Alameda County District Attorney, NAZI NAnZI Oink’Malley 256 Page Subpoena to Produce Documents and Depositions

In their opposition to the 256 page document- motion to compel, The Alameda County District Attorney, NAZI NAnZI Oink’Malley filed a completely perjurious document that would indict her, but they “forgot” to sign it! Hummm? They claim they NEVER received the subpoena but have revealed they have 256 page document that was also filed with the court! They along with Google also make reference to the FBI, possible illegal surveillance, data mining and gathering of information on Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, his family, businesses, and communities.

See DA O’Malley Request for Production of Documents here:

DA O’Malley Compel Subpeona Prod Docs Declaration here:

Freedom of Information Act Request DA O’Malley here:

al-Hakim began the task of unraveling the facts that former and current Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff and Nancy O’Malley, former and current Director of Alameda County Child Support Services Maureen Lenahan and Matthew Brega, former and current Attorney General of State of California Jerry Brown and Kamala Harris, their staff’s, agents and contractors committed Extrinsic Fraud Upon the Court, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Willful and Malicious Prosecution, Conflict of Interest, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process, Willful and Intentional Fabrication and Authoring False Evidence; Misrepresentation and Concealment of Material Facts.

It will examine the role of former DA Tom Orloff, Nancy O’Malley, Kevin Dunleavy, Ann Deim, Towanda Lee, Michael O’Connor, Bob Conner, Bruce Brock, David Stein, Matthew Golde and others unnamed in the DA’s office; and DCSS office including but not limited to former Director Maureen K. Lenahan, Director Matthew Brega, Charlene Perry, Sue Eadie, Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, accountant Mr. Lovelady, Mrs. Reese, Mrs. Remelton, Ms. Alder, Mrs. Carlilse, Mrs. Ricca Alcantara, Terry Simmons-Booker, B. Hoffmann, Mr. Williams and others unnamed in the DA’s and ACDCSS’ offices; various judges and Commissioner Glenn Oleon;  Michelle Escerra, Tanisha Jones, others unnamed in the Superior Court’s Family Law Clerk’s officein these criminal acts.

Nancy O’Malley, former DA Tom Orloff, Ann Diem, Kevin Dunleavy, Bob Connor, Bruce Brock,  Michael O’Connor,  and Judge Pulido?
What is the relationship between former DCSS Director Maureen Lenahan, Matt Brega,  Valgeria Harvey, counselors L. Lavagetto, Ms. K. Pendergrass, Ms. Adler, Kris Ferre, accountant Mr. Lovelady, Ricca Alcantara, Ombudsman Mrs. Reese,  Mrs. Remelton, Terry Simmons-Booker, others unnamed in the DCSS office; and Judge Pulido, Judge Bean, Judge Tara DeSautels, Commissioner Thomas Nixon?

al-Hakim has asked the court to remand this case to the Civil Court trial level to continue further trial proceedings consistent with the requested decision and order for former and current Alameda County District Attorney Tom Orloff and Nancy O’Malley, former and current Director of Alameda County Child Support Services Maureen Lenahan and Matthew Brega, former and current Attorney General of State of California Jerry Brown and Kamala Harris, their staff’s, agents and contractors face charges for committing Extrinsic Fraud Upon the Court, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Willful and Malicious Prosecution, Conflict of Interest, Obstruction of Justice, Denial of Due Process, Willful and Intentional Fabrication and Authoring False Evidence; Misrepresentation and Concealment of Material Facts, among others, as demanded.

This matter has been sumitted to Judges Winifred Smith Presiding Judge, Superior Court of California, C. Don Clay- Supervising Judge, Stephen Pulido- Presiding Judge Family Law, Judge The Hon. Melinda Haag- Director- No. District U. S. Attorney’s Office, The Hon. Claudia Wilken-Chief District Judge U. S. District Court- No. Division, Kamala D. Harris- Attorney General of California, Mr. Brega, Nancy O’Malley and County Supervisor Keith wherein they have ALL failed and refused to investigate the matter even though it was requested by the U. S. Department of Justice.

     The letter that was faxed, hand delivered, personally served, and filed in the Alameda County Superior Courts in response to the continued persecution and extortionate scheme of the al-Hakim Family by the Alameda County Superior Court, District Attorney and Department of Child Support Services or more appropriately entitled the “Department of Child Support Fraud Services”.
    The DA’s goon, Bob “BULL” Conner is coincidently the chief investigator for the DA in the Oscar Grant case, yet was listed as the chief witness for the DEFENSE in that case. HHhhmmmmm? The main investigator and witness for the prosecution is the main witness for the DEFENSE???!!! 
    Further, the County judge in the Oscar Grant case, Judge Don Clay whom is very familiar with Conner, also failed and refused to pursue a formal complaint by Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim against “Bull” Connor for his armed accosting al-Hakim, falsely arresting/detaining him in a room, threatening al-Hakim, forcing from the Courthouse, and telling al-Hakim “don’t ever come back!”. A racist example no less violent then the original “Bull Connor” from Alabama! It must be his daddy!
    These actions are unconscionable!  
    Read and distribute widely!!!

The “COURTEL” – the Superior Court Corruption CARTEL, California Judicial Council, and Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker ALL failed and refused to file ANY opposition to the subpoenas and I am sure they will NOT show up in court. Their motions are below for your pleasure.

You MUST read these motions and oppositions as you will NOT believe them!! 

You can download or view the subpoenas, oppositions and trial notices here:

Motion to Compel O’Malley Subpoena and Request for Production

O’Malley Opposition to Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production

Twitter Opposition to Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production

Twitter Filed Subpoena and Request for Production.pdf:

Twitter Filed Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production.pdf

Motion to Compel Google Subpoena and Request for Production

Google Opposition to Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production

Some of the tweets to Shaun King, Deray, Uncle Bobby, and many others as follows:

Effectively NONE of their reasons for the alleged “suspension” are applicable and seem to have an agenda established by those opposed to the retweets and mentions!

It seems that their selective Persecution and prosecution is clearly motivated by their attempt to silence and censor us, deny our freedom of speech and cover up the corruption of those mentioned in the posts that is directly supported with THEIR OWN ADMISSIONS and the EVIDENCE thereto!

Twitters demonstrated extreme bias and prejudice is clearly intended to cause harm to those accounts you have selectively chosen to “close” to the benefit of those with something to lose by the publicity of the tweets/retweets!

Superior Court Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production

Judicial Council Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production

City of Oakland Motion to Compel Subpoena and Request for Production

Alabama Suspends African American Judge Who Declared Death Penalty Unconstitutional, Alleging Abuse of Power and Anti-Death Penalty Bias

The Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission has suspended an African-American judge who declared the state’s death penalty statute unconstitutional, accusing her of unprofessional conduct and anti-death penalty bias. 

In a 109-page complaint filed on April 6, 2021, the Commission charged Judge Tracie Todd (pictured), a criminal court trial judge in the Birmingham Division of the Jefferson County Circuit Court, “with multiple incidents of abuse of judicial power and abandonment of the judicial role of detachment and neutrality, primarily … in the context of embroilment regarding the issue of the death penalty, prosecutors and the prosecutorial discretion of the executive branch, and personal vindication of her prior rulings and actions.” It alleges that Todd repeatedly improperly refused to recuse herself from cases and engaged in a pattern of conduct exhibiting “lack of faithfulness to the law,” “lack of proper judicial temperament and demeanor,” disregard for the orders of higher courts, and “an apparent predisposition against the death penalty generally.” 

In March 2016, Todd barred Jefferson County prosecutors from seeking the death penalty in four cases and declared the state’s death-penalty statute to be unconstitutional. Her decision came in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s January 2016 ruling in Hurst v. Florida striking down Florida’s death penalty scheme on the grounds that it reserved the final authority to determine facts necessary to impose the death penalty to judges, rather than juries. Todd noted in her decision that “Alabama has become a clear outlier” by permitting judges to impose death sentences by overriding jury votes for life and, relying on Hurst, said capital sentences in the state were “being imposed in a wholly unconstitutional manner.”

The complaint alleges that Todd’s order barring prosecutors from seeking the death penalty interfered with their discretion to seek the death penalty because her ruling applied only to exercises of judicial override, not cases in which jurors recommended the death penalty. It also criticized her for relying on secondary sources she had independently obtained, including information that Alabama trial judges were more likely to impose the death penalty during an election cycle in which they were on the ballot, and that unqualified lawyers were being appointed in capital cases based on campaign contributions. Those extraneous sources, the complaint said, “violate a judge’s duty of detachment and neutrality.” The complaint further alleges that Todd improperly refused to recuse herself from other death penalty cases after her decision was overturned on appeal. 

The complaint also charges Todd with abuse of power for banning a Birmingham prosecutor from her courtroom and holding him in contempt of court. In that matter, Todd emailed the sheriff requesting increased security in her courtroom, claiming that the prosecutor had “unpredictable mood swings” and that his insistence on appearing in her courtroom “demonstrates willful disregard or mental instability.” She also emailed the district attorney about the prosecutor’s subpar performance in a pair of rape cases in which defendants charged with raping Black victims were acquitted. She then said that a court observer and several lawyers had remarked to her that the prosecutor’s behaved confrontationally towards her because she is a Black woman. 

