Last month, I witnessed a judge who was a former partner of a law firm for 30 years who didn't care about facts or evidence, allowing an attorney, Jacob N. Harker, to lie on behalf of his client. The defendant wasn't even required to appear at a restraining order hearing. All I wanted was a restrainnig order against someone who had harassed me for three years, something that should have been granted with the mountains of evidence I provided from court transcripts, subpoenas, my declarations and other evidence.
At the hearing I not only wasn't allowed to present my case, but was told to obtain evidence of the identity behind an IP address only a subpoena could produce. I had witnessed the judge whitewash my evidence in preference for a lying attorney who had an obvious desire to humiliate me in front of a large body of people at the hearing.
In another example, I once witnessed a Commissioner of the San Francisco Small Claims Court division attempt to sabotage my collecting a judgment threatening my case dismissal that I wasn't allowed to write or put up photos about the case on my blog. These judges have no regard for people's First Amendment Rights anymore. They want too much power and need to be outed as such.
The lower U.S. court system is highly political and not functioning for anything other than those who run it. People must protest when there's clear evidence judges violate law and procedure.
I've well documented judicial misconduct in my cases as follows:
Judicial Complaint - Judge Robert C. Longstreth, San Diego Superior Court (East County Division)
Judicial Complaint - Judge Charles R. Hayes, San Diego Superior Court (Central Division)
Judicial Complaint - Judge Richard B. Ulmer, San Francisco Superior Court
I've documented attorney unethical conduct in my cases as follows:
California State Bar Complaint - Jacob N. Harker, Law Office of Jacob Harker
Small Claims Court Declaration - M. Pamela Lauser, Lauser Law
Samples of My Motion vs. Edmond Wollmann's (Both in Pro Per)
Here's an example of my motion battle in the case such as this Opposition to Edmond Wollmann's Motion to Strike My Entire Lawsuit that clearly should have provided me with a Default Judgment to end the dispute. Instead Judge Charles Hayes ignored the statutory law within the motion by allowing the defendant to file a cross-complaint 1.5 months prior to the trial date. What followed was my answer to a cross-complaint. The defendant's cross-complaint was never properly filed but I thought it was since got served with it by mail.
Later at a secret off calendar hearing a month after the case was dismissed, Judge Charles R. Hayes awarded big brother operative Edmond Wollmann attorneys fees and court costs though he had acted largely in pro per. (Here's an example of Wollmann's pro per filing). This is a complete violation of law and procedure especially since a request for attorney fees had already been denied thanks to my opposition motion.
This is all a good example of how the legal system is deliberately entrapping people into silly long overblown disputes in order to promote cash flow for the local legal community. First you use a well documented provocateur to lure a woman into filing a lawsuit then you sabotage her and award attorney fees because she's in pro per. It's a money making operation.
From my experience and perspective this was all a big brother provocateur operation the government condoned. They deliberately omitted evidence and facts in preference for male control and domination of a woman who dared stand up to them as described herein.
Where to file complaints in California: