreparable physical trauma and intentionally inflicted emotional distress and/or PTSD trauma left unacknowledged through the egregious violation of my core constitutional right to free speech and expression; including the right to protect myself from non-consensual gendered violence and/or the constitutional right to defend myself in court..."
Plaintiff John suspects beyond a reasonable doubt all
parties and/or defendants listed in the following discovery process
documentation to be guilty of all charges enumerated and not necessarily listed
in order of importance:
1) Defendants the United States Department of Justice and/or DOJ for gross negligence and/or violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and/or Action For Neglect To Prevent and/or Conspiracy Against Rights etc; with prior knowledge of Plaintiff John's troubles going back at very least ten years; 2) Defendant The State of California and/or Governor Gavin Newsom for a) the financially and emotionally devastating elimination of Plaintiff John's long-time source of income and employment during the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown and/or b) Lack of required constitutional liberty suspensions; 3) Defendant The County of Santa Clara a) for violations of Plaintiff John's First Amendment Rights in repeatedly suppressing Plaintiff John's testimony leading to un-speedy; unconstitutional injustices and/or violation of Fourteenth Amendment rights to the United States Constitution and/or b) lack of due process and/or c) Invasion of Privacy and/or d) Violation of The Voting Rights Act of 1964 through using the color of law to intimidate a cannabis advocate who voted to legalize cannabis twice and/or who is supposed to still enjoy protection as a Proposition 215 voter/patient; and/or violating Plaintiff John's privacy without a required warrant to search Plaintiff John's personal spaces etc; e) lack of mandated speedy justice; f) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and/or I.I.E.D. etc; 4) Defendant The City of Sunnyvale for a) Obstruction of Justice and/or b) Conspiracy Against Rights and/or c) a general pervasive Pattern or Practice of Police Misconduct overseen by Defendant County of Santa Clara and/or The Department of Justice (federal/state); 5) Defendant Lockheed-Martin Corporation for a) the irresponsible destruction of Plaintiff Lester's auditory system leading to hearing loss and a lack of enjoyment of life; leading to b) a massive mischaracterization of Plaintiff John's necessary loud demeanor communicating with Plaintiff Lester (class-action); 6) El Camino Health Care for a) Neglecting To Prevent the necessary restraint of Defendant Davy and/or b) gendered discrimination and/or c) Prescription medication error in under-prescribing dangerous prednisone; which could have caused Plaintiff John adrenal insufficiency if John did not Google the subject the night before running out of prednisone and return to the ER the next day; 7) Defendant Kaiser Permanente Corporation for irresponsible medical practices causing Plaintiff Lester to almost lose an arm due to a life threatening staph infection caused by employee negligence; 8) Defendant Kris Davy for a) Animal Cruelty due to irresponsible treatment of Plaintiff John's beloved cat Molly and/or b) Obstruction of Justice and/or c) Conspiracy Against Rights and/or d) Obstruction of Justice and/or e) Stale Misdemeanor Assault with special circumstances and/or f) Property Theft (currently unassessed by Defendant Sunnyvale DPS) and/or g) Invasion of Privacy and/or PERJURY for lying on a codified court document and/or in Family Court etc; H) Financial Elder Abuse for draining her Father Lester's life savings to fix up Lester's house for an eventual sale that never happened; leaving Plaintiff Lester broke and depressed and financially dependent upon Defendant Davy who as of 15 June 2023 is refusing to pay for Plaintiff Lester's fence that went down during the storms of late 2022 and early 2023; which is in turn causing Lester to acquire a reverse-mortgage on his residence; 9) Defendant Sandy Tabbada for a) Animal Cruelty due to irresponsible treatment of Plaintiff John's beloved cat Molly and/or b) Invasion of Privacy and/or c) Alleged Elder Sexual Abuse and/or d) Failure to report Defendant Davy's violent conduct to proper authorities and/or PERJURY for lying on a codified court document and/or in court etc; and 10) Defendant/Lawyer Leila Sockolov for encouraging Defendants Davy and Tabbada to euthanize the cat of an allegedly suicidal individual (Plaintiff John) amounting and/or leading directly to I.I.E.D and/or b) Attorney Misconduct 🠟(see segments 13-14 below)🠟
"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; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws..."
https://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/
https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/
https://addendumblog3.blogspot.com/
SEE ALSO: APPELLATE RESPONSE: SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA (DTS) CASE # B2201070 + FAMILY COURT DIVISION CASE # 22EA000051 -- REQUESTING LEAVE TO PRESENT A LATE CLAIM / BOARD OF SUPERVISORS / BOS #24-284 @ https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/2024/05/appellate-response-superior-court-of.html
(X1A) PATTERN OR PRACTICE: this civil statute was a provision within the Crime Control Act of 1994 and makes it unlawful for any governmental authority, or agent thereof, or any person acting on behalf of a governmental authority, to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct by law enforcement officers or by officials or employees of any governmental agency with responsibility for the administration of juvenile justice or the incarceration of juveniles that deprives persons of rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
DPS BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE FROM 2022 EXPOSING JUSTICE OBSTRUCTION AND/OR EVIDENCE SUPPRESSION ETC @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt-QKne4-_I&t=7s + DPS body camera footage exposing a pattern or practice of justice obstruction going back to 1999 @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6GoM-bpv5c&t=29s + FRIENDLY RETALIATION AGAINST A JOURNALIST? @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z8mSy-qhY8
PRIOR KNOWLEDGE OF VIOLENT CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES BY DEFENDANT DAVY: KRIS DAVY: ATTEMPTED VANDALISM OF SURVEILLANCE EQUIPMENT / 30 JUN 2015 @ https://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2015/07/kris-clefstad-attempted-vandalism-of.html + KRIS DAVY: INCIDENT #EV 15118 237 | VANDALISM + PROPERTY THEFT ETC @ https://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2015/04/kris-clefstad-incident-ev-15118-237.html
SEE ALSO: https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/2017/11/various-fraudulent-claims-etc.html
Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the Attorney General, for or in the name of the United States, may in a civil action obtain appropriate equitable and declaratory relief to eliminate the pattern or practice.
RESULTS OF GOOGLE AI SEARCH:
TABLE OF CONTENTS: (1) EQUAL PROTECTIONS: / (2) 14TH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTIONS: / (3) 14TH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTIONS (CONTINUED): / (3a) CALIFORNIA STATE LEVEL EQUAL PROTECTION LAWS BEYOND OVERARCHING 14TH AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS: / (3b) PROTECTED CLASS (MEDICAL CONDITIONS/DISABILITY ETC -- POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS ARE ALSO PROTECTED UNDER THESE LAWS: PLAINTIFF JOHN IS EQUALLY PROTECTED UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE EQUAL PROTECTION CONSTITUTIONAL STATUTES: / (4-6) ANIMAL CRUELTY / (7-12) DISSUASIVE WITNESS TAMPERING/PERJURY/BRIBERY/SUBORNATION OF PERJURY / PERJURY: / (13-14) ACTIONABLE LEGAL COUNSEL MISCONDUCT: / (15-20) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE: / (21-22) INVASION OF PRIVACY: / (23-23a-23b) USPS MAIL FRAUD THEFT: / (24-24a) FLAG DESECRATION: / (25) CLASS BASED DISCRIMINATION: / (26-32) DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE TO MEDICAL NEEDS: / (33-35) SECRET WITNESSES: / (36) ADA VIOLATIONS: ELDER ABUSE + CIVIL FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION ETC: / (37) DECLARATION OF RIGHTS: / (38) SUBORNATION OF PERJURY (REVISITED): / (39) FLAG DESECRATION: / (40) CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTS (18 USC 241): / (40a) STALE MISDEMEANOR? ETC / (41) UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (UDHR): / (42) THE FIRST AMENDMENT: / (43) THE 9/11 INCIDENT:
"The courts should overrule all explicit gendered biases and or at least clarify statutory silence regarding necessary powers and protections granted elsewhere to females; and or inherently, axiomatically discriminatory misinterpreted and or misrepresented constitutional rights where males are axiomatically guaranteed equal protections; constituting overarching ambiguity requiring equal deference and or equal protections and or equal justice under law to both sexes..." -- "Similarly and collectively: courts should essentially overrule all explicit socioeconomic and or gendered and or race-based discriminations across the board without hesitation due to the pluralistic natures of various individual judiciary leanings..."
"Bagley versus Sunnyvale proved low-income white males are the most discriminated against in this particular Santa Clara County region; with a discovery process conducted by an African-American lawyer; therefore due to jurisdictional variations and multicultural socioeconomic monocultural conflations needing universal protections; all forms of discrimination must be eliminated..
(1) EQUAL PROTECTIONS: The first screenshot regards overarching equal protections guaranteed as a statutory constitutional mandate for all U.S. citizens; (2-5) Shows similar mirror laws at the federal and state levels essentially doubling up on 14th Amendment mandates including protected class status for medical conditions and/or disability:
 |
| (3) 14TH AMENDMENT EQUAL PROTECTIONS (CONTINUED): |
 |
| (3a) CALIFORNIA STATE LEVEL EQUAL PROTECTION LAWS BEYOND OVERARCHING 14TH AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS: |
 |
| (3b) PROTECTED CLASS (MEDICAL CONDITIONS/DISABILITY ETC -- POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS ARE ALSO PROTECTED UNDER THESE LAWS: PLAINTIFF JOHN IS EQUALLY PROTECTED UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE EQUAL PROTECTION CONSTITUTIONAL STATUTES: |
(4-6) ANIMAL CRUELTY is an applicable statute regarding Defendant Davy's abuse, neglect and abandonment of Plaintiff John's beloved cats Molly Cat and Sweetie Pie; attached are photos of these beloved pets who were equally as much or more a part of the family as occasional visitor Defendant Davy ('DD'):
 |
| (4) ANIMAL CRUELTY |
 |
| (5) SWEETIE CAT: |
 |
| (6) MOLLY CAT: |
(6a) EVIDENCE OF ANIMAL CRUELTY BY DD:
 |
| (6b) EVIDENCE OF COMPASSIONATE CARE: |
(7-12) DISSUASIVE WITNESS TAMPERING/PERJURY/BRIBERY ETC: DD's actions facilitated by co-Defendants The State of California and/or The County of Santa Clara and/or The City of Sunnyvale (DPS) etc include: Dissuasive Witness Tampering (Perjury/Bribery/Subornation of Perjury etc) regarding DD's decade plus long crime spree overseen and/or facilitated by Sunnyvale DPS etc;
 |
| (7) DISSUASIVE WITNESS TAMPERING: |
 |
| (8) DISSUADING A WITNESS: |
.png) |
(9) BRIBERY:
(9a) BRIBERY (see also #9): felony committed by DD for increasing Plaintiff John's weekly online cash allotment given by John's Father Lester during the first 4 weeks after Plaintiff John's illegal 2022 eviction with force facilitated by Sunnyvale DPS including deliberate indifference to Plaintiff John's medical needs:  | | The above segment is undisputable evidentiary proof DD bribed Plaintiff John in the days before an important Court proceeding at the Superior Court of California Family Division -- all part of a multi-year effort to dissuade John; after John's illegal eviction using force without required 3-day notice or a warrant to search John's private belongings other than perjurious misleading slanderous defamatory testimony submitted on a codified document by DD... |
|
 |
| (10) SUBORNATION OF PERJURY: |
 |
| (11) PERJURY: |
 |
| (12) FRAUDULENT CLAIM BY DD: |
GO TO: Friday, June 16, 2023 / SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA (DTS) CASE # B2201070 + FAMILY COURT DIVISION CASE # 22EA000051 -- PERJURY; ASSAULT; ANIMAL CRUELTY; INVASION OF PRIVACY; OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE; DEFAMATION AND/OR SLANDER + ESTABLISHING FACTUAL INNOCENCE ETC: @ https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/2023/06/superior-court-of-california-dts-case_25.html
A) ATTACHMENT 6b: Perjury: "John wants to be paid for caretaking services instead, which he is incapable of performing..."
TRUTH: Not only did John save Lester's life when Lester suffered from a stroke a few years back (as well as saving Lester's life roughly 5 times during other times of his life) successfully taking care of Lester for about 5 years post-stroke until John fell ill for about exactly one year to the day April 2021/April 2020 (see medical documentation attachments @ ).
B) ATTACHMENT 6b: Perjury: "On May 2, 2022. John accused Sandy of causing him to miss a medical appointment, which was cancelled (or not scheduled to begin with..."
TRUTH: John scheduled a dermatological appointment through Stanford Health Care 3 months before aforementioned non-appointment suggested by Defendants. John ultimately missed that appointment on the same day he was released from Elmwood for violating a restraining order he did not have possession of due to negligence of SCC Sheriffs who failed to ensure John left his residence with this required document they were paid to deliver to John 18 May 2023.
C) ATTACHMENT 6b: Perjury: "On May 3rd, John screamed at Sandy because he did not like any of the Factor 75 meals which were delivered to the house. Factor 75 meals are prepared, microwavable meals that Lester's daughter orders and has delivered to make sure Lester eats. While Lester has shouldered a lot of the abuse towards himself, he called the police in (sic) May 3 to protect Sandy from John as the rage and abuse went on and on..."
TRUTH: 1) Kris Davy was ordered by John's father to order Factor 75 meals not only for himself; but also Plaintiff John who was sick for a year to the day from April 2021 to April 2023. (no mention of John's year-long medical emergency was contained in the fraudulent codified document submitted to family court Commissioner Eric Johnson)
D) ATTACHMENT 6b: Perjury: "On the night of May 3, John screamed into the neighborhood from hours between 8 p.m. to 3:30 a.m. that Sandy stole his cat Sweetie. Fortunately Sandy was not there at the time. Other neighbors became involved, calling Lester's daughter to report the disturbance to her..."
TRUTH: Plaintiff John "screamed into the neighborhood" worried about his beloved cat Sweetie after John had several cats killed -- 3 DEAD CATS IN 3 WEEKS -- AND ONE APPARENTLY KILLED BY EX-SCPD OFFICER'S SON JAKE PAOLINETTI!?! And this intentionally inflicted emotional outburst lasted for about 15 minutes maximum until around 10:30 p.m. (as opposed to the codified 3:30 a.m.) around the time when John found Sweetie hiding under the hutch in the living room; frequently frightened by the chaos created by Defendants Davy/Tabadda.
John's aforementioned Intentionally Inflicted Emotional Distress (IIED) by Defendant Tabadda and Plaintiff John's sister Kris Davy was the cause of this; including the PTSD caused by the many unexplained deaths of John's cats over the years. Therefore; any neighbor who was unconcerned about John's emotional health after a year of confinement in bed sick; is simply not the "good neighbor" State Farm Insurance company speaks of.
E) ATTACHMENT 6b: Perjury -- Why Other (sic) Need Protection: "Kris Davy is Lester Joseph Clefstad's adult daughter and has spearheaded efforts to care for her aging father..."
TRUTH: Plaintiff John not only saved Lester's life when he suffered from a stroke a few years back; but John also took care of Lester after the stroke as Kris Davy spent most of her time elsewhere shopping and going for little walks on a regular basis while eating like a pig; wondering why she had a difficult time maintaining a healthy weight.
Which in turn adversely affected her father Lester who needed high calorie foods to keep his weight up instead of the diet foods Defendant Davy was feeding him. At one point when a male caregiver was feeding Lester after John relinquished duties due to illness; Lester lost 20 pounds and was very literally dangerously near death. Plaintiff John's high calorie diet ultimately returned Lester to a healthy weight.
Adding to this; John miraculously took care of his father while deathly ill himself; losing 20 pounds as well at one point in time as recorded by Stanford Health Care.
F) Attachment 6b Perjury: "She (Defendant Davy) stays with friends due to safety concerns...": First off; Defendant Davy not only attacked Defendant John in April 2022 (John called the Sunnyvale DPS non-emergency line a Sunday night [April 10th?] between 6-9 pm; a file clerk answered the phone but sent no responding unit likely due to gender-based discrimination; whereas if the same thing happened to a woman action would have been taken).
TRUTH: Defendant Davy has been occasionally attacking John while hiding and stealing Plaintiff John's property for many years now (as John reported to two El Camino Health ER units during 2021) and or outright destroying Plaintiff John's property as with Defendant John's prized rare rainforest plants that were destroyed by Defendant Davy after Sunnyvale DPS's bungled response to John's request for a civil standby; as both the county sheriff's office and DPS refused to perform a legally required civil standby for Defendant John. In turn causing John irreparable harm due to this heartless; nonchalant illegal response.
Right after John's illegal eviction using force by Defendant Davy without the required 3 days notice and without a warrant to search Ohn's private possessions beyond a totally fabricated complaint misleading county sheriffs into ridiculously aggressive "Nazi-style" actions on May 18 2022. DOmestic violence that DPS had prior knowledge of on May 3rd 2022 (see DPS body camera footage) yet DPS took zero action to help Defendant John once again.
Therefore; Plaintiff John is the one who ultimately needs protection as John has needed for the last decade; not Defendant Davy.
G) Attachment 6b Perjury: "John screams at Kris when he sees her, and is verbally abusive toward her. For example he (Defendant John) called her a "fucking cunt" and that he wrote a song called "My Sister is a Fucking Cunt".
TRUTH: As aforementioned in the last paragraphs; the main reason for John's loud and boisterous demeanor is Defendant John's need to speak loudly to his father Lester due to his severe hearing loss caused by Defendant "Lockheed Martin Corporation; John had also been singing 30 songs once a week for about 3 hours causing John's voice to be the strongest it had even been in the 20+ years he had been independently singing; much like The Who's Roger Daltrey who gained a strong singing voice attempting to sing over his loud band; John's strong voice was helped by these necessary loud conversations with Lester.
(John also played in arenas with a band many years back who opened for GNR at small clubs in LA and SF; and the singer of this band witnessed GNR in the studio choosing foul words for their debut album; causing this singer to assume GNR would be a failure. This singer released a tame compromising album; while GNRs uncompromising attitude was one of the biggest selling hard rock albums of all time. So much for external and or self-censorship)
H) Perjury: Attachment 6b: "Kris is always looking for white vans following her..."
TRUTH: First off; at the time this was testimony was fabricated by Defendant Davy; John was regularly using his father's Honda to shop for his father and get around town for errands (grocery shopping etc) therefore Defendant Davy's paranoid claims are not only totally baseless but also perjurious as well; If factual; this perjurious claim by Defendant Davy frighteningly and sadly exposes Defendant Davy's severe paranoia and mental illness John has been the victim of for many years now. John has been reluctant to file charges against his unstable and unpredictable sister Defendant Davy.
Monday, September 25, 2017 / KRIS DAVY (CONTINUED) #2 @ http://lreblogger.blogspot.com/2017/09/kris-clefstad-continued.html
Hb) Perjury: Attachment 10b(3) - Describe Abuse: "Anything can set John off; and when he is angry his verbal tirades last for hours and into the night..."
TRUTH: Defendant Davy caused so much pervasive trouble in Plaintiff John's life that at one point DPS responded to Defendant Davy's 911 call AFTER DEFENDANT DAVY CALLED LESTER'S PHONE ABOUT 500 TIMES ONE MORNING! THIS AND OTHER SIMILAR INCIDENTS CAUSED IMMENSE AMOUNTS OF TROUBLE AND STRESS FOR PLAINTIFF JOHN AND HIS FATHER LESTER.
"Verbal tirades" is just another term for "John expressing himself"; which Plaintiff John is legally allowed to do under the First Amendment and/or whether Defendant Davy wants to overcome her severe cranial-posterior syndrome -- or not. Either way: the obsessive repetitive focus on the word "screaming" without any supporting evidence is just ridiculous conjecture.
I) Perjury: Attachment 10b(3) - Describe Abuse: "When John is angry with Lester, he swings his arm and fist back, but deliberately stops short of hitting Lester..." -- "Instead, he pulls his fist back at the last moment, or swings his fist into the chair which John sits. Lester, who uses a walker could easily lose his balance and fall..."
TRUTH: Yet another large stinking pile of totally unprovable salacious nonsense submitted on a codified form designed to make John appear to be the violent person he is not: DEFENDANT DAVY VICIOUSLY ATTACKED JOHN IN APRIL 2021; THEN FLED RETURNING TO SEATTLE TO CAREFULLY PLAN CONTACTING A COUNTY POLICE AGENCY WITH OUTRIGHT PERJURIOUS CONTENT TO DISTRACT FROM HER ILLEGAL BEHAVIORS; THEN GO OVER THE HEADS OF SUNNYVALE DPS; HOPEFULLY LEADING TO HER EVENTUAL ARREST. AND SURE ENOUGH; THE DUMB SUCKERS AT THE COUNTY LEVEL BOUGHT DEFENDANT DAVY'S BULL CRAP BECAUSE GENDER BIAS PRETTY MUCH RUNS DUMBASS LIBERALLY BIASED REGIONS LIKE THIS.
DEFENDANT DAVY MADE A VIDEO OF THIS AFOREMENTIONED 10 APRIL 2022 ATTACK; BUT AFTER BRINGING THIS VIDEO TO THE ATTENTION OF VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS WHO COULD HAVE TAKEN ACTION AND CORRECT THIS CASE; WILLFULL DISREGARD OF PLAINTIFF JOHN'S EFFORTS TO EXPOSE WERE IGNORED.
J) Perjury: Attachment 10b(3) - Describe Abuse: "John has also consumed Lester's 'mediations' (sic)..." -- "John also consumes Lester's prepared meals, selecting the ones he likes best..." -- "Essentially, he leaves Lester with leftovers..."
TRUTH: Plaintiff John has NEVER consumed Lester's 'mediations'; as 'mediations' is a nonsensical term from the mind of Defendant Davy's axiomatically inept lawyer. But John DID consume Lester's medications like acetaminophen which Lester gave John permission to do.
Defendant John also could not consume certain meals that contained eczema allergens like beef or processed foods or preservatives etc etc etc; and some Factor meals bought by Lester for both Plaintiff John and Lester were simply undesirable for Lester; while Defendants Davy and Tabbada kept feeding Lester meals Lester failed to finish; eating about half and not getting enough calories in the process and ultimately losing weight. Plaintiff John later found out he had pacreatitis made worse by food supplied by Defendant Davy.
K) Perjury: Attachment 10b(3) - Describe Abuse: "Despite his neglect, John is angry that caretakers have been hired since January 2022, after Lester contacted ocular shingles and needed assistance..."
"John has shouted that he should be Lester's caretaker, he should earn $45000 a month, and that if a caretaker was hired, he would kill himself..." -- "John now has his sights set on Lester's current caretaker, and is doing all that he can to make sure she quits..."
TRUTH: The last segment is SO FULL OF GOD DAMNED NONSENSICAL CRAP AND/OR PERJURIOUS BULL CRAP that it is almost not worth responding to. But! since failure to respond could be viewed by some as an admission of guilt; an appropriate response is clearly in order at this particular juncture:
YOU'RE TOTALLY FULL OF SHIT AS USUAL DEFENDANT DAVY! JOHN NEVER THREATENED TO KILL HIMSELF! THAT IS DEFENDANT DAVY'S USUAL SALACIOUS, PERJURIOUS NONSENSE DESIGNED TO DEFAME JOHN WHILE CAREFULLY PROTECTING HER SECRET VIOLENT REPUTATION. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE TO BACK THESE RIDICULOUS SUICIDAL THREAT CLAIMS; AND THE FACT REMAINS THAT DEFENDANT DAVY DID ALL OF THIS ACTUALLY THINKING HER BROTHER PLAINTIFF JOHN WAS SUICIDAL!?!
WHICH IS FURTHER PROOF OF DEFENDANT DAVY'S EXTREME PSYCHOPATHY AND WILLINGNESS TO INFLICT INTENTIONAL EMOTIONAL DISTRESS ON PLAINTIFF JOHN. DEFENDANT DAVY IS DOING NOTHING MORE THAN PROVING ALL OVER AGAIN WHAT AN EVIL CUNT FROM HELL DEFENDANT DAVY REALLY IS!
ONCE AGAIN; JOHN WAS SUFFERING FROM AN OFFICIAL MEDICAL EMERGENCY THAT WAS UNACKNOWLEDGED BY SUNNYVALE DPS FROM APRIL 2021 TO APRIL 2022 -- WHEN DEFENDANT DAVY VICIOUSLY ATTACKED PLAINTIFF JOHN ON A SUNDAY NIGHT AROUND APRIL 10TH 2021 -- CAUSING JOHN TO CALL DPS NON-EMERGENCY AND SPEAK TO A FEMALE ATTENDANT WHO WAS NOT A DPS OFFICER; YET NO RESPONDING UNIT WAS SENT TO DO A WELLNESS CHECK ON JOHN SINCE THIS REGION IS SO GOD DAMNED LIBERALLY BIASED.
(note: large font corroborates and/or increases veracity of claims)
L) Perjury: Attachment 10b(3) - Describe Abuse: "John is unemployed, and Lester pays for John's expenses..." -- "from time to time, John demands Lester give him money..." -- "If Lester does not comply, John yells and screams at him until he does..." -- "When Lester's daughter tries to give Lester cash, John takes it and uses it for his own spending..."
TRUTH: Once again for the ten millionth time; JOHN NOT ONLY SAVED LESTER'S LIFE DURING A LIFE-THREATENING STROKE; BUT JOHN ALSO TOOK CARE OF LESTER FOR ABOUT 6 YEARS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC LOCKDOWN WHEN DEFENDANT DAVY ATTEMPTED TO FLY HOME AND GIVE BOTHE LESTER AND PLAINTIFF JOHN THIS DREADED DISEASE! AND SINCE DEFENDANTS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND/OR GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM ILLEGALLY SHUT DOWN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WITHOUT REQUIRED CONSTITUTIONAL SUSPENSION;
JOHN ENDED UP BROKE AND DESPERATE DURING THE PANDEMIC LOCKDOWN DURING A SENSITIVE TIME WHEN DEFENDANT JOHN REALIZED HE HAD BREAST CANCER (WHICH FATHER LESTER WITNESSED) -- DURING THIS TIME LESTER ALLOWED JOHN USAGE OF HIS CREDIT CARD SINCE DEFENDANT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA KILLED JOHN'S EMPLOYMENT OF 35+ YEARS. JOHN ULTIMATELY RID HIMSELF OF BREAST CANCER USING NATURAL METHODS:
1) Raw garlic; 2) green tea extract; 3) cruciferous vegetables; 4) grapes; 5) tomatoes (lycopene); 6) CBDs; 7) Cannabis and/or hemp oil; 8) shitake mushrooms; 9) high doses of vitamin C; 10) Baking soda to increase blood alkalinity; and several other natural methods. 11) WHILE CEASING WINE AND/OR ALCOHOL INTAKE IN GENERAL; etc etc etc (Google it)...
M) Perjury: Attachment 10b(3) - Describe Abuse: "The abuse is constant. It has been ongoing, but lately it has become worse. It caused Lester to call the Sunnyvale Police Department on May 3 and temporarily move out of his home..."
TRUTH: The abuse of Defendant John by Defendant Davy was constant for many years whenever Defendant Davy visited Lester's home; so this is the usual gas lighting from Bat Shit Crazy Defendant Davy; just another lame attempt to cover up her own violent abuse of Defendant John that was constant for many years.
N) Perjury: Attachment 10b(6) - Harm or injury: "Lester Joseph Clefstad has lost so much as a result of John Andrew Clefstad's abuse..." -- "He (Lester) is stressed, awake all night worrying, and losing weight..." -- "Sometimes he cannot access his mediation (sic)..." -- "He (Lester) sorely needs the help of these caregivers..." -- "Lately he (Lester) has found a competent, careful, kind, responsible caretaker, and he is at risk of losing her too as a result of John's abuse..." -- "For the last week, Lester has moved out of his own home and has been living in a hotel..." -- "He (Lester) is scared of John..." -- There is always the fear John will snap, especially with his drug use..."
Lester's life was saved at least 5 times by John; including when Lester suffered a stroke a few years back; including once after brother Carl Clefstad died in a dead on collision Christmas Eve 1999 where Lester was almost run over by a bus going to church at the Mission Church at Santa Clara University; causing Lester and John to refrain from attending church ever again. This was around the time that people were regularly getting run over by buses here in Santa Clara County; and this driver drove like he or she did not care who was in the street in front of them and came barreling through in a way that would have killed Lester instantly.
As aforementioned: Lester lost much of his financial fortune at the urging of Defendant Davy; who has been talking Lester into spending his savings pension monies on fixing up Lester's house. One time Defendant Davy requested "pony wall" be installed in Lester's living room.
Adding to this; brother Carl's stock portfolio (which Lester needed after having his all his money spent by Defendant Davy) went from $500,000 around the time of the illegal eviction when Plaintiff John urged his dumbass college educated sister to short sell all stocks since the war in Ukraine was beginning; but Defendant Davy declined and now that same portfolio is now worth a greatly reduced portion half of the original $500,000.
Therefore; Defendant Davy is clearly guilty of financial abuse of Plaintiff Lester; while Lester once offered John $150,000 which John declined...
Also; Lester was "awake all night worrying" due to the fact that Lester was taking a dangerous cocktail of 15 drugs that compromised his mental and physical functions. Lester was mainly worried that Defendant John "did not have a pot to piss in" as Lester said.
Worried about Defendant John's financial future after John was sick for an entire year after having his job of 35+ years DESTROYED by Defendant California Governor Gavin Newsom. Which probably means Defendant Newsom needs to start worrying along with Lester.
But once Plaintiff John is finally compensated for the roughly 20+ years of DPS police misconduct with the roughly $1 million dollars he has been due for a long time due to discrimination against low income white males like John (see: Bagley vs City of Sunnyvale) Plaintiff John is assured that Lester will stop worrying about John's finances.
Furthermore -- The truth is: seizing upon inept Lawyer Leila's glaring typo; when John first appeared in Commissioner Eric Johnson's courtroom; MEDIATORS WERE PROMISED BUT NEVER FURNISHED TO PLAINTIFF JOHN. Other than that; 'medication' (as opposed to 'mediation') ingested by John was acetaminophen and/or tylenol. This activity was not only fully approved by Lester; but also a ridiculous argument to bring up along with all of the other outright perjuries submitted on a codified court document by Defendants Davy and Tabbada.
Lester sorely needed the help of those caregivers; SINCE JOHN WAS SICK FOR A YEAR FROM APRIL 2021 TO APRIL 2022; WITH ZERO PROTECTION FROM DEFENDANT DAVY BY SUNNYVALE DPS; AS DPS HAS REPEATEDLY REFUSED OR DECLINED OR IS UNWILLING OR WHATEVER THEIR GOD DAMNED PROBLEM IS -- TO HELP DEFENDANT JOHN EVERY TIME DEFENDANT JOHN HAS CONTACTED SUNNYVALE DPS FOR THE PAST 20+ YEARS DUE TO CLASS/RACE/GENDER BIAS!
DEFENDANT SUNNYVALE DPS IS TOTALLY INCOMPETENT AND DISCRMINATORY BUT THE CITY OF SUNNYVALE CANNOT NECESSARILY FIRE THEIR WAY OUT OF THE SITUATION BY TERMINATING THE EMPLOYMENTSOF QUESTIONABLE EMPLOYEES -- IT IS A CITY OF SUNNYVALE HABITUAL PRACTICE!
Adding to this; as aforementioned JOHN WAS THE ONE WITH THE ORIGINAL IDEA TO ACQUIRE CAREGIVERS FOR LESTER -- So yes; Lester DID need the help of caregivers; but that statement was axiomatic and not worth mentioning along with pretty much everything else in Defendant Davy and Tabbada's totally perjurious submitted codified document.
Also; the obviously biased assessment of Defendant Tabbada is completely without merit; as Tabbada was clearly NOT a totally competent caregiver since she not only showed bias towards Plaintiff John and refused to report Defendant Davy's brutal attack of Plaintiff John in April 2022; But Tabbada also took part in the torture of John's dying cat Molly; who Defendants Tabbada and Davy left outside to die in Molly's last days on Earth last summer. Both of these meanspirited perjurious defendants need to be charged with conspiratorial animal cruelty.
Not only is Defendant Tabbada incompetent when it comes to universal caring for who are ill (meaning Tabbada needs to be de-certified as a caregiver to protect others from Tabbada); but Defendant Tabbada is clearly not careful; otherwise why would a supposedly college-educated individual like Tabbada do such stupid things as submit perjurious content on a codified document along with axiomatically dumbass college-educated Defendant Davy?
If Defendant Tabbada is careful about anything; Tabbada very carefully / uncarefully lied through her teeth on a document submitted in Family Court along with Defendant Davy. Defendant Tabbada is also an irresponsible caregiver when it comes to equally protecting the civil rights of Plaintiff John; and it would have been a great thing for Lester to lose Defendant Tabbada as a caregiver since Tabbada allegedly molesting Lester and likely continues this.
Lester moved out of his home after several months of stalking and harassment and menacing and theft directed at Plaintiff John by Defendant Davy; which caused an immense amount of intentionally inflicted emotional distress and/or situational stress for Plaintiff John as Defendant Davy abused the DPS 911 hotline with useless call after useless call.
While Defendant John was later told to avoid any situational stress; but when Defendant Davy found out about this; Defendant Davy escalated her harassment and stalking of Defendant John. For instance; Defendant Davy called Lester's phone about 200 times one morning; showing her uncontrollable obsessive compulsive nature and/or how it can adversely disaffect others.
The other truth is; Lester 'snaps' every day by throwing a loud tantrum (as witnessed by the first caregivers who visited when Lester was yelling at the top of his lungs in the kitchen as he did around his son Plaintiff John daily) and the dangerous cocktail of prescription drugs are at least partially responsible for these regular daily outbursts.
Adding to this; mental decline in senior citizens (mainly men) is usually the cause of unrestrained emotional outbursts like Lester regularly suffers from; so these outbursts are not necessarily Plaintiff John's or Father Lester's fault -- as Alzheimer's disease causes this.
On May 3rd 2022 John accused Defendant Tabbada of being 'hooker' for inappropriately touching Lester in the genital region; causing Defendant Tabbada to distract from this allegation by "going to Daddy" (Lester) and telling on John to cover up her alleged sexual abuse. (Defendant Tabbada has an unusual "Freudian" obsession with Lester; as she admitted the first day that she needed a new father since her father died [Note: According to Tabbada: her father was a dirty smoking drinking Filipino lawyer]; then Tabbada became increasingly attached and strangely possessive of Lester; monitoring Plaintiff John's conversations with Lester and causing Plaintiff John to talk to his father Lester after Defendant Tabbada left for the day).
Then on the night of May 3rd 2022; John's beloved cat Sweetie Pie went missing at night for the first time ever; causing Plaintiff John to righteously "totally freak out" about Sweetie's disappearance; with big hearted and compassionate Plaintiff John finding Sweetie about 30 minutes later hiding under the living room hutch. Causing John to go to bed shortly after.
Therefore; the nonsense about John running around screaming until 3 am in the morning is yet another huge stinking pile of useless horse shit submitted by these desperate defendants. John ran around freaking out about Sweetie for about a half hour and went to bed; saying "I love you Dad" to which Dad answered back "I love you John..."
When it comes to family court decisions; Lester saying he loved his son on the night of May 3rd 2022 shows there was no conflict between John and Lester on that particular night; and Lester was probably just fearing potential karma for chasing Defendant John around the house threateningly whenever Lester got angry at John as Lester did so often to Defendant John.
(The truth is: Lester is afraid of Defendant Davy)
O) Perjury: DECLARATION OF KRIS DAVY IN SUPPORT OF LESTER JOSEPH CLEFSTAD'S REQUEST FOR ELDER ABUSE RESTRAINING ORDER: "My father is 96-years old. he is a widower since 1973, when his wife (my mother) passed away from breast cancer." -- "I have a degree in biochemistry, and I work in the health care and biotechnology industry..."
TRUTH: As aforementioned; Plaintiff John realized he had breast cancer at the exact same time the Covid-19 lockdown occurred. His father Lester is a witness to this cancer which occurred likely due to excess wine consumption by Plaintiff John; and perhaps pesticides ingested during said wine consumption. When Defendant Davy heard Plaintiff John admit he had cancer; Defendant Davy said: "Call the police!" Which she constantly threatened Plaintiff John with for pretty much anything and everything since Defendant Davy is essentially an aggressive-passive/passive-aggressive; obsessive-compulsive germophobic psychopath.
Adding to this; while Defendant Davy added references to her deceased mother Virginia Clefstad -- the truth is: Defendant Davy did not get along with Virginia. Defendant Davy constantly argued with Virginia; causing Virginia unnecessary situational stress; likely exacerbating Virginia's sensitive condition and leading to Virginia's early demise. Similar to the intentional infliction of emotional distress Defendant Davy caused for Plaintiff John.
Defendant Davy does not "work in the health care and biotechnology industry".
P) Perjury: DECLARATION OF KRIS DAVY IN SUPPORT OF LESTER JOSEPH CLEFSTAD'S REQUEST FOR ELDER ABUSE RESTRAINING ORDER: SECTIONS 1-35: "John is a hoarder.." -- "He believes he is a rock drummer..." -- "Until the Covid pandemic, he worked approximately 10 hours weekly..." -- "John has abused my father for many years. He used to knock my father down or spit in his face..."
"Lately John does not knock my father down or spit on him, instead he swings his arms and fist at him, and pulls back at the last minute or deliberately directs his fist to my father's chair instead of his body..." -- "John verbally and financially abuses my father..." -- "My father uses a walker, and even these threats of violence could cause him to fall..." -- "John also manipulates my father to control him..."
TRUTH: Plaintiff John has constitutional rights to gather and protect property which Defendant Davy has been stealing for many years now. Defendant Davy is a typical woman obsessed with commandeering men's property due to a perceived lack of empowerment. Since women quite often marry rich men like Defendant Davy did; rich men's wives are essentially just another piece of purchased property like Defendant Davy was. Therefore the property obsession.
The truth is: Defendant Davy is a money hoarder: as homeless people and/or dying cats lie dying in the streets; Defendant Davy heartlessly sits on her piggy pile of cash. Blue regions with large percentages of Democrats often share a relatively defamatory narrative regarding the gathering of private property with insufficient space; sometimes creating dangerous conditions. In these regions excess hoarded money in the bank is not considered to be bad while hordes of hungry homeless people poop right out in the street.
Modern democratic regions and/or states like California have a tendency to hoard homeless people outdoors as opposed to indoors as with the immigrant voting bloc population residing in ultra-expensive housing spending their pension monies.
Whereas in regions and/or states like Kansas (for instance) while there is likely some high density housing in that state; there's also lot of open space; countless barns and storage units full of private property which is essentially money in the bank as "American Pickers" showed.
Two separate ways of doing the exact same thing; and in the meantime, both federal and California state constitutions allow individuals to obtain private property without limitation.
As for Plaintiff John "thinking he is a rock drummer" GO TO: https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/2023/06/superior-court-of-california-dts-case_25.html
Also; John worked only about 15 hours per months delivering Bay Area Parent Magazine before the Covid-19 pandemic lockdown occurred; not 10 hours weekly. Which is another lie. Up until April of 2021 when Plaintiff John became ill for a year until April 2022; John not only worked out with weights every Saturday night after running a mile down at the track including running up and down the stairs on the bleachers 10 times; and working out on body weight workout machines the 49ers made available for the public who pays for the Peterson Field
Plaintiff John also practiced drums a minimum of roughly 4 hours per week; played bass a minimum of 8 hours per week -- more than drums; and sang 30+ songs for 3 hours once a week. While also being there for his father Lester pretty much 24/7 and especially during the pandemic when John went out of his way to stay isolated as to not compromise Lester's health. Other than occasional shopping and doing a distribution route once a month; John was around his father as a caregiver while performing all aforementioned tasks;
While Defendant Davy went for a little walk in the morning; went shopping -- then ate like a pig; wondering why she was having a hard time losing weight. Defendant Davy was also feeding her diet food to Lester when Lester needed high caloric content sustenance.
As for Plaintiff John allegedly "knocking down Lester"; Lester came at his son Plaintiff John in the living room when John was a teenager; and Plaintiff John pushed Lester away causing Lester to fall to the floor. Plaintiff John was standing his ground as legally allowed while Lester was clearly the aggressor who did this kind of thing quite often to Plaintiff John. It's fight or flight; so Plaintiff John usually chose flight and simply evaded and escaped Lester (E&E).
Knocking down Lester was a one-time occurrence;
not repeated by Plaintiff John as suggested.
Flash forward from the late 1970s to a recent time: Before Lester used a walker for balance; Lester had fallen to the cement outside and badly injured himself 2 TIMES when being cared for by Defendant Davy.
Once Lester fell to the ground as Defendant Davy stood by idly in the OSH parking lot; causing Lester to be admitted to Kaiser Permanente Hospital and ultimately getting a dangerous staph infection that could have caused Lester to lose his arm due to negligence on the part of Defendant Kaiser Permanente Hospital and/or Defendant Davy. Lester fell another time in the driveway as Defendant Davy once again stood by idly as Lester fell to the ground.
Lester also fell one time in the kitchen under John's care; Lester insisted on helping Plaintiff John cook Lester's dinner. While John had his back turned at the stove; Lester fell and hit his head on the counter. Lester was admitted to Kaiser Permanente for the night and Lester ended up feeling scared he would lose his freedom if he ever fell again.
Lester also ingested too much alcohol one night and ended up forgetting what happened after Plaintiff John called emergency 911 for an ambulance. Lester spent the night in the hospital and thankfully decided to never drink again.
(SEE #16: "in late October 2021, my dad believed he was having a stroke and was admitted to the emergency room. When he needed to be picked up, the hospital could not reach John..." -- "The doctors ultimately advised that this was in part a product of my father having had wine without eating..." The truth is: John called 911 for an ambulance once again like John did when Lester had a stroke; and when relief arrived Lester groped a female ambulance attendant; later forgetting that he did such a thing...
Causing such embarrassment that Lester ultimately quit drinking until Defendants Davy and Tabbada plied him with alcohol after Plaintiff John's May 2022 eviction perhaps to help Lester forget about what he had just allowed to be done to his beloved son Plaintiff John by these two dirty dog defendant cunts with ulterior motives. Plaintiff John was assured Lester would spend the night at the hospital and tried to go to sleep as Plaintiff John had been desperately trying to do while ill from a mysterious illness until John was finally somehow reached and responded by picking up Lester in the middle of the night...)
Then after Plaintiff John's illegal eviction that occurred with cruelty when John was newly sober from alcohol and/or sick for an entire year thinking he was dying with a mystery illness; Lester was plied with alcohol once again by Defendants Davy and Tabadda until Lester finally quit drinking once again. Defendants Davy and Tabadda are a danger to Lester.
Plaintiff John had to speak loudly since Lester suffers from extreme hearing loss due to negligence on the part of Defendant Lockheed-Martin Corporation who forced Lester to rivet afterburner barrels after WWII; in the process destroying Lester's hearing. All conversations with Lester needed to be very loud so Lester could understand John.
A certain amount of manipulation is necessary when taking care of an elderly parent who is mentally/aurally deficient. But Plaintiff John's necessary manipulation was always in Lester's better interests; usually asking for a paltry amount of money for taking care of Lester after Defendant the State of California destroyed Plaintiff John's job of 35+ years.
And Lester once offered Plaintiff John $150,000 to move out of the house; which Plaintiff John declined. While Defendant Davy talked Lester into spending all of his nest egg pension monies to fix up Lester's house; leaving Lester broke and depressed at this time last year and totally dependent upon Defendant Davy; making all statements leveled against Plaintiff John nothing more than grandiose distraction from the violent kleptomaniacal acts of Defendant Davy.
In the end; Plaintiff John was never violent with any of the supposed "protected parties"; and chairs and/or pillows are not legally protected from alleged misdemeanor assault like Plaintiff John is from Defendant Davy's vicious April 2022 attack John which was reported to Sunnyvale DPS multiple times.
NOTE: There is no supporting evidence for any of the above claims made against Plaintiff John; while Plaintiff John actually has supporting refuting evidence.
(13-14) ACTIONABLE LEGAL COUNSEL MISCONDUCT: also applies to Defendant Davy's legal counsel Leila Sockolov's deceptive practices putting Plaintiff John in a false light and/or dishonesty and/or misrepresentation etc;
 |
| (13) ACTIONABLE ATTORNEY/LAWYER MISCONDUCT: |
Lawyer misconduct is any unethical or unprofessional behavior that violates the rules of professional conduct that govern lawyers. Some examples of lawyer misconduct include: Dishonesty: Engaging in conduct that is dishonest, fraudulent, or deceitful / Misrepresentation: Making false statements or claims to a court or tribunal / Conflicts of interest: Failing to act in a client's best interests due to a conflict of interest / Improper communication: Improperly communicating with an opposing party who is represented by counsel / Breach of trust: Misusing a client's trust accounts or revealing confidential information about a client / Improper influence: Stating or implying an ability to improperly influence a government agency or official / Criminal acts: Committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness to practice law / The disciplinary process for lawyer misconduct generally begins with the filing of a complaint against the attorney. The complaint does not need to be filed by a client of the attorney or anyone else who was harmed by the attorney's conduct:
 |
| (14) ACTIONABLE ATTORNEY/LAWYER MISCONDUCT: |
What is an example of legal counsel misconduct?
Engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice (see also: SCCDA Rosen) and/or engaging in fraud or dishonesty (Perjury: "Kris [Davy] works in the biomedical industry" "John thinks he is a rock drummer" including no mention of Plaintiff John's year-long illness making John part of a protected class etc) Attorney misconduct may include: conflict of interest, overbilling, false or misleading statements, knowingly pursuing frivolous and meritless lawsuits, concealing evidence, abandoning a client, failing to disclose all relevant facts, arguing a position while neglecting to disclose prior law which might counter the...It is also a conscious, voluntary act or omission in reckless disregard of a legal duty and of the consequences to another person. Perjury is a form of justice obstruction; including First Amendment violations disallowing free speech and self-representation.
Adding to this: attorney/lawyers enrich themselves by quite often lying for their clients; and these same lawyer/attorneys often end up as judges and prosecutors guided by relative truths...
Looking for a classic case of attorney misconduct?
SIMILARLY; Leila Sockolov was alternately representing a man (Plaintiff Lester) in a guardian/conservatorship matter regarding Defendant Davy; while this lawyer was simultaneously representing an individual (Defendant Davy) who has been exploiting Plaintiff Lester financially for an extended period of time.
(15-20) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE: not only applies to SCCDA Jeff Rosen's egregious nonfeasance endangering the community at large; but also Sunnyvale DPS's willful disregard for the law -- this is also very closely related to aforementioned witness tampering/dissuasion/bribery/perjury charges.
 |
(15) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE (US):
|
 |
(16) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE (CA):
|
Allegedly "progressive" (regressive) justice obstructions by allegedly well-meaning justice departments essentially amount to overarching justice obstructions Plaintiff John has been a victim of for many years now; resisting arresting several criminals and/or active threats Plaintiff John has experienced. Destroying and/or tampering with evidence including through censorship and/or First Amendment violations disallowing free speech; subornation of perjury; stopping promised investigations (GHC 2014-2015 -- CWC 2022 etc) misleading information; bribery; false alibis etc -- all amount to justice obstruction...
 |
| (17) OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE: |
 |
(18) JUSTICE OBSTRUCTION A:
GHC 17 JULY 2014 |
 |
(19) JUSTICE OBSTRUCTION B:
25 JAN 2015 |
 |
| (20) FRAUDULENT CLAIMS IN THE FORM OF A PROMISED INVESTIGATION BY TERMINATED CWC EMPLOYEE BRUCE MAXWELL PRECEDED THIS EVENTUAL REJECTION NOTICE -- ESSENTIALLY AMOUNTING TO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE ONCE AGAIN |
(21-22) INVASION OF PRIVACY: is another applicable statute regarding Defendant Davy's unforgivable actions -- Intruding on seclusion includes: Trespassing on someone's private property or intruding on their solitude / Unauthorized surveillance: Installing cameras to monitor someone's home without their permission / Publicly disclosing private information: Sharing embarrassing or confidential information about someone without their consent / Appropriating someone's name or likeness: Using someone's photo or name without their permission / Placing someone in a false light: Publicizing information that puts someone in an unfavorable light etc;
INVASION OF PRIVACY is a legal term that refers to the act of intruding on someone's right to privacy. It can include a variety of actions, such as: Physically entering someone's private property / Sharing or disclosing someone's private information or images without their consent / Using someone's name or likeness for commercial purposes without their consent / Publishing false or misleading information about someone that portrays them in a negative light / Harassing or threatening someone by phone, mail, email, or online -- Invasion of privacy is considered a tort, which is a wrongful act that causes injury or loss to someone. A person who has experienced an invasion of privacy can bring a lawsuit against the individual or organization responsible. In some jurisdictions, the right to privacy is governed by statutes rather than common law. GO TO: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/invasion_of_privacy
 |
| (22) INVASION OF PRIVACY: |
Defendant Davy axiomatically invaded Plaintiff John's reasonable expectation of privacy after the unlawful May 2022 ejection; including the unlawful use of force and perjurious codified content (bribery, animal cruelty, justice obstruction etc) in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy facilitated by the County of Santa Clara and or the City of Sunnyvale and or Sunnyvale DPS. Defendant Davy's relentless obsession with violating Plaintiff John's reasonable expectation of privacy is not only an obvious sign of Defendant Davy's uncontrolled OCD tendencies; but (for instance) delusional codified statements about alleged methamphetamine usage by Plaintiff John further exposes Defendant Davy's mentally unsound conjectural delusional ideations. Defendant Davy committed an unlawful invasion of Plaintiff John's constitutionally protected privacy rights expectations; in furtherance of a fraudulent criminal conspiracy overseen and or facilitatted by Sunnyvale DPS and or the City of Sunnyvale and or Sunnyvale DPS -- go to: https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/2023/06/invasion-of-privacy.html
Defendant Davy's actions to invade Plaintiff John's privacy by publicly exposing lyrical proprietary information in a false light and or failing to tell 'the whole truth' behind this non-issue 'nothing burger' decade plus old incident is not only non-actionable due to the statute of limitations; but it is also in violation of protection from unreasonable intrusions upon one’s seclusion, and also protection from unreasonable publicity given to one’s private life, and or from publicity which unreasonably places one in a false light before the public. Although the Court has variously recognized valid governmental interests in extending protection to privacy, it has nevertheless interposed substantial free expression interests in the balance. (Thus, in Time, Inc. v. Hill)
Defendant Davy also allegedly recorded private landline phone conversations between Plaintiff John and his Father Lester: Under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, it is illegal to record confidential conversations without the consent of everyone involved. This includes phone conversations. Victims of an illegal wiretap can sue for statutory damages. Violating the Act is also a crime. Violators can face: fines, jail time, and a civil lawsuit. In a phone call, both sides of the call have to consent to a recording. This makes California a “two-party consent” state. > go to: https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/california-invasion-of-privacy-act/ -- "A plaintiff alleging a violation of the California constitutional right to privacy must establish three elements: a legally protected privacy interest, a reasonable expectation of privacy, and a conduct by the defendant constituting a serious invasion..."
GO TO: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CONS§ionNum=SECTION%201.&article=I
ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS [SECTION 1 - SEC. 32] (Article 1 adopted 1879.) SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. (Sec. 1 added Nov. 5, 1974, by Proposition 7. Resolution Chapter 90, 1974.)
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=CONS&division=&title=&part=&chapter=&article=I
First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Governmental power to protect the privacy interests of its citizens by penalizing publication or authorizing causes of action for publication implicates directly First Amendment rights.
"Privacy is a concept composed of several aspects. As a tort concept, it embraces at least four branches of protected interests: protection from unreasonable intrusion upon one’s seclusion, from appropriation of one’s name or likeness, from unreasonable publicity given to one’s private life, and from publicity which unreasonably places one in a false light before the public..." -- Although the Court has variously recognized valid governmental interests in extending protection to privacy, it has nevertheless interposed substantial free expression interests in the balance. Thus, in Time, Inc. v. Hill, the Times privilege was held to preclude recovery under a state privacy statute that permitted recovery for harm caused by exposure to public attention in any publication which contained factual inaccuracies, although not necessarily defamatory inaccuracies, in communications on matters of public interest. Since Gertz held that the Times privilege did not limit the recovery of compensatory damages for defamation by private persons, the question arose whether Hill applies to all “false-light” cases or only such cases involving public officials or public figures. And, more important, Gertz left unresolved the issue “whether the State may ever define and protect an area of privacy free from unwanted publicity in the press...”
GO TO: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/invasions-of-privacy
(a) Every person who, without the consent of all of the parties to a communication, intercepts or receives and intentionally records, or assists in the interception or reception and intentional recordation of, a communication transmitted between two cellular radio telephones, a cellular radio telephone and a landline telephone, two cordless telephones, a cordless telephone and a landline telephone, or a cordless telephone and a cellular radio telephone, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If the person has been convicted previously of a violation of this section or of Section 631, 632, 632.5, 632.6, or 636, the person shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
GO TO: https://casetext.com/statute/california-codes/california-penal-code/part-1-of-crimes-and-punishments/title-15-miscellaneous-crimes/chapter-15-invasion-of-privacy/section-6327-unlawful-interception-or-reception-and-intention-recordation-of-communications-transmitted-between-certain-telephones
Invasion of privacy involves the infringement upon an individual's protected right to privacy through a variety of intrusive or unwanted actions. Such invasions of privacy can range from physical encroachments onto private property to the wrongful disclosure of confidential information or images. Under the umbrella of invasion of privacy, there exist several legal claims that can be brought by the aggrieved party, such as intrusion on seclusion, public disclosure of private facts, false light, and appropriation. While each of these claims concerns a different form of invasion of privacy, they all hinge on the common thread of an unwelcome or unauthorized intrusion upon a person's private life. -- Katz v. United States is often cited in the context of defining the parameters of invasion of privacy. In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures extended to protecting someone's reasonable expectation of privacy. This ruling helped to establish the notion that privacy is a fundamental right that the legal system is designed to safeguard. [Last updated in February of 2023 by the Wex Definitions Team]
GO TO: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/invasion_of_privacy
(23-23a-23b) USPS MAIL FRAUD THEFT: applies to Defendant Davy's interception of various pieces of legally protected USPS mail within the past 2+ years;
 |
| (23a) USPS MAIL THEFT: |
 |
| (23b) USPS MAIL FRAUD/THEFT: |
(24-24a) FLAG DESECRATION: applies to the two Santa Clara County (SCC) sheriffs who tore down Plaintiff John's flag hanging in front of his bedroom; showing a blatant disregard for basic American liberty and/or freedom...
 |
| (24a) FLAG DESECRATION: |
(25) CLASS BASED DISCRIMINATION: is at the heart of this case as everyone from poor homeless US citizens severely adversely disaffected by greedy 'monoculturistic' leanings here in the United States ~ to low income Palestinians on the Gaza Strip ~ to Roma "Gypsies" allegedly originating from Egypt continuously harassed and displaced in Europe; have felt the adverse effects of class based discrimination; which is ridiculous since here in the United States Uncle Sam is literally trillions of dollars in debt ~ while disproportionately enriching 'himself' from taxpayer money -- The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88–352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) is a landmark civil rights and labor law in the United States that outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. It prohibits unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation in schools and public accommodations, and employment discrimination. The act "remains one of the most significant legislative achievements in American history"; Initially, powers given to enforce the act were weak (and apparently still are due to lax enforcement non-protecting low income white males like Lee Bagley and Plaintiff John etc and their important constitutional rights; perhaps due to racist left-leaning government-sponsored anti-white campaigns). These civil rights were allegedly supplemented during later years -- even though these alleged supplementations never reached Plaintiff John.
.png)
As congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States Constitution, principally its enumerated power to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of Article I, Section VIII, its duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment, and its duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment.
CONCLUSION: 14th Amendment constitutional mandates implicitly guarantee equal socioeconomic protections regardless of class...
GO TO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964 + GENERAL ELECTION DAY @ https://addendumblog2.blogspot.com/2016/11/election-day-8-november-2016.html + CA PROPOSITION 215 AND PROPOSITION 64 @ https://lreblogger.blogspot.com/2019/08/ca-proposition-215-and-proposition-64.html
Amendment XIV -- Section 1. / All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. 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; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. -- https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv
SEE ALSO: CLASS-BASED DISCRIMINATION ETC IN SC COUNTY @ https://lreblogger.blogspot.com/2020/12/class-based-discrimination-etc-in-sc.html
Plaintiff John's voting rights violation argument lies within the fact that since the color of law cannot be utilized to intimidate or coerce voters before the vote; IT CERTAINLY CANNOT BE USED 20+ YEARS AFTER THIS SAID VOTE! As SCC sheriffs wrongfully scrutinized Plaintiff John's legal cannabis production and consumption; as well as showing deliberate indifference to Plaintiff John's medical needs: including Caregiver Sandy Tabbada; Defendant Davy; DPS etc...
(26-32) DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE TO MEDICAL NEEDS: occurs when--
A jail or prison is knowledgeable of an inmate’s needs but purposefully disregards a serious medical condition, resulting in the death of an inmate or pretrial detainee. To establish a constitutional deliberate indifference claim in a medical injury case, a plaintiff must show (a) a serious medical need; (b) the defendant’s deliberate indifference to that need; and (c) causation.
 |
| (26) DELIBERATE INDIFFERENCE TO MEDICAL NEEDS (DITMN): |
.png) |
| (27) DITMN #2 |
Several Sunnyvale DPS officers were aware of Plaintiff John's medical needs; yet failed to address these needs; due to this massive failure to address plaintiff's needs; plaintiff suffered needlessly -- and especially from the meritless arbitrary 4 year restraining order plaintiff wrongfully received for Defendant Davy;
 |
(28) LEFT BREAST LUMP
+ SITUATIONAL STRESS |
(29) Left breast lump; edema and/or resulting severe eczema plus previously undiagnosed pancreatitis exacerbated by Defendant Davy's persistent situational stress -- are all medical conditions Plaintiff John suffers from.
(30) Deliberate indifference to medical care is a constitutional standard that occurs when someone is harmed or dies from medical neglect in a jail or prison. It can be caused by a correctional officer, health care professional, or both. / Examples of deliberate indifference include: Ignoring obvious poor health / Failing to investigate claims of poor health / Delaying or refusing to provide treatment for a diagnosed medical condition / Intentionally failing to follow a doctor's orders / Denying prescription medications / Failing to respond to symptoms indicating potentially fatal heart conditions / Refusing to treat serious infections / The term "deliberate indifference" originated in the 1976 Supreme Court case Estelle vs. Gamble. In this case, the court ruled that failure to provide medical care to a prisoner can constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The U.S. Constitution requires prison officials to provide adequate medical care to all state and federal incarcerated people, as well as pretrial detainees.
Making the ahe axiomatic connection between jail and/or prison incarceration and/or nursing home and/or hospice care; here's Facebook testimony from an adversely affected individual now in hospice in Santa Clara Valley:
(31) "MY DAILY REALITY - NO MORE FUCKING SUGARCOATING THIS: Every. Fucking. Day. AGONY. My lungs feel like they're full of coral rocks - NOT SOME PRETTY METAPHOR - that's EXACTLY how it feels. Can't even BREATHE without pain SHOOTING through my entire body. Every vibration, every TINY movement = TEARS. And I mean REAL TEARS - not being dramatic - I'm LITERALLY SOBBING in these hallways BEGGING for help. And the AUDACITY??? My voice is loud because I CAN'T FUCKING BREATHE properly!!! But instead of understanding this, they MOCK ME. They TALK OVER ME. Like I'm being "difficult" when I'm LITERALLY JUST TRYING TO GET ENOUGH AIR TO SPEAK!!!
Lost 70 pounds then gained it back because my body is SO SWOLLEN it can't handle this anymore. Ears constantly popping, pure AGONY, and what's their solution? "Just go to the hospital" ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!? The hospital CAN'T HELP WITH THIS - they KNOW THIS, I know this, EVERYONE KNOWS THIS!!! DETERIORATING. DAILY. Pain getting WORSE, not better. BEGGING - literally BEGGING - in hallways for help. What kind of HEALTHCARE FACILITY forces someone to BEG for basic pain management?!? -- Anonymous
.png) |
| (32) MORE FACEBOOK TESTIMONY: |
SEE ALSO: PLAINTIFF JOHN'S FATHER BEGGING DEFENDANT DAVY TO UNFREEZE CREDIT CARD WHEN PRESCRIPTION MEDICATION IS NEEDED:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ1muvOpIL8
Recalled California DA charges county jail staff in 2021 in-custody death of inmate: https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/recalled-california-da-charges-county-jail-staff-2021-115913681
Aforementioned evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt a pattern or practice of indifference to medical needs in Santa Clara County.
(33-35) SECRET WITNESSES: are disallowed by the 6th Amendment of the United States Constitution; but after the 9/11 incident secret witnesses were permitted for terrorism court trials; but since the 9/11 incident was axiomatically based upon fraudulent claims (see Fraudulent claims and the 9/11 incident below) all court actions occurring thereafter based upon this false flag narrative are now effectively nullified; similar to DD's perjurious codified content that effectively collapses her original fraudulent claims -- as one lie brings down her entire fraudulent case.
.png) |
| (34) SECRET WITNESSES: |
.png) |
| (35) SECRET WITNESSES: |
Unfortunately; socioeconomic discrimination has been applied to court cases thereafter regardless or running afoul of 14th Amendment mandates; even though many of these cases are clearly unworthy of such trumped up charges. Including terrorism charges for Plaintiff John's Elmwood cell buddy for throwing a meatball at his sister and/or secret witnesses used in family court against Plaintiff John when Defendant Davy was clearly the aggressor in this particular case; an axiomatic example of governmental prosecutorial overreach conflated with gross negligence stemming from multiple years of egregious DPS police misconduct.
(36) ADA VIOLATIONS: Sec. 12101 note: Findings and Purposes of ADA Amendments Act of 2008, Pub. L. 110-325, §2, Sept. 25, 2008, 122 Stat. 3553, provided that: (a) Findings:
Congress finds that— (1) in enacting the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Congress intended that the Act “provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities” and provide broad coverage; (2) in enacting the ADA, Congress recognized that physical and mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, but that people with physical or mental disabilities are frequently precluded from doing so because of prejudice, antiquated attitudes, or the failure to remove societal and institutional barriers;
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, As Amended | ADA.gov
Plaintiff John was not only a medically dependent individual; but also considered to be a mentally dependent individual as well even though these allegations were not entirely based in fact -- either way one cannot discriminate against those with disabilities even if and/or especially when those alleged disabilities are either non-existent and/or imagined by those who endanger roughly half the populace with gendered discrimination -- while both aforementioned designations clearly prohibit bullying isolation etc and other forms of inhumane abuse;
Furthermore: Mental disabilities and/or severe innate ineptitudes of irresponsible individuals within government involved with large-scale broken enforcement of these important aforementioned laws in no way diminishes Plaintiff John's abilities to not only fully participate in all aspects of society; but to also question the mental states of irresponsible individuals responsible for this cruel and unusual treatment of both Plaintiff John and his father along with so many other disaffected seniors -- since it shows evidence of psychopathy on the part of law enforcement and/or the County of Santa Clara and/or Sunnyvale DPS along with other named defendants -- as those who are a harm to themselves or others are generally considered to be candidates for psychological testing;
Civil Financial Exploitation § 192.2400 R.S.Mo. (2022) TITLE 8. PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE CHAPTER 192. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND SENIOR SERVICES / ADULT DAY CARE PROGRAMS / Protective Services for Adults / 192.2400. Definitions
(1) “Abuse”, the infliction of physical, sexual, or emotional injury or harm including financial exploitation by any person, firm, or corporation and bullying; (6) “Eligible adult”, a person sixty years of age or older who is unable to protect his or her own interests or adequately perform or obtain services which are necessary to meet his or her essential human needs or an adult with a disability, as defined in section 192.2005, between the ages of eighteen and fifty-nine who is unable to protect his or her own interests or adequately perform or obtain services which are necessary to meet his or her essential human needs;
Note: Plaintiff John will be 62 years old in December 2024; living in one of the most expensive regions of the world and/or country in Silicon Valley; making it difficult for Plaintiff John and many other low-income individuals like John to obtain adequate services. Adding to this Plaintiff John suffered from a year long illness April 2021/2022 rendering John sick and bedridden as Defendant Davy was allowed to torment and torture Plaintiff John -- facilitated by Sunnyvale DPS;
 |
| ↕ PLAINTIFF JOHN'S CVS MEDICAL RECORDS ↕ |
STATEMENTS BY JOHN:
(1) "Both my father and I were dependent persons violated under the ADA -- not only by my sister DD; but also other facilitating defendants -- and my father remains an abused dependent individual regardless of my valiant efforts to expose after being kidnapped from his residence by DD;
Facilitating defendants who should have taken into consideration the fact that my father was consuming roughly 15 different pharmaceutical drugs daily at the time the restraining order was issued;
Including me who had been on a toxic cocktail of cortisone-based drugs like prednisone and triamcinolone which can I have dangerous physical and psychological effects on those who consume or use these toxic drugs;
Therefore my father was not in a position to make any sound decisions at the time; and I was in an extremely medically; psychologically and financially vulnerable state due to pharmaceutical drugs and or undue and unnecessary situational stress caused by my sister affecting both me and my father;
Sunnyvale DPS knew that my sister had attacked me after contacting them at very least four times regarding her assault and battery; which has blossomed into bribery; mail fraud; obstruction of justice and animal cruelty etc;
Furthermore; Sunnyvale DPS should have done something to protect me as a vulnerable individual protected under the ADA as well as my father who still remains at risk from the multifarious fraudulent actions of my sister..."
(2) "Plaintiff John contacted CWC representative Katy Warren in 2022 when Warren informed John he very likely had a case against the City of Sunnyvale but needed legal representation. CWC investigator Bruce Maxwell (I believe his name is) was unexplainably terminated right after being assigned to the 2022 CWC investigation -- along with Katy Warren who was let go after Mister Maxwell; repeatedly obstructing justice...
Defendant Davy terminated Caregiver Sandy Tabbada's employment for unknown reasons after Plaintiff John informed Defendant Davy of alleged yet unproven molestation allegations; the same unresolved runaround Plaintiff John has been experiencing for many years from the City of Sunnyvale and/or CWC and/or GHC. GHC's San Jose office closed a few years back leaving the San Jose area altogether for another home office location..."
(3a) LETTER FROM JOHN TO DAD -- Johnny Roper <jclefstad@gmail.com>
Wed, Jul 17, 5:29 PM / to DAD, Kris:
"Hi Dad this is John I have been hesitant to write any letters after giving you letters about 2 months ago and being left in the dark about whether you actually got them or not; And I am also concerned about Kris snooping in on our private conversations which would be a violation of my privacy; I told her as I have told you many times over that I want nothing to do with her but she keeps calling me or texting me when all I want to do is talk to you Dad; I suppose you are not aware of the full ramifications of what you did to me but now you are finding out how cruel and compassionless government really is when it comes to the handling of family matters; Not only towards me but also towards you in failing to protect you from being moved out of your house against your will which is unlawful;
And I happened to run into Bobby Martinez's son by chance in Santa Clara two months ago and he told me he overheard a large argument at our house supposedly about Kris redirecting my inheritance to her kids; Bobby Martinez's son also told me that you told Bobby Martinez the same thing and were very angry about it; of course in turn causing me to be angry about it as well not only worried about your well-being but my own;
And I have been told by more than one person that everything my sister did to me is all about that; committing financial elder abuse against me after she spent all of your money to fix up a house you do not want to move out of leaving you in debt when you spent your whole life getting out of debt; And as a loan manager it hurts me to know that you now owe money that you should not owe since you worked your whole life to pay off the house not to end up in debt again;
Either way I have been hesitant to write any more letters not knowing whether you got the letters I wrote two months ago ever got to you as I have been totally and completely left in the dark by your daughter; which has left you in the dark for the past 2 months wondering what the heck happened to me;
So Kris is up to her usual tricks again -- isolating us since she has to control everything (continued)..."
Note: Self-violation of my lawful expectation of privacy only comes after repeated attempts to expose privacy violations; DD attempted to classify the email seen above as being "disrespectful" mainly because it contains information about eventually charging Defendant Davy with crimes committed; facilitated by the County of Santa Clara and/or the City of Sunnyvale and/or DPS...
(3b) ALSO: Defendant Davy recently concealed an email sent from Plaintiff John to his Father Lester on 17 July 2024 / Defendant Davy has also been obstructing USPS mail sent by Plaintiff John to his Father Lester for an entire year:
"Whoever knowingly and willfully obstructs or retards the passage of the mail, or any carrier or conveyance carrying the mail, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both..." (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 778; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(B), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2146.) -- 18 U.S. Code § 1701 - Obstruction of mails generally
All aforementioned parties have been involved in a mass OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE: The term “obstruction of justice” refers to any action that a person willfully takes to obstruct, or hinder, the administration of justice. Obstruction of justice occurs when a person offers false information, or otherwise takes some action that frustrates an investigation or other legal process -- go to: https://legaldictionary.net/obstruction-of-justice/
(4a) ELDER ABUSE (CONTINUED):
Civil Financial Exploitation / Cal Wel & Inst Code § 15610.30 & § 15610.23 (2022) / WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE / Division 9. Public Social Services / Part 3. Aid and Medical Assistance / Chapter 11. Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act / Article 2. Definitions / § 15610.30. Financial abuse
(a) “Financial abuse” of an elder or dependent adult occurs when a person or entity does any of the following:
(1) Takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both. (2) Assists in taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both. (3) Takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains, or assists in taking, secreting, appropriating, obtaining, or retaining, real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult by undue influence.
(b) A person or entity shall be deemed to have taken, secreted, appropriated, obtained, or retained property for a wrongful use if, among other things, the person or entity takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains the property and the person or entity knew or should have known that this conduct is likely to be harmful to the elder or dependent adult.
(c) For purposes of this section, a person or entity takes, secretes, appropriates, obtains, or retains real or personal property when an elder or dependent adult is deprived of any property right, including by means of an agreement, donative transfer, or testamentary bequest, regardless of whether the property is held directly or by a representative of an elder or dependent adult. (d) For purposes of this section, “representative” means a person or entity that is either of the following:
(1) A conservator, trustee, or other representative of the estate of an elder or dependent adult. (2) An attorney-in-fact of an elder or dependent adult who acts within the authority of the power of attorney.
(4b) § 15610.23 Dependent Adult
(a) “Dependent adult” means a person, regardless of whether the person lives independently, between the ages of 18 and 64 years who resides in this state and who has physical or mental limitations that restrict his or her ability to carry out normal activities or to protect his or her rights, including, but not limited to, persons who have physical or developmental disabilities, or whose physical or mental abilities have diminished because of age.
Defendant Davy retained real or personal property of an elder or dependent adult for a wrongful use or with intent to defraud, or both when Defendant Davy illegally retained Plaintiff John's personal constitutionally protected properties through perjurious deceptions and/or fraud; including physical and emotional intimidations; while Defendant Davy denies redirecting Plaintiff John's living trust assets as claimed by Bobby Martinez Junior in May 2024 as hearsay evidence similar to the almost entire contents of Defendant Davy's perjurious codified fraudulent semi-baseless hearsay testimonies.
Defendant Davy used deception, intimidation and coercion to withhold and control Plaintiff John's personal property causing Plaintiff John's inability to access important personal computer-based evidentiary information that would have aided Plaintiff John at the 2022 Family Court speedy railroaded injustice hearing. Defendant Davy retained property for a wrongful use knowing this conduct would likely be harmful to Plaintiff John.
===
Criminal Financial Exploitation / Cal. Penal Code § 368(d), (e), (g) & (h) (2022) / California Penal Code / Part 1. Of Crimes and Punishments / Title 9. Of Crimes Against the Person Involving Sexual Assault, and Crimes Against Public Decency and Good Morals / Chapter 13. Crimes Against Elders, Dependent Adults, and Persons with Disabilities / § 368. Crimes against elder or dependent adults
(d) A person who is not a caretaker who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of an elder or a dependent adult, and who knows or reasonably should know that the victim is an elder or a dependent adult, is punishable as follows:...(e) A caretaker of an elder or a dependent adult who violates any provision of law proscribing theft, embezzlement, forgery, or fraud, or who violates Section 530.5 proscribing identity theft, with respect to the property or personal identifying information of that elder or dependent adult, is punishable as follows: (g) As used in this section, “elder” means a person who is 65 years of age or older. (h) As used in this section, “dependent adult” means a person, regardless of whether the person lives independently, who is between the ages of 18 and 64, who has physical or mental limitations which restrict his or her ability to carry out normal activities or to protect his or her rights, including, but not limited to, persons who have physical or developmental disabilities or whose physical or mental abilities have diminished because of age. “Dependent adult” includes a person between the ages of 18 and 64 who is admitted as an inpatient to a 24-hour health facility, as defined in Sections 1250, 1250.2, and 1250.3 of the Health and Safety Code.
Defendant Davy violated lawful provisions proscribing theft and fraud knowing Plaintiff John was a medically compromised dependent adult needing protection; while the County of Santra Clara and/or the City of Sunnyvale both independently worked to facilitate this theft and fraudulent activity.
===
Civil Elder Abuse / Cal Wel & Inst Code §§ 15600 through 15766 (2017) / Cal Wel & Inst Code § 15610.06 (2017) / WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE Division 9. Public Social Services Part 3. Aid and Medical Assistance Chapter 11. Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act Article 2. Definitions
"Abduction" means the removal from this state and the restraint from returning to this state, or the restraint from returning to this state, of any elder or dependent adult who does not have the capacity to consent to the removal from this state and the restraint from returning to this state, or the restraint from returning to this state, as well as the removal from this state or the restraint from returning to this state, of any conservatee without the consent of the conservator or the court.
(4c) 18 U.S. Code § 1201 - Kidnapping:
18 U.S. Code § 1201 - Kidnapping -- (a)Whoever unlawfully seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, kidnaps, abducts, or carries away and holds for ransom or reward or otherwise any person, except in the case of a minor by the parent thereof, when—(1)the person is willfully transported in interstate or foreign commerce, regardless of whether the person was alive when transported across a State boundary, or the offender travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses the mail or any means, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce in committing or in furtherance of the commission of the offense; shall be punished by imprisonment for any term of years or for life and, if the death of any person results, shall be punished by death or life imprisonment.
In May 2024 a concerned neighbor contacted John Clefstad regarding John’s sister Kris Davy allegedly threatening to forcibly move John’s Father Lester to a nursing home in the State of Washington against Lester’s will. John contacted the Sunnyvale DPS non-emergency line and spoke to a lady who suggested a wellness check for Lester. John then called DPS the next day and spoke to a DPS phone officer who not only refused to intervene; but who was also acting in a meritless coercive fashion. Lester called John in May 2024; and Plaintiff John mentioned an ultimatum of either establishing peaceful contact (that Defendant Davy is not capable of) and/or having Sunnyvale DPS inventory Plaintiff John’s remaining property to ascertain the full extent of misallocation.
Causing Defendant Davy to recently return home to Sunnyvale to unlawfully retain Lester against his will and flee to Washington State like Defendant Davy did in April 2022 when she violently attacked Plaintiff John; in turn causing Plaintiff John to call Sunnyvale DPS non-emergency line. Sunnyvale DPS ultimately botched this investigation; egregiously violating John’s constitutional and civil rights in the process -- then Carl Warren Company (CWC) botched another investigation; finally firing the assigned CWC investigator mid-investigation.
This situation is similar to a parent abducting their child after losing custody; except in this situation it is a cognitively sound adult denied his legal self-determination. And Lester is legally allowed to determine where he lives out his last days. According to a trusted neighborhood source; Lester wants to remain in his Sunnyvale home. As opposed to an ADU where Defendant Davy allegedly took him against his will before moving Lester to an undisclosed location in June 2024. Plaintiff John's Father Lester remains isolated at an undisclosed location.
(4d) CIVIL ELDER ABUSE / Cal Wel & Inst Code §§ 15600 through 15766 (2017) / Cal Wel & Inst Code § 15610.07 (2017) / WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE Division 9. Public Social Services Part 3. Aid and Medical Assistance Chapter 11. Elder Abuse and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act Article 2. Definitions
(a) "Abuse of an elder or a dependent adult" means any of the following:(1) Physical abuse, neglect, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering. (2) The deprivation by a care custodian of goods or services that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental suffering. (3) Financial abuse, as defined in Section 15610.30. (b) This section shall become operative on July 1, 2016.
Defendant Davy emotionally abused both Plaintiff John and his Father Lester while repeatedly physically abusing Plaintiff John for over a decade; facilitated by the State of California and/or the County of Santa and/or the City of Sunnyvale and/or DPS. Defendant Davy also isolated both Plaintiff John and 97 year old Father Lester; kidnapping and/or abducting Lester in May 2024 as previously aforementioned..."
(4e) CRIMINAL ELDER ABUSE / Cal. Penal Code § 13-368 / (a) The Legislature finds and declares that crimes against elders and dependent adults are deserving of special consideration and protection, not unlike the special protections provided for minor children, because, or incompetent, and therefore less able to protect themselves, to understand or report criminal conduct, or to testify in court proceedings on their own behalf. (b) (1) Any person who knows or reasonably should know that a person is an elder or dependent adult and who, under circumstances or conditions likely to produce great bodily harm or death, willfully causes or permits any elder or dependent adult to suffer, or inflicts thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or having the care or custody of any elder or dependent adult, willfully causes or permits the person or health of the elder or dependent adult to be injured, or willfully causes or permits the elder or dependent adult to be placed in a situation in which his or her person or health is endangered, is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, or by a fine not to exceed six thousand dollars ($6,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment, or by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years. (2) If, in the commission of an offense described in paragraph (1), the victim suffers great bodily injury, as defined in Section 12022.7, the defendant shall receive an additional term in the state prison as follows: (A) Three years if the victim is under 70 years of age. (B) Five years if the victim is 70 years of age or older. (3) If, in the commission of an offense described in paragraph (1), the defendant proximately causes the death of the victim, the defendant shall receive an additional term in the state prison as follows: (A) Five years if the victim is under 70 years of age.
Plaintiff John's Father Lester was confused while on various medications, both mentally and physically impaired and therefore semi-incompetent, and therefore less able to protect his son Plaintiff John from repeated abuse by Defendant Davy, therefore rendering Lester unable to fully understand and report Defendant Davy's egregious criminal conduct, and or to testify in court on behalf of Plaintiff John due fraudulent manipulations by Defendant Davy.
===
(c) Any person who knows or reasonably should know that a person is an elder or dependent adult and who, under circumstances or conditions other than those likely to produce great bodily harm or death, willfully causes or permits any elder or dependent adult to suffer, or inflicts thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental suffering, or having the care or custody of any elder or dependent adult, willfully causes or permits the person or health of the elder or dependent adult to be injured or willfully causes or permits the elder or dependent adult to be placed in a situation in which his or her person or health may be endangered, is guilty of a misdemeanor. A second or subsequent violation of this subdivision is punishable by a fine not to exceed two thousand dollars ($2,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not to exceed one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
Defendant Davy repeatedly willfully caused Plaintiff John mental and physical suffering; then willfully placed Plaintiff John during an extremely vulnerable medically compromised time (Breast cancer; Severe pancreatitis; Severe depression; Newly sober etc) in a perilous homeless situation in which Plaintiff John's physical and mental health was severely endangered and disaffected to the point of near suicide during and episode of severe pancreatitis.
Facilitated by supposed 'progressive' regressive law enforcement policies leaving protective lawful mandates and or statutes largely unenforced by the State of California and or the County of Santa Clara and or Sunnyvale DPS; including and mainly important protective state and federal constitutional mandates.
Plaintiff John's Father Lester was confused while on various prescribed medications, leaving Lester mentally impaired and unable to fully understand the ramifications of illegally evicting his beloved son Plaintiff John in May 2022; wrongfully believing Plaintiff John would receive housing from the City of Sunnyvale; especially due to inability to rent due to his evicted status. In turn increasing both Plaintiff John's and his beloved father's mental suffering.
First Amendment violations then disallowed Plaintiff John from stating his case after repeated censorship during every step of this illegal/legal process; working to suppress and/or conceal and/or pre-emptively destroy and/or alter and/or render unavailable important testimonial oral argument evidence..."
(4f) "Plaintiff John and his father were both equally medically compromised physically and emotionally from a dangerous cocktail of pharmaceutical drugs utilized by both at this time; but when Plaintiff John pleaded for equal deference from Commissioner Eric Johnson he was treated with socio-economic discrimination violating Plaintiff John's civil rights;
The family court process lacked required procedural steps and/or right to recuse lacking a required Superior Court judge in a Superior Court; with no promised mediator and the usual systemic violation of Plaintiff John's First Amendment rights; disallowing Plaintiff John to be 'heard' at a public 'hearing'; therefore violating Plaintiff John's core constitutional rights;
Additionally; Plaintiff John and his father were both dependent adults; but even though Plaintiff John was equally financially/physically/medically etc compromised; John did not receive required equal protections and/or deference; therefore violating Plaintiff John's core constitutional 14th Amendment right to equal protection;
Even though Plaintiff John's imagined disabilities allowed his rights to be abused and/or discriminations to occur; even if those disabilities are imagined as they clearly were and/or are in this case -- those with disabilities cannot be discriminated against under the ADA and/or Americans with Disabilities Act:
(The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects people with disabilities from discrimination. Disability rights are civil rights. From voting to parking, the ADA is a law that protects people with disabilities in many areas of public life. When the fact remains that we are all gifted and crippled; gifted in what we excel at ~ while crippled by our equal inabilities)
Financial compromise facilitated by the State of California's fraudulent pandemic lockdown lacking required constitutional suspension; therefore mass violating the core constitutional rights of countless free Americans including Plaintiff John;
Plaintiff John had been abused physically/financially/mentally for roughly 20 plus years due to police misconduct and suppression of evidence and obstruction of justice leading to subsequent compromised mental health regarding an axiomatic unrecoverable lack of trust in law enforcement;
As once trust is gone it's gone for 'good'..
Plaintiff John's mental health was compromised in a variety of ways beyond discrimination and police misconduct; with his life turned upside down after a year long medical emergency leaving him as a dependent adult; especially due to loss of employment due to the unconstitutional pandemic lockdown unlawfully ordered by Governor Newsom;
Compromised mental health due to: 1) loss of employment during pandemic lockdown facilitated by Defendant State of California; 2) several of John's cats who were killed with apparent foul play involved with botched DPS investigations; 3) illegal eviction with force after newfound sobriety after a year of false imprisonment in his bedroom medically compromised while avoiding his evil sister Defendant Davy who Plaintiff John had been complaining about for many years prior; 4) forced removal from his home and/or sanctuary that had been under siege for a number of years prior to this; 5) separation from Plaintiff John's beloved cats which were major factors in Plaintiff John's positive mental health; 5a) one of which (Molly) was more medically compromised than both Lester and John combined; needing emergency treatment for kidney disease that later took Molly's life in 2022 when Plaintiff John could not visit his dying cat; 6) Toxic positivity in mental health court refusing to focus on the need to heal trauma through discussion; as even when violence conducted by Defendant Davy was discussed with court appointed mental health advocates -- no action was taken to apprehend Defendant Davy within the statute of limitations by Sunnyvale DPS and/or the Superior Court of California; 7) etc etc etc...
Plaintiff John experienced temporary physical limitations restricting ability to conduct normal activities while restricting access to protected properties controlled by Defendant Davy -- disallowing Plaintiff John from protecting his rights due to unlawful retention of evidence/properties.
(4g) § 15610.23 Dependent Adult
(a) “Dependent adult” means a person, regardless of whether the person lives independently, between the ages of 18 and 64 years who resides in this state and who has physical or mental limitations that restrict his or her ability to carry out normal activities or to protect his or her rights, including, but not limited to, persons who have physical or developmental disabilities, or whose physical or mental abilities have diminished because of age.
BTW: Even if those disabilities are imagined as they clearly were and/or are in this case -- those with disabilities cannot be discriminated against under the ADA and/or Americans with Disabilities Act: Sec. 12101. Findings and purpose:
(a) Findings: The Congress finds that—
(1) physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, yet many people with physical or mental disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination; others who have a record of a disability or are regarded as having a disability also have been subjected to discrimination; (2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem; (3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services; (4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination; (5) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright intentional exclusion, the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers, overprotective rules and policies, failure to make modifications to existing facilities and practices, exclusionary qualification standards and criteria, segregation, and relegation to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits, jobs, or other opportunities; (6) census data, national polls, and other studies have documented that people with disabilities, as a group, occupy an inferior status in our society, and are severely disadvantaged socially, vocationally, economically, and educationally; (7) the Nation’s proper goals regarding individuals with disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for such individuals; and (8) the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue those opportunities for which our free society is justifiably famous, and costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity."
