Amicus Curiae Brief — Read v. United States

Supreme Court, U.S.

| y” yy ’ i >

NO: 92-1952

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER TERM 1992

THOMAS M. READ,

Petitioner

VS

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent

nA K

AN AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF A

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI,

SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO: 92-1952

AK K

KAREN D. HUFFER

FOR VIC. TRE

3104 PLAZA DE ERNESTO

LAS VEGAS, NV 89102

(702) 876-246]

a BEST AVAILABLE COPY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

A BRIEF IN AMICUS CURIAE IN

SUPPORT OF MR. READ'S PETITION .............. l

a. PIII cscs, arses eatin eenataeerees l

b. o£ kh e pS See:

¢. Psychological Impact Of

Coens NN ie A 6

d. Are Allegations Of Judicial Evidence

Tampering Well Founded? .............. 8

GR IEN 5 bcs yncntcnnoscuacsnvanaielesnniseinabenead iuawiles 12

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

AUTHORITY CITED PAGE

Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of

Mental Disorders, 3rd Rev., American Psychiatric

Assoc. (1987), IFBN 0-89042-018-1 oo. 3

America: What Went Wrong. .............. eee 10

United States Trustee Program, Hearing before the

House Subcommittee on Economic and Comercial Law,

November 6, 1991, 102d Congress, Serial No: 61... 11

BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEES, Oversight Improved

But Extent of Trustee Fraud Is Unknown,

January, 1993, GAO/GGD-93-54 oon. 1]

A BRIEF IN AMICUS CURIAE

IN SUPPORT OF MR. READ'S PETITION

a. Introduction.

On June 7, 1993, Thomas M. Read filed a

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI to a Decision

entered by the U.S. Court of Appeals For the Federal

Circuit, affirming a lower court dismissal of his Civil

RICO complaint, and additionally attacking Mr. Read

with allegations that his appeal was "frivolous as filed

and frivolous as argued" and that he "persists in abusing

the judicial process with repetitive filings without any

arguable merit ...".!

Ten persons knowledgeable of Mr. Read's

premise for filing his petition, and believing that the

allegations of wrongdoing in his circumstances are

directly representative of abuses in their own particular

cases, have each prepared their respective statements in

support of Read's Petition. Those statements comprise

the 22 pages of the Appendix to this brief.

The motive of the contributors to this document is

that each one of them is profoundly outraged as an

American Citizen, at such manner of abuses by federal

courts and their appointees, as described by Mr. Read in

his Petition. Clearly as evidenced by the litany of

federal court decisions without a trial and in utter

disregard of a jury determination in his favor, is the

manner of federal abuse that reflects the like experiences

of the contributors, and that must be immediately

terminated. This nation has been founded upon certain

principles of servitude by its government to its people.

Amongst those principles is the individual's absolute

right to bring a civil complaint of wrongdoing before a

| See Petition App. I-3

jury of his peers, in all matters arising under the common

law, where the damages exceed twenty dollars.

It is by this mode of redress that violence is

arrested and made a manner of conduct that is lawfully

punished by our laws. However, if civil redress is to be

barred to this nation’s citizenry upon the whim and

caprice of those whom are directly or indirectly served

by its denial, then anarchy shall ultimately reign in place

of the rule of law. The contributors to this Amicus

Curiae are each ternbly concemed that their own

allegations of official wrongdoing, each alleged to have

been perpetrated in excess of governing official

authority, are likewise constructively mooted by judicial

indifference to the Constitutional orngins of power to

both federal and state courts.

b. Purpose of V.1I.C.T.R.E.

The underlying function of V.I.C.T.R.E. is to

piece together a network of understanding and ultimate

consensus of direction toward solution of personal crisis

that may be created by violations of individual private

rights. These violations are the root of immense

damages to growing numbers of our society. The

wounds inflicted by the abusers not only destroy the -

financial base of innocent citizens, but they destroy the

targeted individual's ability to meaningfully contribute to

society.

At the heart of this endeavor is network of mutual

contributors’ efforts to bring the Supreme Court of the

United States in touch with the threatened psychic

underpinning of the American citizen, as it is tied to

each citizen's constitutionally protected rights that it

depends upon. The contributors urge the Court to

observe the condition of peril imposed upon the basic

freedoms that Americans are taught are their birthright,

and to acknowledge the jeopardy imposed upon the

public trust that results from the realization that those

fundamental safeguards necessary for a_ healthy,

productive life -- are missing!

All the contributors, whose words make up this

Amicus Curiae, have been denied due process of law and

further traumatized by the mean and oppressive actions

of those who serve under an oath to protect a fair and

civilized system of justice.

In some cases, the great stress imposed upon the

individual, or upon an individual's family unit, has led to

death or dysfunctional impairment by stress induced

stroke, heart damage, and gastric disorders. As the

medical community continues to learn of the inter-

relationship between emotional stress and the body's

auto immune system, there are direct correlations

developed between the unavoidable stress imposed by

the acts committed by federal abusers and other diseases,

such as certain cancers, Adult Respiratory Distress

Syndrome, and a multitude of stress induced mental

disorders that may be triggered by the resulting

depression.

All have suffered from Post Traumatic Stress

Disorder*. It is a cumulative type of trauma wherein the

victim, having experienced a primary problem, turns to

the court for relief and protection. Chemical changes

occur in a subject's brain when it experiences a profound

sense of helplessness in the face of the jeopardy imposed

by its then-to-fore protective system (the courts)

functioning in an organized manner against it. It is an

emotional state beyond the point of rage, and manifested

by an implosive condition in which mental illness

: Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders. 3rd

Rev.. American Psychiatric Associon. publisher (1987). Chapter on

Anxiety Disorders. pages 247-250. IFBN 0-89042-018-1.

flourishes. As a therapist, Karen Huffer has observed a

middle class epidemic of this condition, that has been

imposed by the legal system in both state and federal

courts. The condition so imposed has been tagged:

"Legal Abuse Syndrome".

One of the V.I.C.T.R.E. supporters suffers from

lupus, a condition that is greatly aggravated by the stress

imposed by the destruction of her sizable solvent estate

by the Northern California bankruptcy system.

V.LC.T.R.E. exists to provide a forum for those

in need of assistance, and those capable of assisting, to

meet and find self empowerment from the group. Each

supporter of V.I.C.T.R.E. is both a contributor and a

beneficiary. The individual mentioned above who

suffers from lupus, is quite knowledgeable in the area of

credit recovery and Real Estate mortgage financing, and

has freely offered her assistance to any persons in need.

One Doctor in Northern California, and another in

Texas, have extended their office's medical services to

the destitute targets of the federal abusers, and have

upon occasion been the only means of medical contact

by the individuals served, due to their minimal

resources. Some members have acquired limited pro se

legal knowledge relating to use of a law library and

procedures within the court systems, and have shared

their knowledge with others in need. Still others have

maintained files upon the abusers, and through private

investigations of their own, have been the principals

instrumental in exposing the criminal nature of the

wrongdoing Mr. Read addresses in his civil complaint.?

3 Contributer Sandy Brick (App. 1-2) and her late husband John.

were a major source of information (from the roughly 80.000 records

they acquired) for Anthony Sousa. the U.S. Trustee who successfully

prosecuted the infamous Charles Duck. Sandy has obtained a certificate

as a paralegal in California. and has assisted many individuals to both

understand the otherwise incomprehensible system of treachery

Generally, it is a universal truth that the federal

courts, the Department of Justice, state and local law

enforcement agencies and courts, and municipal relief

organizations, all ignore the decimation perpetrated upon

the federally targeted individuals that V.I.C.T.R.E.

attempts to serve. The ultimate measure of

V.L.C.T.R.E.'s success, shall be its dissolution for want

of a continuing need to exist. That event may be

materially shortened in time if this court shall grant the

particular petition that Mr. Read has submitted in READ

V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and determines

that the answer to Mr. Read's questions is in each case

There are many more who are materially assisting

Mr. Read than those who have contributed to this

document. All those involved are aware that the chances

of this Court granting the petition are remote given the

high number of petitions submitted, and that even if the

Court should grant the petition, that the people of this

society may be greatly surprised to learn that this Court

would determine a "no" response to one or more of Mr.

Read's questions presented.

Even if the Court should determine that one or all

of the three questions presented requires a "no" answer,

all who are concerned with supporting Mr. Read desire

this Court to state it so. Each is deeply aggrieved at the

nature of similar abuses in its own circumstances within

the five judicial districts in three separate federal judicial

circuits that span our continent, in this case.

All those involved particularly support Mr. Read,

because his is a case where he was not a debtor or a

creditor to an estate under title 11. His only relationship

confronting hapless debtors and creditors and to further put in place the

defensive blocks that have been discovered to frustrate the stream of

thefts underway in an individual case.

to bankruptcy was that his family was targeted by court

appointees of the now notorious Eureka/Santa Rosa

bankruptcy ring. Alone, he fought those who used their

federal powers against his family, and beat them in the

trial resulted from their abuse of law where they sought

to use fraudulent legal process and coercive false

complaints as an extortion tool against him.

After Read prevailed in the only trial conducted,

it took the six judges he named in his Civil RICO

complaint, the trial court judge, and the U.S. Court of

Appeals For The Federal Circuit, "per curium", each and

every one either ignoring or misstating the issues of his

two post judgment complaints, to so ripen this case as to

warrant this high court's attention. If Read is not

allowed to present his case to the demanded jury, then

each other of bis supporters knows that in their own

cases, remedy must be obtained outside the courts and

the laws of this nation, heretofore believed to be the only

acceptable means of remedy.

Cc. Psychological Impact Of Official Abuse.

The homfying impact upon ordinary persons by

misuse of official process to wrongfully deprive it of

property and to impress official control over its free will

(its constitutionally protected liberty), cannot be over-

emphasized. One supporter of V.1.C.T.R.E. has been in

court on the same case for 42 years! This circumstance

is an abomination of justice, and if our federal

government is so callus, so self protective, that it cannot

observe the simple truth that this individual had far more

to contribute to society in its out of court capacity as a

normally functioning human being, then reasonable men

must question the legitimacy of our federal government.

