SCOPA Lawsuit Alleges Family Court Asset Stripping by Unchecked Judicial Corruption

It took far too long for the U.S. Supreme Court to address the local practice of  “civil forfeiture,” in a certiorari granted to the non-profit “Institute for Justice.” The delay allowed seizing  of assets of citizens accused of, but neither convicted of crimes nor prosecuted.  The SCOTUS ruling has since put a damper on personal property being liquidated and used to fund salaries and pensions of the government employees who basically stole it “under color of law.”

This same  duplicitous operation exists in family court systems around the country.  It is now being challenged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (SCOPA), where homes and savings are being extorted to fund the unsustainable, bloated state and county budgets.

This parasitic revenue machine often consumes family income  for over a decade, and is responsible for murders, suicides, foreclosures, homelessness, poverty and substance abuse among children and parents.  Judges facilitate  the ” quid pro quo” case-churning to maximize attorney fees-  which are also laundered into political campaigns, in addition to the state and county general funds. 

It is difficult to comprehend such a widespread scam on American families, that rivals the revolting “Kids for Cash” travesty. It is  carefully concealed because of the  dependency of politicians on campaign funding from the $50 billion a year divorce industry monopoly.

Although the high-priced lawyers of  the Judiciary-funded “Institute for Justice” successfully challenged the criminal justice system,  the family court is a taboo topic for attorneys.  They carefully targeted only District Attorneys, likely for fear of losing their law licenses and grant funding in retaliation, if they dared implicate judges –who are at the core of family court corruption.

Therefore, one person has instituted a law suit to end this racketeering and lawlessness, without an attorney,  against the entire Pennsylvania Court system and its agencies. The approach by the self-represented family court victim, had to be a novel one to circumvent the existing self-instituted, and illegitimate  defense used by judges, of judicial immunity.

While it does challenge that insolence, it  also poses a “breach of contract” claim against the family court and its obstruction of jury trials. Starting as a Commonwealth Court law suit  it was as expected thwarted with an Opinion that has as much validity as the Nuremberg laws.  It is now on Appeal in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

The case may be a game changer for several other reasons.  It alleges that mechanisms are hidden under “color of law,” by court procedural rules being used in place of legislated statutes.  Using  unconstitutional rules they are barring jury trials and counterclaims,  by power vested in one biased judge.

Probably the most egregious of all is the Judicial Conduct Board, that has operated as  an arm of this literal crime syndicate. It does not provide any quality assurance for either the integrity or the mental health of judges.  It was delegated as the only agency to provide protection against judicial corruption, however, it really was designed to protect judicial criminality and not the citizens.

There was a deliberate omission of a restitution provision and the Board operates under a veil of secrecy. These deficits clear the path for a whole host of other nefarious legal abuse of families, often using children as pawns in their life destroying operations.

Given the sheer quantity of the Judiciary scandals that have occurred in  Pennsylvania,  one would think monumental attention would be given to  these problems, but that is far from reality. This compromised Judiciary  needs to be exposed as the national threat that it has furtively become.  Imagine what is being done to those that do not have the resources to fight it.

REVISED 2019 February 21 JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT COMMONWEALTH APPEAL_Redacted
FURTHER REDACTED AMENDED May 7 2018 Commonwealth Law suit FINAL VERSION_Redacted

 

24 Views

2 thoughts on “SCOPA Lawsuit Alleges Family Court Asset Stripping by Unchecked Judicial Corruption”

    1. We have to exercise our rights under Article 1 section 1, 2, 6, 11, 20, 25, and 26 of the pennsylvania constitution. See Sprague v Cortez 75 MAP 2016 Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *