Your Tax Dollars “at Work for You”. Not!
Welcome to Weavergate.
I am not an attorney. Nothing here should be taken as legal advice.
Because I am not allowed to practice law and there are a few judges and lawyers who would like any excuse to incarcerate me, I usually write about my own cases. I am free to discuss my experiences and how I responded in certain situations but must tip toe lightly around other people’s cases.
If you have followed my blog, you have read about two of my cases, Pietrczak and PRA.
The two cases collided, like particles in the Big Bang.
Pietrczak is about a man who conned me into believing he was in love with me in order to defraud me of hundreds of thousands of dollars. After making off like a bandit, he filed a lawsuit against me in an attempt to take many times the initial fraud. A lawyer named William White helped him to win the lawsuit by default against a trust that I am a trustee of, even though the joint claims against me were dismissed on the merits. It appeared to me and many attorneys I asked to represent the trust that the judge on the case is colluding with Pietrczak and White. No lawyer would represent the trust out of self-preservation.
One appearance of bias is that the judge, Susan Weaver, insists that she made an erroneous ruling orally, and that I took more than the allotted 10 days plus weekends to object, so the order became a written order with no opportunity to respond in writing.
I was representing myself in the hearing and know what was said. Judge Weaver said that she spoke to the “AOC” during a short break and they told her Pietrczak’s oral motion for an extension of time to serve summons on the trust had to be in writing and I had to be given an opportunity to respond in writing.
The official court reporter’s transcript followed the fiction created by Judge Weaver and Attorney White.
I guess the conspirators thought that I would be scared of disputing Judge Weaver’s lies, like so many of the lawyers in this neck of the woods and let her transfer property that should belong to me to her friends and family.
Judge Weaver does scare me. But I am a champion poker player. There is a fun saying in poker. “A big pair beats everything.” Regardless of the spoken threat that Judge Weaver will incarcerate me and give all the money I ever earn or inherit to Pietrczak and White, I called her “bluff”. She gets away with a lot of stuff, but I don’t think she will get away this time.
So far, I have limited the amount of impermissible transfer to the value of a 40-acre parcel with a cabin, because that is the only assets that ever got put into the trust.
The PRA case is about a debt buyer that made incessant phone calls to me in an attempt to collect an alleged debt. At first, I thought I had no debt. Not to Portfolio Recovery Associates and not to anyone.
Recently, PRA produced what it claims is a statement from the credit card company that shows a debt incurred in 2010. What a coincidence! 2010 is when Pietrczak started his con on me. It is feasible that Pietrczak committed identity theft by using my credit card. Since I was not using the card, having gone to debit cards and cash, I would not look out for a bill. If a bill was sent to an address that we lived at, it could easily by intercepted by Pietrczak.
I think any juror who hears the recordings of the Pietrczak hearings and sees how inaccurate the transcript is will believe that Pietrczak had special favor from the Court. Collusion with the court coupled with Pietrczak’s criminal record, handwritten notes and sworn testimony in which he contradicts himself, is evidence of the plausibility that Pietrczak used one or more of my old credit cards. (All the while, I paid off thousands of dollars of debt for Pietrczak willingly, on the promise that he would reimburse me when he could.)
I want to play the recordings of the Pietrczak hearings to the jurors in the Portfolio Recovery Associates case. I doubt the court reporter will transcribe the dialogue when Mr. White leaned toward me and said “bitch” loud enough for me and the court observers to hear. The written transcript, even if accurate, cannot capture Judge Weaver’s tone of voice, snarky to me and sweet to Mr. White and Mr. Pietrczak.
I had a subpoena served on the court reporter.
Below is her brief in support of a motion to quash the subpoena. It is written on her behalf by the Office of Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge. It seems to me to be in violation of Civil Rules of Procedure Rule 1, Rule 11 and is a big waste of taxpayer dollars.
If the deputy attorney general actually made a reasonable inquiry into the facts of the case, he would encourage his “client” to email the files of the recordings. The AG would learn from the fiasco surrounding the oval office tapes that Nixon tried to keep from the public.
I won’t vote for Leslie Rutledge for Lt. Governor. She says what I want to hear, but in practice she defends government employees with facts and law that she knows or should know are not true. She may eventually file charges against Judge Weaver and court reporter Jana Perry for some kind of honest services fraud*, but to date, I have no reason to think Attorney General Rutledge pursues law and order when it comes to her cronies and the entrenched power elite.
*Assistant Attorney General Middlebrooks provided me with this information: “While the Attorney General does represent the state in criminal cases on appeal, it does not, to the best of my knowledge, do any prosecution at the trial level.”
I have contacted the FBI, Searcy County Sheriff, the Court Reporters Board and filed a civil rights action that was supposed to be read by Federal District Judge Wilson and the Eighth Circuit Court of appeals. I have yet to have anyone act even mildly interested in investigating what I believe is a serious infraction of the law.
By creating inaccurate records, the court personnel involved are making law obsolete in Arkansas. Worse, each and every citizen is subject to the whims of a greedy judge. Please do not vote for Susan Weaver for any office in Arkansas. She belongs in prison, not public office.
Do You Question the Integrity of Judge Susan Weaver of Arkansas Circuit Courts?
Do you find yourself thinking “Judge Weaver favored the other party”?
“Judge Weaver would not let me present evidence”?
“Judge Susan Weaver had a bias”?
Do you ask “is there anything I can do to help remove Judge Weaver from the bench?” Or, “is there some way to have criminal charges filed against Judge Weaver?”
One thing you will need is persistence. Patience is important, too.
An investigation by the Judicial Disciplinary and Disability Commission, called the JDDC, can take up to 18 months. You can file a complaint here.
The JDDC and law enforcement told me that they cannot overturn any of the judge’s rulings. I helped convince the California equivalent of the JDDC to discipline another evil “judge”, Alan H. Friedenthal. But, despite his appearance of bias and embroilment in my case (and several others) his destructive and draconian rulings were never overturned.
But I tried to appeal the orders all the way to the United States Supreme Court and then to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights.
Even though none of the higher courts gave me any relief, I am glad I plodded through. The California Commissioner Alan Friedenthal eventually recused from my case and then retired from his cushy job.
I am glad I made several complaints to several agencies about corrupt judges, and suggest you do the same.
Call the FBI and ask for the Public Integrity Unit.
Visit the local Sheriff.
Write on bulletin boards and social media.
If you contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com I will research your case and write about it on this blog. I will give you the level of confidentiality that you request.
Or you can write your own story and I will consider posting it here.
The courts belong to the People. Fight those that would try to transfer wealth and even traffic children for their own gain and sick motives.
Get loud.
The King’s New Clothes: Judge Weaver Tries to Silence Me from Pointing Out Her Deceptions
It is illegal to practice law without a license. Does that make writing that statement an illegal act?
I think not. Otherwise, we would need to round-up and incarcerate every parent who tells their child, “it is illegal to use marijuana without obtaining a medical marijuana card in Arkansas.” It would be illegal for that back seat driver to say “the speed limit here is only 35 miles per hour. Slow down.”
If laypeople are not allowed to discuss law, a non-attorney might be able to opine that Kyle Rittenhouse shot and killed two men, but the non-attorney would not be allowed to talk about whether it was legal for the young man to possess a gun in the first place or if the shooting was murder.
What if there are two co-defendants in a case, and one of the defendants claims innocence and mentions that the other defendant is equally innocent?
This is what is happening in a civil case that was filed against me.
I successfully proved my innocence. The case against me was dismissed with prejudice, which means on the merits.
The other defendant was a trust of which I am trustee and the beneficiary. Non-attorneys cannot represent trusts, even if they are trustee and beneficiary, or so say most attorneys.
After I was dismissed, Judge Weaver wrote an order in which she “found” that I did all the things the plaintiff claimed, including practicing law without a license when I supposedly prepared legal documents for the trust and the plaintiff. She ignored that just days before she wrote that I was dismissed with prejudice.
Based on my newly “found” trespasses, the trust was held liable for all the damages, because, according to Judge Susan Weaver the trust knew or should have known I was not a licensed attorney, and therefore the trust filed “unauthentic and fraudulent” documents.
Judge Weaver does not want me to say the plaintiff directed the preparation of the documents. She does not want me to say the plaintiff committed fraud against me to the tune of $260,000. The judge does not want me to say that the plaintiff wrote a letter in his own hand, signed, that describes his intent to trick me into giving him over $80,000 more to settle any debt the trust agreed to pay to him, knowing he would use the money to sue me and the trust for 6 or 7 times that amount.
Judge Weaver said making those statements in court would be the unauthorized practice of law.
I think Judge Weaver is pretending she is an imbecile, writing orders that rip off the trust (which is money that should go to me), knowing that no attorney will dare to defend the trust against Judge Weaver’s evil.
Judge Weaver was eager to make arguments for the plaintiff, even though the plaintiff was represented by an attorney. Then, she ignored the truth that supported dismissal of the unrepresented trust. She gave the represented plaintiff everything he asked for…literally.
Property in Arkansas is cheap compared to most states. But be warned, if you bring your money into Arkansas, Judge Weaver and her ilk will probably find a way to take all your assets with bullshit lawsuits filed by her pet attorneys.
Why do Judges do Favors for Friendlies?
HUGE CORRECTION, April 22, 2022
When someone makes an error, she should acknowledge it and correct herself.
I made a huge error when I wrote the following post.
The Arkansas Constitution says what I wrote, but apparently the Constitution does not limit the pay for circuit court judges.
A site called transparency.Arkansas.gov lists Judge Susan K. Weaver’s pay as $180,129.
So, my question is answered. Even paying a judge a wage that is higher than the majority of hard-working folks does not guarantee the judge will be honest.
Here is a link to the site and here is the original article.
**************************************************
I never thought I would be arguing to pay a government employee more…especially not a judge. But my problem with judges is only when a judge acts corruptly, like Judge Susan Weaver appears to me.
I wondered why a judge would be greedy enough to jeopardize her career and even risk prison for helping her favored attorneys. I just found out one reason.
The Arkansas Constitution Amendment 15 specifies the monthly salary “for Judge of the Circuit Courts and Chancellors, each, the sum of $3,600.00.”
That is a livable wage, but most attorneys in Arkansas charge about $300 per hour. That means a judge, who is an attorney first, would need to work only 12 hours per month as an attorney to earn the same salary as she would earn honestly as a judge. Add another couple hours to cover the medical insurance and other benefits.
There would be a lot of temptation and easy rationalization for a judge in Arkansas to take bribes. She might not call it a bribe. She might call it a dinner out, a gift, a campaign contribution or a screaming good deal on something.
When I was a building inspector, which is a position of power similar to a judge, my husband at the time told me to never take anything from the contractors or superintendents. He said taking a gift was the same as taking money out of their pocket.
Once I was offered a gift. It sounded exceptional. I tried to get my ex on the phone to see if he wanted me to take it. He didn’t pick up the call, so I declined the gift.
When I told my now ex about it after work, he blew a fuse. He remembered telling me not to take gifts, but he had to alter that opinion. He said “the rule does not apply if, as here, the gift offered is a pair of tickets to the final game of the World Series!”
Probably government employees who are paid more but are of irreputable character still take the bribes. But it must be difficult to entice the higher quality people to take the cut in pay, to become a judge rather than a lawyer.
My first suggestion is to cut the pay of all attorneys. Their jobs are not so difficult or dangerous as to deserve 10 times the pay of a blue-collar worker or 20 times the pay of an entry level employee.
Realistically, we should raise the pay of judges. And then be quick to fire and incarcerate the judges who take a little something on the side.
There is nothing sweeter than finding a judge who does the right thing, treats people respectfully and gives more than he or she takes. I’ve met a handful. If I learned that any one of them earned $250,000 per year, I’d have no problem with that.
I heard that the investigation of one judicial officer who I helped remove from the bench cost taxpayers $1,000,000. That price tag does not take into account the countless hours of time volunteered by concerned citizens like myself.
A judge like Weaver can financially devastate a “person” by purposefully making bad calls, and often times does. She recently transferred title to a 40-acre property with house from a trust that could not retain representation to a person who admitted in writing that he was trying to defraud the trustee and beneficiary of the trust. The trustee was dismissed as an individual on the merits. The trust held no other assets, but Judge Weaver gave the fraudster plaintiff a blank check for attorney fees, repairs to the structure, personal property that was not placed in the trust and even a box truck which title was given to the individual, not the trust. The trust was devastated.
What do you think? Do we get what we pay for, or would the bad apples always supplement their income by throwing the game in favor of those that gave some form of illegal or unethical compensation?
Judge Susan Weaver Transfers Trust Property from Unrepresented Trust, Again
She did this before in the Gawenis case.
This is not legal advice. I am not an attorney. I am the victim of a corrupt judge.
Judge Weaver allowed a convicted felon to commit perjury in front of her, knowing the convicted felon had obtained property from me by fraud. She made threatening comments to me that if I tried to give testimony contradicting the fraudster, I would be committing a crime, the unauthorized practice of law.
Based on only the fraudster’s testimony and the testimony and arguments made by his attorney, William Zac White, Judge Weaver transferred title from a trust to which I was a beneficiary to the fraudster and then to a special needs trust for the fraudster.
This is the order Judge Weaver wrote, with my commentary bold and underlined. (You can download the court copy below.)
In general, I suggest that you do not buy real estate in Arkansas or bring any assets to the state. The judiciary is inbred and hell-bent on transferring “outsiders” wealth to themselves and their attorney supporters. The “good” attorneys are not willing to take cases where they know the judge has a predetermined outcome, for fear of losing all their cases. More than one attorney told me this.
If there is one brave attorney in Arkansas, I hope he or she takes this matter on contingency.
************************************************
This matter came before the Court on March 17, 2022, at 8:30 a.m. within the Searcy
County Circuit Courthouse located in Marshall, Arkansas. Micheal Pietrczak (hereafter referred
to as “Pietrczak”) appeared in person with his attorney, William Z. White. Laura Lynn Hammett
(hereafter referred to as “Hammett”) appeared in her individual pro-se capacity. The Rural
Revival Trust was not present (though the trustee, Laura Lynn Hammett was present), and no attorney appeared on its behalf. I told Judge Weaver that no attorney would take the case because of her appearance of bias. She said that claim was “unfounded” and went on to hold kangaroo court. Based upon the pleadings filed of record herein, statements of counsel, parties (except that Laura Lynn Hammett as an individual was not permitted to argue, testify or cross-examine the plaintiff), and/or witness(es), and all other matters before the Court, the Court finds as follows:
- This Court granted Pietrczak’s Motion for Default Judgment on March 2, 2022,
against the Rural Reviving Living Trust. The Court found that:
a. Service was perfected, in the presence of the court, upon the Rural Revival
Living Trust on October 7, 2021 after a Motion Hearing in the above case was
held. (The affidavit of summons said that Chief Deputy Sheriff Ezra Pierce served summons on October 12, 2021. But, so far, that misstatement has not been used to support some other lie.)
b. Pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. P. 55(a), when a party against whom a judgment for
affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided
by the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure, judgement by default may be
entered. “May” not “should” or “must”. Judge Weaver had already read my counterclaim and the letter written by Pietrczak that explains how he would use money he defrauded from me to pay Willy White to sue me and the trust for six times what I agreed to pay, plus attorney fees.
c. The Rural Revival Living Trust failed to plead or otherwise appear in this
action and therefore defaulted. - The Court ordered that a damages hearing be held on March 17, 2022. The
purpose of the hearing was specifically limited to the Pietrzcak’s presentation of damages
against the Rural Revival Living Trust. How convenient. - During the hearing, Hammett attempted to make objections and statements in
response to Plaintiff’s presentation of statements to the court, admission of exhibits, and/or
witness testimony. The Court, several times, explained to Hammett that she is not a licenses (sic)
attorney and could not make statements or arguments on behalf of the Rural Revival Living
Trust. I told Judge Weaver I wanted to make statements in protection of my own individual rights, and she refused to allow me to speak. Later you will see that she made findings against me as an individual, even after dismissing me on the merits. - Hammett prepared a purported “Marriage Contract” (attached as exhibit 3 to
Pietrczak’s Complaint). The contract was prepared and signed by Pietrczak and Hammett, jointly. On October 14, 2021, based upon Hammett’s announced agreement and
consent the Court found that the contract was void ab initio and deemed to have no legal effect as
if it never existed. There was no hearing on October 14, 2021. There was a hearing on October 7, 2021. At that hearing, I said that the “marriage contract” was not meant to be a legal state endorsed marriage. We specifically wrote “married in the eyes of God”. By the contract, I agreed to split our combined assets 50/50, even though all the assets were rightly mine. But, since Pietrczak wanted to litigate, I would agree to voiding the agreement and recovering all the money Pietrczak defrauded from me, which was hundreds of thousands of dollars more than was used to purchase the Lick Fork property. - Hammett prepared an Affidavit (attached as Exhibit 4 to Pietrczak’s Complaint)
and filed it of record with the Searcy County Clerk on March 13, 2015, at 3:35 p.m. with BK:
MISC 175; PG: 150-151. The Affidavit claims Hammett is entitled to possession of 9985 Lick
Fork Road, Witts Springs, Arkansas (hereafter referred to as “Lick Fork Property”), along with
the owner of title, Micheal Pietrczak. Further, Hammett gives “actual notice to the world that
my possession is as a 50% undivided interest…”. Hammett’s purported claims to the Lick Fork
Property were based upon the purported “Marriage Contract’ discussed in the preceding
paragraph and are therefore deemed to have no legal effect as if it never existed. Judge Weaver refused to let me argue, testify or cross-examine Pietrczak about this issue. The Affidavit I filed was based on what the Court dubbed the “marriage contract”. That contract was only one of many times Pietrczak agreed to split our combined property 50/50 if we broke up. - On or about March 22, 2016, Hammett prepared a Mortgage Agreement (attached
as Exhibit 5 to Pietrczak’s Complaint) on behalf of the Rural Revival Living Trust guarantying
the repayment of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND 00/100
($150,000.00) from the Rural Revival Living Trust to Pietrczak. Judge Weaver would not let me speak about this document on March 17, 2022. But she allowed me to speak about it on October 7, 2021. I said and wrote in filed documents that the mortgage was a form found online and Pietrczak told me what to write in the blanks. I was merely the scribe who filled in blanks in a mortgage. - The Mortgage Agreement was filed of record with the Searcy County Clerk on
March 23, 2016, at 11:30 a.m. within Book: MORT 203; PG: 427-436. On March 22, 2016, the
purported Mortgage Agreement was only executed by Hammett, not a licensed attorney, as the
trustee of the Rural Revival Living Trust rendering the Mortgage Agreement invalid. Therefore,
the Mortgage Agreement is void ab initio and deemed to have no legal effect as if it never
existed. I agree. The Mortgage Agreement was void ab initio. So, why is Judge Weaver giving Pietrczak an award based on a void mortgage? (Hint: She wants to.) - On or about March 22, 2016, Hammett prepared a Warranty Deed (attached as
Exhibit 6 to Pietrczak’s Complaint) on behalf of the Rural Revival Living Trust purportedly
transferring the Lick Fork Property from Pietrczak to the Rural Revival Living Trust. Again, Pietrczak told me what to write. My spelling is far superior to his, and I was his secretary often during our six years together. Only Pietrczak signed the deed. There was no space on the form we copied for the transferee to sign. Putting title into a trust was Pietrczak’s demand, and one of his cohorts wrote that I “slipped up” when I agreed to let Pietrczak deed to a trust instead of me as an individual. - The Warranty Deed was filed of record with the Searcy County Clerk on March
23, 2016, at 11:13 a.m. within Book: Deed 200; PG: 606-609. Hammett is not a licensed
attorney. Therefore, the Warranty Deed is void ab initio and deemed to have no legal effect as if
it never existed. Pietrczak is the only person who signed the warranty deed. It was prepared under his direction. Judge Weaver should not call it void ab initio. - The Rural Revival Living Trust knew or should have known that Hammett is not
a licensed attorney and that she is prevented from preparing legal documents on behalf of
Pietrczak and/or the Rural Revival Living Trust. So, Judge Weaver finds that the Rural Revival Living Trust cannot represent itself, because it is not an attorney, but that the Rural Revival Living Trust should know an obscure interpretation of the law that forbids a non-attorney to represent another entity. The interpretation applies the law to the trustee of a trust. Several attorneys I spoke with did not know this interpretation of the law. Pietrczak demanded the property that should have been put in Hammett’s name as an individual be put into a trust. - The Rural Revival Living Trust slandered the title of Pietrczak’s Lick Fork
Property by intentionally acting with malice, express or implied, in making slanderous
statements regarding the title of Pietrczak’s Lick Fork Property. Pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-
37-226(a) anyone who suffers loss or damages as a result of conduct the prohibited conduct and
who must bring civil action to remove any cloud from his or her title or interest in the real
property or to clear his or her title or interest in the real property is entitled to three (3) times
actual damages, punitive damages, and costs, including any reasonable attorney’s fees or other
costs of litigation reasonably incurred. See Ark. Code Ann. §5-37-226(c). Payday for Willy White and his helpers. Of course Judge Weaver ignored the email I presented as an exhibit on August 2, 2021 that said I was willing to pay off the entire mortgage for the trust, if half the money, which was “a tithe”, went into a special needs trust for Pietrczak. I was not speaking on behalf of the trust, but I am the trustee of the trust, so it is unfair to call the trust “malicious”. - Due to Rural Revival Living Trust’s slandering of Pietrczak’s title, Pietrczak has
been unable to enjoy the Lick Fork Property freely and quietly, and likewise, has been unable to
otherwise sell or lease the Lick Fork Property to others. - The Rural Revival Living Trust filed the unauthentic and fraudulent, Mortgage
Agreement and Warranty Deed into the records of the Searcy County Recorder with Pietrczak standing there, and who signed the documents in front of a notary who remembers Pietrczak was sober and had no gun to his head to cloud Pietrczak’s title to the Lick Fork Property and to adversely affect, impair, or discredit the title of Pietrczak’s interest in the Lick Fork Property. This has prevented Pietrczak from disposing, transferring, or granting any interest of the Lick Fork Property to anyone. - The purported “Marriage Contract”, Affidavit of Laura Lynn, Mortgage
Agreement, and Warranty Deed described further herein are canceled, held null, and void and of
no legal effect as if they had never existed. The affidavit does not mention the trust. The trust did not exist at the time. So, Judge Weaver denied my individual right to present evidence in my favor on March 17, 2022, dismissed me on the merits on March 28, 2022, then found against me as an individual on April 7, 2022. - Any and all clouds on the title of Pietrczak’s Lick Fork Property is removed. Again, Judge Weaver over reaches. She said the hearing of March 17, 2022 was only on the trust issues, and did not let the non-defaulting defendant testify or have a jury. “Any and all” clouds on title includes my personal rights to the property.
- The Court renders judgment in Pietrczak’s favor and grants recovery of the
possession of the Lick Fork Property and grants the recovery of the costs incurred by Pietrczak
for the necessitation of this action as set forth within Ark. Code Ann. §18-60-207, 209. - The Court shall issue a Writ of Possession commanding the officer to whom it is
directed to deliver to Pietrczak or his agent possession of the Lick Fork Property pursuant to Ark.
Code Ann. §18-60-208. - At the conclusion of this matter Pietrczak may petition and be awarded his costs
pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 16-68-401 including the treble damages provisions of Ark. Code
Ann. § 16-60-102. - The Rural Revival Living Trust entered upon and/or unlawfully detained
Pietrczak’s Lick Fork Property without right or claim to title. See Ark. Code Ann. § 18-60-
303(1). - The Rural Revival Living Trust forcibly entered the premises and caused the
locks of Pietrczak’s residence located on the Lick Fork Property to be changed to prevent
Pietrczak or the attorney-in-fact from gaining access to Pietrczak’s Lick Fork Real Property.
See. Ark. Code Ann. § 18-60-303(2). - This Court shall issue a Writ of Possession pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 18-60-
309. - This Court hereby declares that Pietrczak is the true and rightful owner of the
Lick Fork Property pursuant to Ark. R. Civ. P. 57 and Ark. Code Ann. § 16-111-101 et seq. - This Court permanently enjoins the Rule Reviving Living Trust from further
slandering, clouding, and entering upon Pietrczak’s Lick Fork Property pursuant to Ark. R. Civ.
P. 65. - Pietrczak may be awarded actual monetary damages, upon a proper motion and
hearing, against the Rural Revival Living Trust for the costs of replacing and repairing the
property to its former condition, when Pietrczak last possessed it, once he has been allowed to
inventory, apprise the damages, and file a verified damages report with this Court. - Michael Pietrczak is the true and rightful owner of the property located in Searcy,
County, Arkansas that has been the subject of this matter and who’s legal description is as
follows: - The cloud on the title of Pietrczak’s Lick Fork Property is removed and is not
subject to any lien, mortgage, other encumbrances. Judge Weaver is not allowed to remove liens and other encumbrances that belong to me as an individual without a case filed, summons served and any further action against me would be res judicata because I was already dismissed with prejudice. - The Court Orders title to the Lick Fork Property be placed into the Micheal A.
Pietrczak Special Needs Trust as previously considered and ruled upon by the Court. If
necessary, the Court will issue the appropriate conveyance documents (if necessary) to effectuate
the transfer.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
HONORABLE SUSAN WEAVER
Judge Weaver stamped the order but did not date it. It was filed on April 7, 2022
Only a licensed attorney can represent a trust. But we each have the right to express ourselves regarding the decisions judges and juries make. Do you think OJ was guilty? Do you think Kyle Rittenhouse was innocent? The whole country expresses its opinions on legal issues, even though some of the people are not licensed attorneys.
Do you think Judge Weaver conspired with William Zac White to transfer property from a trust to a man who committed fraud on the beneficiary of that trust? If you do, please contact the JDDC and let them know you lost trust in the integrity of our legal system. If you are an attorney and want to represent the trust on appeal, contact me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com. You can take the maximum contingency fee allowed from the trust case and any case you advocate on my individual behalf for malicious prosecution and fraud against any of the actors.