As frightening a prospect as this circumstance

may pose, each of his supporters is in turn deserving of

the answer to Read's questions. Although his supporters

are generally debtors in cases under title 11, none of

them has ever renounced its citizenship. None has

committed any offense to society warranting suspension

of its First, Fifth, Seventh or Tenth Amendment.

constitutionally protected rights, and each and every one

of his supporters desperately wishes to be able to present

the facts of its case to its own respective jury, and to

have that sacred fact finder determine the facts and the

applicable law to the circumstances created by those

facts so determined.

Each of Read's supporters recognizes the

congressional power to interfere with contracts, but none

of his supporters has otherwise waived its private right to

life, liberty, or property, protected by the Fifth

Amendment, and apart from the actual debt that may be

owed to another. Yet these are the fundamental issues

that are common to each of the contributors to this

Amicus Curiae. Each claims that federal officers and

agents, in complete disregard of their fiduciary and

professional ethical codes, has literally stolen millions of

dollars from them that is far beyond that which was the

actual liability each supporter possessed.

Like Read, each supporter has substantial

evidence to present to their respective intended trier of

fact, to develop its own proof of unlawful self-serving

indulgence by court appointees, in utter and complete

disregard of their respective fiduciary standards of care.

Like Read, each supporter simply wishes to go to

its respective court of law, be allowed to present this

evidence in a proceeding that is strictly policed by its

judge to insure impartiality along with psychological

safety, and allow the designated fact finder (not the

judge in a jury case) to determine the facts of the case,

the applicable law to the circumstances, and the remedy

to completely repair any proved damages.

It is the determined will of the federal courts in

the Second, Fifth, Ninth, and Federal Circuits that are

known to Read and his supporters, by means of judicial

tampering with submitted evidence and intimidation of

witness/litigants and their attorneys through brow

beating, threats of sanction, and sanctions, that has

prevented Read and in their respective separate

circumstances -- his supporters, from having their day in

court.

d. Are Allegations Of Judicial Evidence

Tampering Well Founded?

Supporters Vincent and Sophie Germano (App. 8

& 9) have pointed out a statement by Professor Monroe

Freedman‘, expressing his disdain for judges who

engage in admitted "disingenuous" statements upon the

decisions they wnte. Of compelling significance to Mr.

Read's case brought forward, is the fact that the

quotation cited by Mr. and Mrs. Germano appeared in

the November 19, 1990, edition of Legal Times, in Mr.

Freedman's monthly column, Cases and Controversies,

and was specifically addressed to the admissions of the

judges of the Federal Circuit. Mr. Freedman continued

in his column to describe the backdrop of the statement

Mr. and Mrs. Germano have cited, as follows:

-

4 Monroe Freedman is the Howard Lichtenstein Distinguished

Professor of Legal Ethics at Hofstra University Law School. Amongst

his contributions he és the author of Understanding Lawvers' Ethics.

Matthew Bender & Co. (1990). and is featured monthly in Legal Times.

in his column Cases and Controversies.

enamel ee

“When I| made that statement last year5 in

an address to the Seventh Annual Judicial

Conference of the U.S. Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit, there were some

unexpected reactions. What was not

unexpected was that lawyers expressed

strong agreement. What took me aback

was the comment of one federal appellate

judge who said, "you don't know the half of

it." A second appeals Judge protested that

outright lying was rare, but acknowledged

that "disingenuous statements of the facts"

are commonplace. That struck me as a

singularly inadequate defense of the

integrity of our judiciary by one of its

own."

Read's petition alleges exactly the same tactics by

certain federal judicial officers form the basis of his

Civil RICO complaint. Moreover, Read's appeal to the

same Federal Circuit, and its responsive and unprovoked

hostile language, attacking Read for coming to court

with his complaint, accusing him of "abusing the judicial

process", when it is clear (as the respective noses upon

their honorable faces) that a prior jury had determined

equities inopposite, and that actually it was Read who

had been abused by this judicial process, makes a

compelling prima facie argument for this Court to review

Read's case.

An even further impetus should move this Court

toward granting Read's Petition, by recollection of the

Chief Justice, Mr. Rehnquist, that he, personally,

addressed the American Bankruptcy Institute, on May

5 The Seventh Annual Judicial Conference of the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the Federal Circuit. was held in 1989,

:

12, 1992, where he related almost verbatim the laundry

list of bankruptcy court appointee abuses found in

Chapter Four of America: What Went Wrong.°,

entitled "The Lucrative Business Of Bankruptcy". In

conclusion of his address to the American Bankruptcy

Institute, Chief Justice Rehnquist admonished the

members of the Institute to better police themselves, and

to cease such manner of activity.

Clearly those involved at the judicial level as well

as those in the Department of Justice defending such

manner of wrongdoing, either missed the message of the

Chief Justice, or some fear may have smiled, winked,

and gone back to business as usual. This is indisputably

the circumstance in Read's case, since the District Court

dismissal of matters on point with the manner of

concerns expressed by the Chief Justice occurred in just

under sixty days after Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered

his address, and the Federal Circuit decision followed 10

months later!

How do the innocent targets of outrageous

judicial abuse manage to ever heal the damages done by

those with power over an individual's protection system?

Certainly it is not suggested that the Chief Justice

of the United States Supreme Court is simply paying

"disingenuous" lip service to placate an increasingly and

greatly angered public; therefore, we witness that his

admonitions are given the same reaction of arrogant and

overt disobedience that is given to Read's Petition-cited

Constitutional provisions and_ federal statutory

authorities. In either case, only this court, and obviously

not the Circuit, district, or bankruptcy courts, and

profoundly not the American Bankruptcy Institute, has

6 By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele. Pulitzer Prize

winning reporters of the Philadelphia Inquirer. and Published by

Andrews and McMeel. of Kansas City.

TT

EE ee

ll

the final authority to correct a problem that may well

rank above private organized crime in the amount of

money and human destruction it imposes.

In its hearing upon the U.S. Trustee program, held

November 6, 19917, the House Subcommittee on

Economic and Commercial Law, in a statement by Rep.

Jack Brooks, reported that the American bankruptcy

System oversees $26 billion ($26,000,000,000.00) in

private assets administered by 2,000 private trustees.

annually. Application of 4th grade division reveals that

each trustee manages on average, $13 million in estate

assets. In actual practice (not disclosed in the scope of

the hearing) only a handful of trustees and their law

firms (referred to as "employees" in the report) control

the greater percentage of that massive amount of

individual wealth.

A spin-off of that November 199] hearing was

the order by the Subcommittee Chairman, Rep. Brooks,

to the General Accounting Office to conduct an

investigation of the allegations of wrongdoing by private

trustees and their employees, in conjunction with an

investigation into the competency of those administering

the U.S. Trustee program, and determine the status of the

integrity of the system in view of the considered charges

of gross misconduct. Although the report was requested

by Rep. Brooks in "... the Spring of next year" (1992), it

was finally submitted in January 1993.8

7 United States Trustee Program. Hearing Before House

Subcommittee On Economic and Commercial Law. 102d Congress.

Serial No. 61, November 6. 1991. See Petitioner Appendix 54-66.

See: GAO Report to the Chairman. Subcommittee on Economic

and Commercial Law. Committee on the Judiciary. House of

Representatives. BANKRUPTCY TR STEES, Oversight Improved

But Extent of Trustce F raud Is Unknown. January 1993. GAO/GGD-

93-54.

12

Even though the report was inconclusive, it

observed that substantial fraud exists in the American

bankruptcy system, and that there is no constructive

oversight in place to even monitor its extent. In short,

there exists a condition of complete chaos relating to the

system's capability to manage the code created

administrators of bankruptcy estates, under title 11.

CONCLUSION

Read's Petition asks this Court to review an

unusually clear and well documented sequence of events

that span the past thirteen years. The events complained

of all originate in the minds and deeds of federal judicial

officers and their duly appointed private officers of their

courts. Read and his wife were innocent of any

wrongdoing -- at any time. Yet, their lives, fortune, and

personal character, have been ruthlessly attacked in a

clearly apparent attempt to conceal the wrongdoing by

those empowered with federal authority who abused

their entrusted official capacity.

Additionally, the supporters of V.I.C.T.R.E. ask

this Court to closely review Read's case. His complaints

are the complaints of several thousands of honest

citizens caught up in a corrupt system of manipulation,

larceny, extortion, and possibly even involving murder.

A legitimate system of justice cannot await

another opportunity to address these profound issues.

The time is now. This Court, having been urged by so

many herein to affirm or deny the strict meaning of the

constitutional provisions Read has cited, must not ignore

its role to the public upon such a widespread and well

known manner of federal corruption.

Along with Read, each supporter of V.1.C.T.R.E.

asks this Court to detail in precise and doable terms, the

approach an individual (even when represented pro se)

Nocona dine talent iia aiiiiltaatanniaciaiale

ee

13

must take to bring his civil case involving documented

judicial abuse of federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules

of the Bankruptcy Court, Rules of Appellate Procedure,

federal statutes, and Constitutional provisions, to court

for the singular purpose of individual redress of the

wrongs claimed.

App. |

July 5, 1993

Statement Supporting

THOMAS M. READ vs. UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA

I, Sandra J. Brick, was a Debtor and Victim of

the Bankruptcy system of the Northern District of

California during the period of 1979 through 1983. The

trustee involved in the pilfering and embezzlement of

our estate was the infamous Charles Duck.

With due diligence and with the aide of many

others, my husband and I were able to accumulate

enough evidence to warrant an indictment of and a plea

of guilty of one Charles Duck. Further investigative

work, over the past thirteen years, into the activities of

Messrs. Judge Connolly Brown (deceased), Judge Alan

Jaroslovsky, Attorney Philip Amot, Charles Duck and

other high powered law firms too numerous to name

have revealed the continuing rape of bankrupt estates in

the Northern District of California that financially have

benefited only Federal Bankruptcy Court officials and

their agents.

Our estate was valued at $2 million dollars in

assets and less than $500,000 in liabilities when we

were falsely coerced by Charles Duck's class-mate,

childhood friend, and co-conspiratory attorney Philip

Arnot to seek reorganization in the bankruptcy system.

As a result, my husband. in his late years and I in

my mid years, were reduced to minimal social security

and county aide after forty-five years of hard work. We

were left, as others were, in the position of never being

App. 2

able to re-coop, re-group or start over because of our

age factors.

During the past thirteen years of research we

have painfully discovered the following:

l. We were and have been denied the nght to

redress.

pa The right to due process.

7: The wrongful taking of property by

Federal Court Officers and agents.

4. The fraudulent protection of wrongdoing

by the Judiciary.

>. The systematic violation of oath of office

and fiduciary duty by the courts and the

bankruptcy court insiders.

Mr. Thomas Read's Petition for Writ of Certiorari

to the U.S. Supreme Court, docketed case number 92-

1952, has merit and represents a network of victims

through out this country who believe that their

Constitutional Rights to redress and due process have

been violated. That they have been denied their legal

heritage as guaranteed by the Constitution and the Bill

of Rights.

This Court must take serious consideration in

granting Mr. Read's Petition for Writ of Certiorari in

order to serve the society that has come knocking to its

door.

/s/

Sandra J. Brick and also for John I. Bick (Deceased)

P.O. Box 5740

Santa Rosa, Ca 95402

707/575-3464

App. 3

DECLARATION OF WILLIAM J. CONNOLLY

IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION FOR WRIT OF

CERTIORARI

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED

STATES

BY THOMAS M. READ vs THE UNITED STATES

OF AMERICA,

DOCKET NO; 92-1952

The above petition asks one simple question in three

different ways: "Does the individual possess the right to

redress?” It is ludicrous to have to ask the Supreme

Court of the United States this question but it has

become necessary because of the blatant abuses heaped

upon private persons by governmental employees and

their agents.

The corruption in the bankruptcy courts is particularly

rampant and is nation wide. I filed for "protection"

under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code with the

totally naive notion that the bankruptcy laws were in

place to protect the individual from his creditors while

he organized his affairs in order to discharge his

obligations in an orderly manner without destroying his

estate.

The court appointed a trustee who immediately

confiscated all bank accounts, credit cards and income

properties leaving my wife and me destitute. I was

worth five or six million dollars at time of filing and

only owed $900,000.00. My estate has always been

solvent! The trustee could have discharged by creditors

within six weeks of being appointed but has kept the

Chapter 11 case open for over five years.

App. 4

The trustee immediately and systematically dismantled

by assets and sold them for under market values. Not

once was I consulted regarding how I intended to

operate my affairs in order to discharge my obligations.

To the contrary, the trustee deliberately destroyed my

business affairs and sold my properties leaving me with

no way to continue making a living.

The trustee caused some ten to twelve federal marshalls

to evict me from my home of 35 years with only the

clothes on my back leaving me without a domicile or a

living allowance in order to obtain same. I have been

relegated to food stamps and have no place to live. My

wife of forty years passed away under this terrible stress

and abuse and I am dysfunctional as a result of a

nervous breakdown, high blood pressure, severe

arithmea and severe circulation problems.

The court has continually denied my any living

allowance stating that there is not enough money in the

estate. Yet the court has overseen the rape of my estate

for the benefit of the trustee, her attorneys, her

accountants and other various agents she has hired. The

trustee and her agents has filed law suits against KT VU,

Channel 2 for airing their investigation into this

corruption. They have filed a frivolous lawsuit against

me which was dismissed. The have filed lawsuits

against my three sons which cost the estate $400,000.00

to pursue and blackmailed my sons into settling or they

would continue to cause them more and imore attorney

fees.

To date this corruption has generated about

$1,500,000.00 for these people. All this with the full

knowledge and approval of the court. If this activity

App. 5

were perpetrated by a bank, the government would have

some people in prison. This corruption by government

agents must be redressable by private persons.

Dated: June 30, 1993

/s/

William J. Connolly

4773 Sonoma Hwy.

Santa Rosa, CA 95409

App. 6

STATEMENT SUPPORTING

THOMAS M. READ vs. UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA

Re: Supreme Court Docket No. 92-1952, Request for

leave to file an Amicus Curlae

That we ROBERT L. DENNIE and DOLLY M.

DENNIE filed a Chapter 13 Bankruptcy on the 8-27-85,

in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of

Nevada, Case No. BK-S-85-01264-LBR, that ITT

Consumer Financial Corporation foreclosed on the

Dennies' property in question on the 8-28-85, that

Adversary Proceeding No. 900031 was filed as a result.

That said case went to trial on January 27, 28 and

29, 1992, that Amended Judgment was entered on about

the 4-16-92, that the court awarded the Dennie's

damages of 4500.00 dollars and attorney fees, that the

court also awarded ITT attorney fees and cost, whereas

the court found that ITT willfully violated the Stay, that

U.S. Bankruptcy Code and Case Law mandate that the

Debtor be awarded attorney fees for willful violation of

Automatic Stay.

Further, the Dennie's cash award of $500.00

dollars, wasn't pursuant to current Case Law, that it was

held in In re Abrams, 127 B.F. 239 (9th Cir. BAP

(1991) that damages of $1,500.00 dollars was awarded

to the Abrams for Creditor's refusal to turn over property

of the estate to Debtor for several days, that in the

instant case the Creditor refused to turnover property of

the estate for approximately 5 years, that in direct

proportion the cash award would exceed $200,000.00

|

App. 7

dollars, that said award is pursuant to Title 11 U.S.C.

SSS 542.

That whereas the Bankruptcy Court found in

favor of the Dennie's allegations that ITT willfully

violated the Automatic Stay, and awarded damages of

$500.00 dollars and attorney fees, the Dennie's has

never received a cent, further the court awarded [TT

attorney fees and cost, which would cost the Dennie's

thousands.

That the Bankruptcy Court Judge in our case-

Judge Linda B. Riegle, awarded the Amended Judgment

to the Dennies "that is the Dennie's wond the law suit".

but the cash award wasn't pursuant to Case Law "Due

Process," further Judge Riegle awarded attorney fees

and cost to the Creditor for violating 11 U.S.C. §542

and 11 U.S.C. §362(h), that said violations extended for

an approximate 5 year period.

That problems expressed in READ v. U.S. of A.

appear to ask the crucial questions, which is do we in

fact have a right to redress and due process when such

rights are abused in the court.

That we have read and understand Mr. Read's

Petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No. 92-

1952, and we respectfully petition the United States

Supreme Court to grant the said Petition.

Dated this 30 day of June, 1993.

Sign/s/ and /s/

ROBERT L. DENNIE DOLLY M. DENNIE

App. 8

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF HARRIS

AFFIDAVIT

COMES NOW THE ~~ UNDERSIGNED

AFFIANTS, under oath, and state the following in

support of Thomas _M. Read vs. United States of

America.

Affiants express our sincere appreciation to

Thomas M. Read for petitioning the United States

Supreme Court for Writ of Certiorari in case #92-1952:

We too, are similarly victimized by the Court justice

system which we believe adversely affects citizens

throughout our very troubled nation.

In our case, our own legal council, their bar

association and member employees of State and Federal

law enforcement agencies, colluded with concert acting

Judges in allowing extortionary bankers to evade jury

trial to seize our business and property and continue

evading trial on the merits of those frauds, from Jan. 4,

1985 to the present time.

The looting of our estate was not limited to the

federal bankruptcy court: Those bankruptcy crimes

were compounded by attorneys and Judge in the federal

district court action: The reason for the denial of our

compelling Briefs in State and Federal Appellate Courts

by (unpublished) Opinion is best said by Monroe

Freedman, a Howard Lichtenstein Distinguished

Professor of Legal Ethics at Hofstra University Law

School who states in part:

a

App. 9 |

.."T have had my fill of judicial opinions that

bear no relationship to cases that were filed and argued.

I am tired of opinions that falsify the facts of the case

and that disingenuously use or omit the legal precedent."

The honorable professor wrote another Horror

story by Professor Anthony D'Amato, who states. in

part: "The Illinois Supreme Court committed an

outright fraud." (Legal Times, Nov. 19, 1990)

Congressman Brooks' News Release of Nov. 6.

1991, cites additional reasons why we, like many more

Americans, are prevented from exercising inalienable

rights to redress those frauds. The American Court

system is politicized and affected by conflicts of

interests, cronyism etc..

It is our opinion that unless people affected by

such corruption, organize in a national association such

as "Victre", Los Vegas, NV 89102, Americans. will

continue to be deprived of their Constitutional Rights by

officials sworn to serve the people.

July 1, 1993, Affients

/s/

Vincent and Sophie Germano

610 Masters Way

Kingwood, Texas 77339

(713) 358-1505

_) a

App. 10

Statement in Support of THOMAS M. READ vs.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Supreme Court

Docket No. 92-1952

July 4, 1993

I, James D. Huffer and I, Karin D. Huffer,

debtors in the Ninth Circuit and with our case still open

in the Federal Bankruptcy Court in Las Vegas, Nevada,

urge the Supreme Court to hear and to respond to the

issues of due process and right to redress as put forth in

Thomas Read's action for Writ of Certioran. We

believe that Thomas Read's case brings to the proper

forum an issue that is of critical concern to a large

population of Americans who have attempted to use

their courts for settlement of disputes or resolution of

problems and have found that their rights to be heard in

fair and safe court were not available to them.

In our case, we came to the Chapter 11

Bankruptcy Court in which Judge Robert Clive Jones

presided. We had and still have a solvent estate. We

needed to reorganize in order to strengthen our estate

and to cope with business pressure created by our

lender. Once our Chapter 11 was filed, our efforts at

implementing our plant were interfered with and our

rights to the use of this court as a business tool were

denied to us. We were forced into Chapter 7 liquidation

and at this time only fraudulent creditors have been

serviced by the trustee, her attorney and the judge.

Creditors have also been denied their rights to be paid

according to the law and our plant.

As a result of this judicial "gang rape" of

ourselves, our creativity has shut down, our

OO

App. [1

contributions to society are limited and our economic

devastation has spread to our creditors and all who

depended on us. We find ourselves among thousands

suffering from the same type of abuse of the Bankruptcy

system and other court systems wherein the officers of

the court, lawyers, judges, trustees and their appointees

treat the court as their private enterprise. In the halls of

our judiciary, our demise was sport. The Opposing team

of insiders laughed at us as they perjured, defrauded and

denied our rights. We spent ten years fighting for our

rights, spent $140,000 in legal fees and had our seventh

attorney quit on us because he had exhausted all funds.

This was compounded by the judge dismissing our

lawsuit against the lender without hearing a word of its

merits and continuing to allow non creditors to file

motions to take properties, paying amounts so low as to

"shock the conscience" of the community. We then

faced the critical condition of our judiciary and how

unprepared the average and ordinary American is for the

pain administered by our protective judicial system. We

were homeless, broke, suffering from Post Traumatic

Disorder, and unable to pay deserving creditors, while

we had a provable $5,000,000 estate with $2,000,000 in

debts. The judge refused to look at our proof or to

determine values on any of our properties.

I've written a book to help others deal with the

emotional damage inflicted by the courts. This is a truly

preventable mental health epidemic that I've witnessed

worsening in my past twenty years in private practice as

a marriage and family therapist. The judiciary on the

one hand has committed to victims rights and greater

sensitivity in the courts. On the other, it must see and

hear all facets of victimization by our courts. Thomas

M. Read's case speaks for all of us who have felt the

App. 12

betrayals by our own judiciary. He has defined it,

researched it thoroughly and refined the issues to the

common error of today's courts. They simply are not

open to the ordinary American who comes in good faith

to find his due process of law and right to redress.

Without a fair and safe court we will have madness in

our country.

We respectfully request that this court observe

the importance of this Writ of Certiorari to protect our

civilized method of solving problems and ensure that

each American's birthright to life, liberty and pursuit of

happiness is protected.

Sincerely,

James D. Huffer

Karin D. Huffer

3104 Plaza de Ernesto

Las Vegas, NV 89102

(702)876-2461

App. 13

Statement supporting

THOMAS M. READ vs. UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA.

Re: Supreme Court Docket No: 92-1952, Request to

Supreme Court to GRANT CERTIORARI.

My name is John L. Johnston. I am a seventy-

one year old retired trucker. [ worked at the Nevada

Test Site from 1960 to 1972 and had a Q-Clearance.

[ later started my own trucking company and

upon turning sixty-five in 1986, I leased my company to

two of my employees. When they would not pay me, [|

started repossession in 1987. The case was in Nevada

State District Court, Case #A264667.

I was forced into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, BK-90-

1317, on April 23, 1990, and the same debtors from my

state court case filed nearly $700,000.00 in false claims

against me, claiming to be creditors instead of debtors.

They filed to convert me to Chapter 7 and liquidate.

The trustee, attorneys and judges have destroyed

me. I had 1.1 million net worth when I filed bankruptcy

and now cannot even buy health insurance for my wife.

I have.read and understand Mr. Read's petition to

the U.S. Supreme Court, Docket No: 92-1952, and on

behalf of myself and several others who have also read

Mr. Read's petition, request this Court to GRANT the

subject petition.

A sad state of affairs exists when it is safer to

walk streets filled with thugs and carry a pocket full of

App. I4

money, than it is to go into a courtroom with attorneys

and judges.

June 30, 1993

/s/

John L. Johnston

3958 El Segundo Ave.

Las Vegas, Nevada 89121

(702) 457-1555

App. 15

Statement Supporting

THOMAS M. READ vs. UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA

We, Charles George Milden and Susan Patricia

Milden, debtots in the Central District of California,

U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Santa Ana, California herewith

expresses concurrence with Petitioner Thomas M. Read

in his action for Writ of Certiorari to the Unites States

Supreme Court in docketed Case No. 92-1952. We

believe there is widespread problem that citizens of the

United States of America being denied due process and

basic Constitutional protections within the US.

Bankruptcy Courts.

In our personal bankruptcy, we have experienced

many of the same transgressions of our Constitutional

rights which are raised in READ vs. U.S. of A.,. In our

case, we sought Chapter 11 protection while awaiting

trial in a California State Court action. On a motion of

the U.S. Trustee, we were denied counsel in the State

Court action, converted to Chapter 7 and our estate

squandered by a Chapter 7 Trustee. The Chapter 7

Trustee then settled our State Court action for a cent-on-

the-dollar with the adversary to our estate. When we

objected, the presiding Article | Bankruptcy Judge told

us that we waived our Constitutional rights the day we

filed bankruptcy.

Can American citizens be defrauded out of

property, defamed in the process, then when they seek

redress in Court, be litigated into bankruptcy? Then

App. 16

while in bankruptcy have a representative of the U.S.

government deny them legal counsel, have a trustee

appointed by the U.S. government systematically erode

their estate? Then have the trustee enter into a

settlement agreement with the adversary of their estate

which compromises the citizens’ rights to life, liberty

and property? Our experience has been YES!

We believe that the US. Bankruptcy Courts have

denied us and other citizens of the United States our

rights, to life, liberty, property, due process and rights to

trial by jury -- all inalienable rights granted under the

Constitution of the United States of America. Rights

that must be reaffirmed by this Court's ruling in Read vs.

U.S. of A.

July 4, 1993 /s/

Charles George Milden

18032 Lemon Drive C-149

Yorba Linda, CA 92686

(714) 960-6658

July 4, 1993 /s/

Susan Patricia Milden

18032 Lemon Drive C-149

Yorba Linda, CA 92686

(714) 960-6658

App. 17

Statement Supporting

THOMAS M. READ vs. UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA.

[, Charles Blake Walker, debtor in the Southern

District of Texas U.S. Courts Houston wish to express

concurrence with Petitioner Thomas M. Read in his

action for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court

in docketed case number 92-1952 and would state that |

believe there is a widespread problem accessing our

Courts for redress, due process, and the various basic

Constitutional safeguards. The problem expressed in

READ v. U.S. of A. appears to ask the crucial question,

which is do we in fact have a right to redress and due

process when such rights are abused in the courts.