"This is very similar to my situation; yet after being determined to be allegedly mentally ill and or disabled; the ADA was violated:
(4h) "I want to add my father is 97 years old and still obviously very cognitively sound after I saved his life during a stroke; he would have been brain dead if I didn't stay and live in that house for all those years for that one moment;
And I have been documenting my sister's abuse claiming she was the bane of my existence for at least a decade in blog posts that contain video evidence of her attacking me up to a decade ago along with pulling down surveillance equipment etc; so at some point y'all have to wake up and get over your socioeconomic gendered bias and have my back for once in your lives so I can be equally protected in every way the law prescribes for me and others;
Life is too short and my dad and I were closer than most Fathers and sons after losing Mom and Carl my brother; it was just the fate I was handed and it's quite common for elderly divorced or widowed parents to have one of their siblings stay there for companionship..."
(4i) "A very troubling aspect of all this that just occurred to me is that I'm not only dealing with roughly 20 years of police misconduct on the part of DPS; misconduct that can be reversed by simply understanding my side of the story and following through by helping me; But I have a strong feeling the risk management insurance company the county has working for them is going to try to either ignore me or shortchange me;
Then you have the bar association and bribed lawyers and general corruption within the judiciary which is allowed to occur through qualified immunities suffered by various individuals -- almost like children;
So you have all these sort of entitled children running the court system along with crooked cops and a lawsuit by someone proving low income white males are the most discriminated against in this particular region according to Bagley vs Sunnyvale; Lee "The Bag" Bagley actually won another lawsuit against Sunnyvale DPS after he was apparently allegedly retaliated against for winning the first lawsuit; and then there's my sister too perhaps explaining why she's allowed to run rampant as a criminal by all these other criminals;
I suppose any sane individual would give up at this point and figure hell with it I'm dealing with a bunch of criminals here how am I actually going to bring a change to this mess? Which perhaps explains the mental illness designation to begin with since anyone would have to be mentally ill to actually think they're going to get government and the judiciary and law enforcement and the court system etc in general to actually be fair and impartial...
That's the craziest part of all of this..."
(4j) Another very important aspect is the fact that my sister totally and completely fabricated her story about me supposedly having or wanting guns which I do not have or do not want; she was stealing my lyrics so I wrote some particularly sensational lyrics with the word Columbine in it about a decade ago and it was all bait to see who was stealing my lyrical proprietary information;
But like I said before; since DD is mentally ill and basically paranoid (which is exacerbated by the mainstream media by the way) What DD was actually doing was making a reference to stealing my constitutionally protected properties -- therefore it had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with me doing anything illegal;
It's just the usual stupid knee-jerk emotional demagoguery that so many women rely on to destroy the lives of men they're mad at or envious of like my sister is of me ~ and or used by government to manufacture consent for pretty much anything and everything they want regardless of truth or legitimacy;
Once again government is not necessarily involved in seeking the truth as they're quite often involved in judging things on a superficial level without further objective scrutiny: > go to: https://share.newsbreak.com/83m4gz0c
(4k) "I suppose the bottom line here is negative mental illness designations more often than not cause people to be treated badly as if their words are merely nonsensical and therefore not worth listening to; allowing human beings to be treated worse than dogs; Therefore mental illness designations are not only extremely slanderous and defamatory; but they also tend to cause people to be treated like they're less than human in the process -- creating an insidious new kind of mental health 'cognitive caste system' of dominance and submission...
Therefore I highly suspect overarching systemic violations of the ADA are more commonplace than we are led to believe; especially in monocultural Silicon Valley where so many low income people don't matter as much as others; which does not help anyone's physical or mental health..."
<><><>
(5) CIVIL FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION: 10 G.C.A. § 21002. (2022) Title 10. Health and Safety. / Division 1. Public Health / Chapter 2. Division of Public Welfare. / Article 10. Adult Protective Services § 21002. Definitions. (l) Financial or Property Exploitation means illegal or improper use of an elderly or adult with a disability's money, property, or other resources for monetary or personal benefit, profit or gain. This includes, but is not limited to, theft, misappropriation, concealment, misuse or fraudulent deprivation of money or property belonging to the elderly or adult with a disability. (b) Adult with a Disability is any person eighteen (18) years or older who: (1) has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one (1) or more major life activities; or (2) has a history of, or has been classified as having, an impairment which substantially limits one (1) or more major life activities. (h) Elderly refers to a person age sixty (60) years or older. > GO TO: https://www.justice.gov/elderjustice/prosecutors/statutes
The County of Santa Clara along with the State of California are both guilty of serial elder abuse as CA Governor Newsom not only irresponsibly grouped medically dependent senior citizens together leading to mass casualties; but Santa Clara County now embraces a new homeless shelter ideology housing families while socioeconomically discriminating against low income elderly often physically/medically dependent single individuals;
GO TO: https://share.newsbreak.com/9n8duojy
see also: https://www.justice.gov/elderjustice/prosecutors/statutes
Mental disabilities of a government so irresponsible in its' discriminatory enforcement of ADA laws are quite apparent as well; also apparent is the mistreatment of John's father Lester who suffers from brain cancer and ensuing mental disabilities while allowed to be kidnapped and moved out of California against his will by Defendant Davy;
Facilitated by Adult Protective Services (APS) who have taken zero action to protect Plaintiff John's Father Lester since reporting this criminal activity;
Defendant Davy should be charged with knowingly making perjurious false statements in furtherance of criminal conspiracies and or fraudulent obstruction of criminal justice; while other listed defendants facilitated this obstruction of criminal justice under the guise of alleged 'progressive' criminal justice (and or nonfeasance) essentially amounting to misfeasance and or malfeasance in an overarching multifarious fashion;
In turn endangering the community at large due to this abuse of qualified immunities; especially low income and/or especially male defendants who are regularly openly discriminated against; ridiculously based upon their gender...
(BTW unlawfully evicting what is considered to be a medically/mentally dependant individual like Plaintiff John utilizing government-facilitated force by Defendant Davy is not only a clear violation of civil rights laws; but also removing an elderly medically dependent adult like Lester runs afoul of these laws as well)
Defendant Davy improperly used Plaintiff John's father Lester's money, property, and other resources for monetary or personal benefit, profit or gain -- saving money while essentially enriching herself through Lester's money. Defendant Davy also improperly used Plaintiff John's property including the theft; misappropriation; concealment; and fraudulent deprivation of Plaintiff John's property facilitated by Sunnyvale DPS and or the County of Santa Clara as both DPS and SCC sheriffs refused to perform legally allowed civil standbys mentioned by Commissioner Johnson -- when expedience in doing so would have protected a larger percentage of Plaintiff John's constitutionally protected properties;
While invading Plaintiff John's privacy; and severely compromising John's safety and/or promise of happiness.
(37) DECLARATION OF RIGHTS: Article I of the California Constitution is the Declaration of Rights. Section 1 of Article I states that all people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. These rights include enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
Understanding Property Protection in the United States Constitution --Understanding the Common Law Right to Protect Property:
In the United States, property protection is a fundamental right that is enshrined in both the Constitution and the common law. This comprehensive guide aims to provide an in-depth understanding of the common law right to protect property. By exploring the historical context and legal principles that underpin this right, individuals will gain a clearer understanding of their rights and responsibilities as property owners.
1. Historical Background: The concept of property protection in the United States dates back to its colonial roots. Influenced by English common law, early American settlers recognized the importance of protecting property rights as a fundamental aspect of personal liberty. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution later solidified this right by ensuring that private property cannot be taken for public use without just compensation.
2. Common Law Principles: The common law right to protect property is based on the principle of self-defense. Under this principle, individuals have the right to defend their property against unlawful intrusions or interference. However, it is important to note that the use of force must be proportionate and reasonable in order to be legally justifiable.
3. Castle Doctrine: The «Castle Doctrine» is a legal principle that recognizes an individual’s right to use force, including deadly force, to defend their home or «castle» against intruders. This principle varies from state to state, with some states adopting a more expansive interpretation that includes protection of one’s vehicle or place of business.
4. Stand Your Ground Laws: Stand Your Ground laws, which exist in some states, expand upon the Castle Doctrine by removing the duty to retreat before using force in self-defense. In these states, individuals have no obligation to retreat and can use force, including deadly force, if they reasonably believe it is necessary to protect themselves or others from imminent harm.
5. Limitations: While the common law right to protect property is recognized and protected, it is not absolute. There are limitations imposed by state and federal laws. For example, the use of excessive force or force that is not proportionate to the threat may result in criminal or civil liability. It is important to understand the specific laws and regulations of your jurisdiction to ensure that your actions are within the bounds of the law.
Body camera footage is needed from SCC sheriffs not only to discover what property remained at John's residence when evicted; but to also prove indifference to Plaintiff John's medical needs. DPS footage will show the same indifference and property discovery.
(38) SUBORNATION OF PERJURY (REPRISE): revisited this is also applicable to all who knew about Defendant Davy's perjurious leanings; yet did nothing to correct these violations to bring necessary justice and truth to this proceeding.
.png) |
| County of Santa Clara PDOs suspected perjury from the onset of proceedings in 2022; with evidentiary proof of validity later provided by Plaintiff John within the last two years -- without necessary corrective actions taken... |
(39) FLAG DESECRATION: (1) Whoever knowingly mutilates, defaces, physically defiles, burns, maintains on the floor or ground, or tramples upon any flag of the United States shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. (2) This subsection does not prohibit any conduct consisting of the disposal of a flag when it has become worn or soiled. > GO TO: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/700
SCC sheriffs ripped down a United States flag hanging in front of Plaintiff John's bedroom door; in the process displaying gross disrespect for American freedoms etc; as the United States flag represents freedom and unity. Its design includes: 13 red and white stripes, symbolizing the original 13 colonies. 50 white stars on a blue background, representing the 50 states. Red: valor and bravery. White: purity and innocence. Blue: vigilance, perseverance, and justice...
(40) CONSPIRACY AGAINST RIGHTS (18 USC 241): makes it unlawful for two or more persons to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the United States in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of their having exercised such a right. Plaintiff John had his rights repeatedly violated in a 'vast chicken wing conspiracy' (for lack of a better term) against his rights;
Where John's First Amendment rights were repeatedly not only violated by various individuals employed by the County of Santa Clara; but also John's ADA rights and civil rights and human rights as well.
CIVIL RIGHTS CONSPIRACY
18 U.S.C. § 241 / Conspiracy Against Rights
Section 241 makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in the United States in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or because of his or her having exercised such a right.
Unlike most conspiracy statutes, §241 does not require, as an element, the commission of an overt act.
The offense is always a felony, even if the underlying conduct would not, on its own, establish a felony violation of another criminal civil rights statute. It is punishable by up to ten years imprisonment unless the government proves an aggravating factor (such as that the offense involved kidnapping aggravated sexual abuse, or resulted in death) in which case it may be punished by up to life imprisonment and, if death results, may be eligible for the death penalty.
Section 241 is used in Law Enforcement Misconduct and Hate Crime Prosecutions. It was historically used, before conspiracy-specific trafficking statutes were adopted, in Human Trafficking prosecutions.
MISCONDUCT BY LAW ENFORCEMENT
& OTHER GOVERNMENT ACTORS
18 U.S.C. § 242 / Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This provision makes it a crime for someone acting under color of law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. It is not necessary that the offense be motivated by racial bias or by any other animus.
Defendants act under color of law when they wield power vested by a government entity. Those prosecuted under the statute typically include police officers, sheriff’s deputies, and prison guards. However other government actors, such as judges, district attorneys, other public officials, and public school employees can also act under color of law and can be prosecuted under this statute.
Section 242 does not criminalize any particular type of abusive conduct. Instead, it incorporates by reference rights defined by the Constitution, federal statutes, and interpretive case law. Cases charged by federal prosecutors most often involve physical or sexual assaults. The Department has also prosecuted public officials for thefts, false arrests, evidence-planting, and failing to protect someone in custody from constitutional violations committed by others.
A violation of the statute is a misdemeanor, unless prosecutors prove one of the statutory aggravating factors such as a bodily injury, use of a dangerous weapon, kidnapping, aggravated sexual abuse, death resulting, or attempt to kill, in which case there are graduated penalties up to and including life in prison or death. If charged in conjunction with 18 U.S.C. § 250, as noted below, all sexual assaults under color of law are felonies.
(40a) STALE MISDEMEANOR? ETC
from: Hwi Woong Kim <HWKim@sunnyvale.ca.gov> / to: Johnny Roper <roperjohnny2@gmail.com> / date: Jun 19, 2022, 3:57 PM
"I'm truly sorry for all that you've been going through. It seems like you've been trying to get your side of the story heard without much luck. Unfortunately we also have our hands tied behind our backs in terms of what we can and cannot do as law enforcement. The claims you have about your sister seems like a frustrating situation in itself as you cannot voice your side of the story until a later date, but getting you a quicker hearing and getting you through the court system is something way above my pay grade and I have absolutely no control over that.
(Note: Defendant Davy could have been arrested within the statute of limitations at this point in time - but nonexistent "stale misdemenaor" laws were cited 🠋)
It is great to hear that you are enjoying your time away from the residence as you do not have to deal with your father's caretaker and your sister for the time being. I am in no way, shape, or form trying to get you to incriminate yourself or spam you with texts and phone calls. I was just trying to get a contact information from you in case I had more questions or needed to talk to you in the future..."
PSO H. Kim #17098
===
from: Hwi Woong Kim <HWKim@sunnyvale.ca.gov> / to: Johnny Roper <roperjohnny2@gmail.com> / date: Jun 19, 2022, 4:15 PM
"I'm glad you are taking that court order seriously. It can only help and benefit you if you are abiding by the orders in the future. It can help show the courts that you are more than compliant and are not the one causing an issue. Having a good track record even when the restraining order is against you goes a long way.
Once you finally have your say and share your voice on the matter, hopefully the courts will be able to determine what the real truth is and the right decisions will be made. But like I said, I wish I could help you with your court dates/hearing and the process to get your voice heard, but as PSOs, we do not have any control in that matter. We are only here to enforce the law given the situation and circumstance we are told/see/given at the time. And hopefully to assist people like you who are placed in just an unfortunate situation.
Again, I'm sorry about this whole situation you're in. It just seems like you were caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. I am willing to try and help you to the best of my abilities and capabilities. But please understand that I cannot move mountains or part seas. I am just an officer with limitations and restrictions on what I can do to help you. If you're patient with me, we can continue to talk and try to figure this out..."
PSO H. Kim #17098
(Note: Plaintiff John was not allowed to speak on his own behalf in court right around the time State Bar/Family Court leader and ex-judge James Towery got busted laughing at pro se defendants at an annual lawyer meeting; creating case law of sorts mandating Defendants Santa Clara County etc recuse themselves and allow ultra-capable pro se defendants like John to defend themselves in court)
===
from: Hwi Woong Kim <HWKim@sunnyvale.ca.gov> / to: Johnny Roper <roperjohnny2@gmail.com> / date: Jun 21, 2022, 2:42 AM
"Hey John, sorry for the late response. I was off work and I'm on night shifts. I was able to respond to you earlier as I was working an overtime shift. I will try giving your sister a call and see what her side of the story is as I'm sure what you're telling me and what she will tell me will have a combination of the truth somewhere in the middle.
It's always good to get both sides of the story before anything comes to fruition as I feel like you'd also appreciate having your voice heard if it was the other way around. Unfortunately I will be having a procedure done and will be off work the next week or so. I'll try to get back to you when I can.
But if I can get in touch with your sister, I will definitely talk to her about leaving your belongings alone as I agree with you. I would hate for others to tamper with my personal belongings. What was yours sister's name again?..."
(Note: Plaintiff John is unsure if PSO Kim contacted Defendant Davy regarding the importance of protecting Plaintiff John's mass-misappropriated belongings)
===
"Hey John, Sorry about that long delay. I just returned to work and had time to read most of your concerns. I was unable to contact your sister so far, so I have not been able to get anything from her yet.
Another point I wanted to clarify with you... When Officer Montgomery offered a civil standby, did you advise him that you were a restrained party in a restraining order? Unfortunately, we cannot do civil standby when a restraining order is in place. I believe Officer Meuting informed you that we cannot do a civil standby. We are not able to break policy, rules, procedures, and the law and unfortunately unable to assist you in the civil standby.
I believe the best way to make sure your items are still there is to continue to abide by the restraining order. Once you go through the courts and are able to lawfully retrieve your belongings and find that your sister had damaged your items, we can go from there.
Also, it has been brought to my attention that if you continue sending emails to our Human Resources department, there could be charges filed against you for harassment - 653m(b) PC. I do not intend to come off as if I'm threatening you, but I'm concerned for your well-being as well.
I know you're already going through a lot with the courts and I would hate for you to have to deal with this on top of the situation you're already going through with your father and sister. To help avoid any possibility of that happening, would you want to just voice your concerns and frustrations towards me and like I've said before, I could direct the concerns to the proper people if I am able to..."
Thanks John,
PSO H. Kim
(Statements from John: "Superior Court Commissioner Eric Johnson clearly expressed Plaintiff John's ability to do a civil standby; causing unknown property losses through misallocation and or theft by Defendant Davy. Caregiver Sandy Tabbada is willing to testify about these violations and abuses of ADA etc statutes -- Adding to this; more meritless unconstitutional coercions on the part of the City of Sunnyvale Human Relations who violated Plaintiff John's First Amendment rights with their unlawful and meritless actions..."
QUESTION: WHY THE HELL WOULD BOGUS HARASSMENT CHARGES FILED BE FILED AGAINST PLAINTIFF JOHN AFTER PLAINTIFF JOHN HAD BEEN STALKED AND HARASSED AND MENACED ETC FOR ROUGHLY 7 YEARS ON SCCDA ROSEN'S WATCH WITHOUT ANYONE BEING ARRESTED AND/OR CHARGED WITH CRIMES BY GROSSLY NEGLIGENT SUNNYVALE DPS!? Tuesday, May 15, 2018 "THE REVOLVING DOOR OF VIOLENT STALKING AND HARASSMENT" VIDEO DELETED BY YOU TUBE @ https://lreblogger.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-revolving-door-of-violent-stalking.html -- Also known as malfeasance and/or misfeasance and/or overreach an/or abuse of power etc...
Note: If PSO Kim didn't know about Defendant Davy's lawless ways; he does now)
===
from: Hwi Woong Kim <HWKim@sunnyvale.ca.gov> / to: Johnny Roper <roperjohnny2@gmail.com> / date: Jul 10, 2022, 9:05 PM
"Hey John, So you've sent a lot and I'll try to address all your questions and concerns. Feel free to ask anything you have questions about or unclear on. I'll do the best of my ability to try and clarify everything.
I understand that things may not seem fair to you and you aren't satisfied with the outcomes and our limitations on what we can do to help. You keep mentioning a domestic violence incident with your sister. By definition, domestic violence is between two individuals who are romantically involved (Boyfriend/girlfriend, husband/wife, boyfriend/boyfriend, etc.). If there was a physical altercation between you and your sister, that would be a battery. Battery is a misdemeanor and officers are unable to arrest someone on a misdemeanor committed not in presence, unless the victim wants to press charges (which you stated you did). However, after a "reasonable" time as passed, the crime becomes a "stale misdemeanor" in which we can no longer take legal action.
 |
| THE TRUTH REGARDING NONEXISTENT STALE MISDEMEANOR CA LAW: |
In terms of human resources, they have not decided that that's the route they were going to take (pressing charges for 653m(b) PC), but it has been brought to my attention that it could be a possibility. I did not threaten you that they were going to do so. I just wanted to give you a heads up so that you were aware of the possibility if they decided to take that route.
I understand that you have your rights to send emails regarding concerns you may have and to voice your opinions. However, there were an excessive number of emails being sent almost daily, which could meet the criteria for the "annoying," aspect of the penal code. Even if the other party did not respond to the email, a one sided conversation and repeated emails being sent could meet the criteria.
As for your email regarding a video footage of subjects who were vandalizing and stalking you, they are misdemeanors and would require a subject to want to press charges and become a victim for us to be able to take action. On top of that, we would need to be able to confirm their identity (name, birthday, etc.). If we do not have the suspect information, there is not much we can do. There is no program that can take a video footage and identify the individual in the footage..."
PSO H. Kim #17098
(Note: Plaintiff John was contacting various government email addresses during this same time frame; so why would Human Relations of all agencies do this?)
===
I'm not trying to contain your testimony or trying to suppress your voice. In fact, I do care for your well-being and will be available via email. I will not personally press charges against you for sending me emails, so feel free to send me as many emails as you'd like.
However, we cannot just take whatever action we want to. We are limited in what we can do and we have to follow the law, and policies and procedures set by our department as well. I will advise human resources of your concerns, and I hope I was able to clarify and confusion or provide an explanation for why we were able to do certain things and why we were unable to take action for others.
If you have any other questions, feel free to keep emailing me, but I do think that leaving human resources out of your emails will help you more than it can hurt you. As for sending the emails to the rest of the group, you're free to do so unless another person contacts you asking you to stop sending them emails...."
PSO H. Kim #17098
===
from: Hwi Woong Kim <HWKim@sunnyvale.ca.gov> / to: Johnny Roper <roperjohnny2@gmail.com> / date: Jul 11, 2022, 2:05 AM
"It's my pleasure. I'm glad I could clarify any confusion or misunderstandings you may have had. I cannot speak for human resources, but I'm not sure if they're equipped to respond to the concerns you are bringing up, which may be the reason you have not gotten a reply back from them. I'm sure there was no ill will to cause harm to your reputation. I was able to clarify a lot of the things that human resources may not have known the answers to.
But I'm glad I could be of some help to you. I wish you the best, and like I've already said, I'll be available via email so go ahead and send me any questions or concerns you may have in the future..."
PSO H. Kim #17098
(Statement from John: Overall PSO Kim was helpful to Plaintiff John during this trying time; but misunderstandings about an alleged "stale misdemeanor" law and/or Plaintiff John's lawful right to access his properties unlawfully denied under ADA regulations etc caused undue property losses by Plaintiff John via Defendant Davy who remains on the lam in a non-apprehended state essentially holding John's Father Lester against his will in an unknown location not only for the aforementioned; but also for kidnapping Plaintiff John's Father Lester last May 2024 -- and all other listed violations contained within this particular blog post...)
(41) UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (UDHR):
...is a milestone document in the history of human rights. Drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world, the Declaration was proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948 (General Assembly resolution 217 A) as a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations. It sets out, for the first time, fundamental human rights to be universally protected and it has been translated into over 500 languages. The UDHR is widely recognized as having inspired, and paved the way for, the adoption of more than seventy human rights treaties, applied today on a permanent basis at global and regional levels (all containing references to it in their preambles)...
Article 5 - No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. / Article 6 -- Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. / Article 7 -- All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. / Article 8 -- Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. / Article 5 - No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. / Article 6 -- Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. / Article 7 -- All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. / Article 8 -- Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law. / Article 10 -- Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. / Article 11 -- Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. / Article 12 -- No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. / Article 17 -- 1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. 2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. / Article 18 -- Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. / Article 19 -- Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. > GO TO: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) shares many direct similarities with the United States Constitution; well meaning laws aimed at the regulation of cruelty and inhumanity for the advancement of compassion and humanity; a shared quantum entanglement of humanism...
Humanism is a philosophy that stresses the importance of human factors rather than looking at religious, divine, or spiritual matters1. It is rooted in the idea that people have an ethical responsibility to lead lives that are personally fulfilling while at the same time contributing to the greater good for all people. Humanism is a democratic and ethical lifestance that affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. It stands for the building of a more humane society through an ethics based on human and other natural values in a spirit of reason and free inquiry through human capabilities.
===
(42) THE FIRST AMENDMENT: of the US Constitution guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. It forbids Congress from both promoting one religion over others and also restricting an individual’s religious practices. It guarantees freedom of expression by prohibiting Congress from restricting the press or the rights of individuals to speak freely. It also guarantees the right of citizens to assemble peaceably and to petition their government. > GO TO: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/first_amendment
 |
| NOTE: FIRST AMENDMENT VIOLATIONS CAN AMOUNT TO JUSTICE OBSTRUCTIONS SINCE FREE SPEECH QUITE OFTEN ALLOWS THE TRUTH TO SET ONE FREE... |
(43) THE 9/11 INCIDENT: Exposing a pattern or practice of fraudulent claims
made by the US government beyond aforementioned content; commencing an NWO of
lawless rights abuses and violations:
 |
| Photo 911.jpg |
1) 911.jpg shows a circular hole made by a hand-held rocket after penetrating several walls at a newly reinforced section of the Pentagon. Leaving the question: What happened to the supposed airliner that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon?! -- 2) Photo 911.X.jpg shows no windows broken where nonexistent airliner wings would have potentially impacted if the Pentagon was actually struck by a hijacked airliner by terrorists supposedly trained at a CIA flight training facility -- Questions: Due to the lack of corpses at the crime scene; what actually happened to American Airlines Flight 77 and/or why did the CIA allegedly train these terrorists?! And why did Dick Cheney tell Diane Feinstein to "come back in a week" after Diane warned VPOTUS "something is about to happen"?! -- 3) Photo 911-4.jpg re-exposes lack of lateral damage adjacent to the center of impact...
 |
Photo 911.X.jpg
|
 |
| Photo 911-4.jpg |
If such misleading misinformative disinformation can be allowed to flourish; what other lies have been presented as truths and subsequently misinterpreted by lawyer/attorney/judges who have made a fortune lying for their clients?
Therefore exposing probable cause beyond a reasonable doubt 6th Amendment protections guaranteeing defendants allowance to face their accusers must be reinstated due to fraudulent nature of governmental malfeasance and overreach...
POSSIBLE LEGAL APPLICATIONS:
1) Conspiracy Against Rights, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 241, makes it unlawful for two or more persons to agree to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in the United States in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or because of his or her having exercised such a right; 2) If someone has knowledge of a planned act that would deprive another person of their civil rights, and has the power to prevent it, but neglects to do so, they can be liable for any damages caused by the wrongful act. This applies even if the individual wasn't directly involved in the violation itself. Action for Neglect to Prevent (42 U.S.C. § 1986) kkc.com/laws/action-for-neglect-to-prevent-42-u-s-c-%C2%A7-1986/
9/11 - Loose Change: Final Cut FULL VERSION @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE9LTYHiknE + http://anonhq.com/european-scientific-journal-concludes-911-was-a-controlled-demolition/ + Families of 9/11 Victims On Verge of Proving Government Cover Up in Court @ http://anonhq.com/families-of-911-victims-on-verge-of-proving-government-cover-up-in-court/ + 28 PAGES @ http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-911-classified-report-steve-kroft/ + HOW THE U.S. COVERED UP ROLE IN 911 @ http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/ + 911 TRUTH MOVEMENT @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_truth_movement + FAHRENHEIT 911 FULL MOVIE IN HD ETC @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2014/12/fahrenheit-911-full-movie-in-hd.html + WTC 9/11 Building 7 - CLEARLY DETONATED! 2013 NEW FOOTAGE OF EXPLOSIONS! @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXrT6h2oepc + It’s Official: European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 was a Controlled Demolition @ http://anonhq.com/european-scientific-journal-concludes-911-was-a-controlled-demolition/ + 9-11 Conspiracy Solved Names, Connections, & Details Exposed! @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hhBZJEqoe0A + Families of 9/11 Victims On Verge of Proving Government Cover Up in Court @ http://anonhq.com/families-of-911-victims-on-verge-of-proving-government-cover-up-in-court/
9/11 -- ANONYMOUS @
http://www.anonews.co/tag/911/
http://www.anonews.co/pentagon-attack/
IN CONCLUSION: Due to apparent acute axiomatic psychopathy uniquely expressed by various aforementioned defendants; as a compassionate act of mercy Plaintiff John recommends corrective action in the form of Judge Manley's Department 61 Mental Health Court (MHC) located at the State of California Superior Court Santa Clara County Courthouse.
updated: 27 Oct 2025
"ENEMIES OF TRUTH ARE ALLIES OF DECEPTION..."
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