And the Winner of the Award for Dumbest Attorney Ever Goes To…
William “Zac” White of Heber Springs Arkansas.
Mr. White rarely wins a case. Unless Judge Susan Weaver is presiding, and no summons is served on the defendant.
It seems that was the plan to transfer ownership of 40 acres and a house in Witts Spring, Arkansas to one of White’s clients, a convicted felon, Micheal “Mike” Pietrczak.
Unfortunately for Mr. White, he named this writer as a defendant. I found the case against me on Court Connect and began to vindicate myself, pro se.
My defense was far superior to the advocacy by the licensed attorney. The Judge, Susan Weaver, seemed to favor Mr. White to a degree that I consider unethical. Still, I had Mr. White on the ropes.
So, he hatched a scheme. He had named a second defendant, a trust. No attorney who saw the crazy rulings prior would take the case for the trust. If I represented the trust, I would be found to have committed the unauthorized practice of law, a misdemeanor that might subject me to a year in jail.
After I found indisputable evidence that Mike Pietrczak had committed fraud on me (posted below), Mr. White dismissed me with prejudice. He thought, and it seems like Judge Weaver agreed, that I could no longer make arguments or submit evidence in the case. (That is probably not true, as dismissed defendants often file motions, such as a motion for attorney fees.)
Judge Weaver and Mr. White went on to find against the trust on all claims and gave Mr. White a blank check to file for damages. I was not allowed to say one word about the facts of the case, even though I was ordered to attend the hearing and I am the trustee of the trust.
Then Mr. White wrote a proposed order in which the Court “finds” that I committed crimes and did all the things I was accused of in the complaint, things for which I was dismissed with prejudice.
Mr. White musta thunk he was pulling a fast one. He did not think that once a joint non-defaulting defendant is dismissed with prejudice, the defaulting defendant must also be dismissed.
In other words, I think the court must go through the complaint and strike out any sentence that says the trust and I did anything. The court already decided I did not do those things. “And” means both. So, the sentence is no longer true.
I’ll let y’all know if Judge Weaver weasles out of her signed dismissal with prejudice and if she finds me guilty of a bunch of charges with literally no opportunity to defend myself.
What do Y’all Think of “Judicial Immunity”?
Here is what most courts think:
“Further, allegations that judicial decisions were ‘conditioned upon a conspiracy or bribery,’ including allegations that a judge entered into a conspiracy ‘to predetermine the outcome of a judicial proceeding, while clearly improper, nevertheless does not pierce the immunity extended to judges.’ Ashelman v. Pope, 793 F.2d 1072, 1078 (9th Cir. 1986) (en banc). Judicial immunity applies so long as ‘the judge’s ultimate acts are judicial actions taken within the court’s subject matter jurisdiction.’ Id.; see alsoMcCarthy v. Mayo, 827 F.2d 1310, 1314-15 (9th Cir. 1987) (holding that allegations of conspiracy do not remove quasi-judicial immunity); Khazali v. Berns, 2016 WL 4479915, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 24, 2016) (‘Judicial immunity applies even if there are allegations that a judicial decision resulted from a bribe or a conspiracy.’); Gozzi v. County of Monterey, 2014 WL 6988632, at *7 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 10, 2014) (‘Moreover, even if the Judicial Defendants had acted corruptly and received bribes, as Plaintiff appears to allege, they would still be immune from Plaintiff’s § 1983 claim.’).” Rote v. Comm. on Jud. Conduct & Disability of Jud. Conf. of United States, No. 3:19-CV-1988-SI, 2021 WL 6197041, at *8 (D. Or. Dec. 30, 2021)
I understand the concept of judicial immunity. It seems overbroad to me and has extended to acts that I contend were taken by Judge Susan Weaver in Arkansas that were criminal, not “judicial”.
If the powers that be insist on extending judicial immunity to corrupt acts by judicial officers, they best be ready to pursue ethics violations and criminal charges against the alleged wayward judges.
Without meaningful ethics oversight and criminal prosecutions for honest services fraud or similar, we are living under the tyranny of an evil oligarchy, a band of black robed bandits.
Pro Se Litigant Dismissed From Suit Filed By Attorney William Z. White
With the tenacity of a pit bull, endless hours of tedious work and the favor of God, not necessarily in that order, even a pro se litigant can prevail against a licensed attorney.
It helps quite a bit if the attorney has a horrible track record and no case.