In my case, I sought to reorganize in bankruptcy

from abuses in a Harris County Texas Divorce matter

and ended up with my children kidnapped, my estate

looted, incarceration, professional ruination, and a

$500,000 life insurance policy being placed on my life.

Both the Divorce and Bankruptcy Courts worked in

tandem to bring about an outcome worse than fiction.

In trying to take appeal I have encountered a

close-knit group within both the State and Federal

Judiciary who actively protect trial court wrongdoing.

the underlying scheme to loot my estate and ruin me

should be redressable before a jury no matter if the

participants are judges, attorneys, court clerical

personnel or whomever. Note that when the problem

includes Court insiders it is worse because it is a

violation of oath of office and fiduciary duty.

App. 18

In conclusion I would like to know if we actually

have Constitutional rights to redress and due process or

has our legal heritage in America been reduced to

hollow slogans with no substance.

June 25, 1993/s/

Charles Blake Walker

P.O. Box 1962

Houston, TX 77251

713/498-1681

ee

App. 19

IN SUPPORT OF NO. 92-1952

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER TERM 1992

THOMAS M. READ,

Petitioner

vs

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Respondents

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

I am familiar with Tom Read's case and his

petition for certiorari and I, myself, have gone through a

horrendous protracted legal battle. The courts have

stripped me of my property and everything that I have

worked for all my life.

I am, however, not a loser which is always the

first response from the lips of lawyers. It should be

obvious to the Supreme Court that the American Judicial

System is dysfunctional. We, the people, are denied

fairness in the courts, especially if our adversaries are of

the legal profession.

In my case, my adversaries were allowed to

defame me and steal from me with the court giving a

helping hand denying me a right to fair trial in the

presence of a fair judge.

[ grew up in my uncle's home in Germany,

Supreme Court Justice Alexander Niedner. | was taught

the doctrines of honesty, decency and I prided myself to

App. 20

go to bed every night sleeping well because I never lied.

That probably was my biggest mistake.

American lawyers have shown me_ how

contemptuous they are of human nghts, the hard-earned

dollar, honesty and integrity. The courts will grant us

no relief for wrong doings of the attorneys. Because we

are lay persons, we become secondary citizens in the

judicial system treated with disrespect for our feelings.

The more innocent the victim caught in the judicial

system, the more outrageous becomes the lawyer's

character assassination on the individuals, their families

and friends. The lawyers first emotionally destroy their

victims and then the stealing becomes easy because they

now have the judge's ear.

I am outraged that | gave up iny perfectly good

German Constitution for a Constitution that is now

under attack by its own lawmakers. In the 1920's my

uncle tried a German President for corruption and my

uncle became a hero. I am proud of my family. I am

sick of what I have had to endure because of my high

standards of work ethics and honesty toward my fellow

citizens. I am n upright citizen without even a traffic

violation to my name.

If the courts don't want to be there for the people,

they should have the decency to make an open

announcement that we, the people, have no more rights

in the courts and that. henceforth, the legal profession

will conduct the peoples’ business behind closed doors

over lunches between lawyers and judges.

Name Withheld upon request of writer because of

concern there may be federal reprisal.

App. 21

July 3, 1993

To whom it may concern:

We join in support of Thomas M. Read,

Petitioner, in his petition for a writ of certiorari to the

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

We filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy in November

1982, in Greensboro, North Carolina. Debtors Clift C.

Lane and Dorothy P. Lane and their 19 affiliated

corporations (thereafter referred to as "Lane"). Case

No. B-82-02012 C-11 through -82-02031 C-11

[allege the Courts did not follow the Laws as

written in many instances. Due to limited space, [

cannot mention all of these but if our case is fairly

looked at, it will not be necessary to see ther all.

John Peterson of Greensboro was our Court

appointed examiner. He was also Chairman of a 3 man

panel provided for in our reorganization plan. This

panel was to take over management of our company if

we defaulted. We defaulted and were in the process of

getting bids for the sale of our entire company which

was valued at around $50,000,000.00 above all debt.

The Plan call for the 3 man panel to take over

management until I finished sale of the Company within

six weeks. Examiner and panel member, John Peterson

met and conspired with my attorneys. They drew up a

50 page take-over agreement. This agreement (without

my knowledge) gave ownership rather than management

to Examiner John Peterson and the other two panel

members. Attorney Jerry Tart (now a Greensboro

App. 22

Bankruptcy Judge) and my lead Aitorney, Bill Sullivan

(a Harvard Law graduate and so called Bankruptcy

Expert), were two' of the attorneys supposedly

representing my interest.

As Court appointed Examiner, John Peterson was

a fiduciary and could not legally acquire the property of

the principal. Under the criminal code, they also

violated 18 U.S.C. §152, §153 and §154. These laws

clearly state Mr. Peterson violates criminal law if he

buys, sells or profits from the Bankruptcy Estate. Mr.

Peterson has profited several million dollars. The

Courts have evaded and ignored these laws along with

many other laws we allege to have been broken.

Each justice or judge of the United States shall

take the following oath or affirmation before performing

the duties of his office: » ?

, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will

administer justice without respect to persons, and do

equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will

faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the

duties incumbent upon me as according to

the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to

the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help

me God."