This writer just won a case, even though the presiding Judge, Susan K. Weaver, appeared to many attorneys and lay people to have a bias in favor of the opposing attorney, Mr. William Zac White of Heber Springs, Arkansas.
The Court might have made a further error by making an oral order for judgment against an unrepresented trust by default. In a case such as this, there is caselaw suggesting that when two parties are named jointly, if the non-defaulting party prevails, the defaulting party must also be dismissed. Because I am not an attorney, I must hire an attorney to represent the trust on appeal (if Judge Weaver does not reconsider her possible error before committing it to writing.)
Here is the order dismissing me as an individual with prejudice.
Open Email to Attorney William Z. White
This blogger is ill and has used all the time she was able to sit up today to write an email concerning the unethical transfer of property from an older woman to the man who defrauded her into thinking he was in love with her. Cliche, yes. But true.
Hopefully, if God does not heal my disease, I will leave a legacy that helps the good people of Arkansas fend off tyrannical government employees, like judges, that transfer property to their friends and family, and themselves, of course.
Pardon the quality of this writing. It is done while I have eaten only a bowl of rice in more than two days, and can barely lift my head.
***************************************************
Mr. White and Staff,
I am extremely ill right now and can only sit for a few minutes at a time. Standing to scan makes me need to puke. But, because Judge Weaver appears to me to be ruling unethically and illegally, I won’t assume she will give me the stay I requested.
My Jewish grandmother who lived in the USSR survived the Bolsheviks and the Russian oligarchy stealing her property, killing her nine siblings and mother and ran, physically on her legs I was told, to Poland, then Germany, then crossed the Atlantic by ship and made it to Los Angeles. We are a tough breed.
Attached is a copy of the Laura Lynn Living Trust Dated December 25, 2014 and Designation of Successor Trustee for the Laura Lynn Living Trust Dated December 25, 2014 that transferred control of my assets to Micheal Pietrczak on July 23, 2015. Attached also is a revocation of Micheal Pietrczak as Trustee of the Laura Lynn Living Trust Dated December 25, 2014. A lawsuit regarding the trust will be filed as soon as Judge Weaver is removed from the bench, as I have no expectation of justice with Judge Weaver presiding.
I made my sons the trustees until July 2015 because Mr. Pietrczak was on a drunken binge, driving from California to Arkansas with our furniture and he was paying prostitutes for sex at the time. Mr. Pietrczak called me about December 28 and begged me to fly out to meet him because he was out of money already. He spent $15,000 driving from California to Clarendon Texas.
Once in Arkansas, Mr. Pietrczak defrauded me again into believing he loved me and considered me his “wife in the eyes of God”. Those were his words.
Mr. Pietrczak had no assets when we met. He was a felon on probation for using fraudulent documents at the US-Mexico border.
He used all my money and my unpaid labor to build a business. When we were denied our opportunity to purchase the property the business was in, I did all the physical labor of writing our arguments for court documents and won the case in spite of Mr. Pietrczak’s continual drinking binges and 24/7 use of cannabis. The arbitrator wrote that he favored the plaintiffs because my family had the assets to purchase the property, not that the broke alcoholic felon had the assets to buy the property. (The arbitrator even noted in writing that he considered me “a rescuer”.)
Mr. Pietrczak put everything that we both earned into his name, including the property on Lick Fork.
Mr. Pietrczak showed a loss on his income tax returns every year, and in fact did not file income tax returns until he met me, he said.
I offered in writing to give him half of what we had left from six years of my Silver Strand Plaza, LLC income and the lawsuit money. Instead of taking my gift gratefully, he and you greedily pursued this lawsuit that could only be won if you had a crooked judge on your side. (It was dismissed when I could afford to hire an attorney in 2018.)
But you saw another opportunity to have Judge Weaver transfer assets from an older woman’s trust to you and your client. Your client will need to pay all the money he keeps to medical bills that the government has paid for him thus far. So, unless you are slipping him some cash, the only individuals who profit are you and those you pay off to help you.
Hopefully Judge Weaver gives me at least a couple weeks to meet with doctors and rest. If she does not, and I am forced to comply with your overbroad subpoena, instead of caring for my health, I hope she will be charged with honest services fraud or at least removed from the bench. Those are probably appropriate outcomes already.
If not, I will keep in mind a friend of my family who was one of the people memorialized in the movie Defiance. I asked him why he believed in God. He said that if there was no God, he would not have survived 18 months in a forest in Germany after being shot in the leg by Nazis while escaping a concentration camp.
Regards,
Laura Hammett
A Higher Law 