The prosecutor subsequently filed motions to recuse Todd in all future cases in which he was involved. Todd denied the motions and, on appeal, asserted that the motions had been filed in retaliation for her decision striking down the death penalty. “Historically, judges in Alabama who made unfavorable rulings against the interests of the power structure were threatened, ostracized and made subject of personal and political retaliation,” she wrote in opposing the recusal appeal. “The methods employed in these petitions amount to tactical relics of dark days past.”

Judge Todd has been automatically suspended with pay pending resolution of the charges. No Alabama trial judge who overrode jury recommendations for life has ever been suspended for pro-death penalty bias.

Judge orders L.A. City and County to offer Shelter to Everyone on Skid Row by Fall

Judge David O. Carter tours skid row with a police officer.


A federal judge overseeing a sprawling lawsuit about homelessness in Los Angeles ordered the city and county Tuesday to offer some form of shelter or housing to the entire homeless population of skid row by October. 

Judge David O. Carter granted a preliminary injunction sought by the plaintiffs in the case last week and now is telling the city and county that they must offer single women and unaccompanied children on skid row a place to stay within 90 days, help families within 120 days and finally, by Oct. 18, offer every homeless person on skid row housing or shelter. 

It’s unclear whether the city and county will challenge the order, which also calls for the city to put $1 billion into an escrow account — an idea that has raised concerns among city officials. 

The ruling argues that L.A. city and county wrongly focused on permanent housing at the expense of more temporary shelter, “knowing that massive development delays were likely while people died in the streets.” That element of the order underscores the judge’s skepticism of a core part of L.A.’s current strategy to tackle homelessness. ADVERTISING

“Los Angeles has lost its parks, beaches, schools, sidewalks, and highway systems due to the inaction of city and county officials who have left our homeless citizens with no other place to turn,” Carter wrote in a 110-page brief sprinkled with quotes from Abraham Lincoln and an extensive history of how skid row was first created. 

Read the full injunction here

“All of the rhetoric, promises, plans, and budgeting cannot obscure the shameful reality of this crisis — that year after year, there are more homeless Angelenos, and year after year, more homeless Angelenos die on the streets.” Last year more than 1,300 homeless people died in Los Angeles County.

In the last homeless count in January 2020, more than 4,600 unhoused people were found to be living on skid row — about 2,500 in large shelters and 2,093 on the streets. They account for only slightly more than 10% of the city’s overall homeless population, and it’s not clear what Carter’s order might mean for other parts of the city. 

The judge wrote that “after adequate shelter is offered,” he would allow the city to enforce laws that keep streets and sidewalks clear of tents so long as they’re consistent with previous legal rulings that have limited the enforcement of such rules. That appears to only apply to skid row.

He also ordered the county to offer “support services to all homeless residents who accept the offer of housing” including placements in “appropriate emergency, interim, or permanent housing and treatment services.” The costs would be split by the city and county, he said. 

Rob Wilcox, a spokesman for the city attorney’s office, said Tuesday that city lawyers are reviewing the order. He declined to comment further. 

Skip Miller, partner at the Miller Barondess law firm, which is outside counsel for the county in the lawsuit, said the county is “now evaluating our options, including the possibility of an appeal.”

Previously, the county had asked to be removed from the case, arguing that it was about the city and that the county was aggressively responding to homelessness without any direction from the court. It cited efforts that included spending hundreds of millions of dollars annually through the Measure H sales taxand developing innovative strategies such as Project Roomkey in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Project Roomkey is a state program that provides temporary funding for cities and counties to rent hotel rooms for homeless people during the pandemic.

The push for an injunction “is an attempt by property owners and businesses to rid their neighborhood of homeless people,” Miller said. 

David Barker, 56, is visiting with his friend living in a tent on skid row in Los Angeles, Calif. on Thursday, March 19, 2020. David is not homeless but he works in the area. Because of the coronavirus pandemic city and county workers are working to move people living on the street inside.


L.A. plans nearly $1 billion in spending to address homelessness under Garcetti plan

“There is no legal basis for an injunction because the county is spending hundreds of millions of dollars a year on proven strategies,” he added.

Matthew Umhofer, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, said he and his clients were ecstatic. Carter’s call for action was what they had been looking for when they filed the case, he said, and why they sought out Carter, who had overseen similar cases in Orange County in recent years, to preside over it. 

“This is exactly the kind of aggressive emergency action that we think is necessary on the issue of homelessness in Los Angeles,” Umhofer said. 

The Alliance is a coalition of downtown business owners and residents that filed the case in March 2020, accusing the city and county of breaching their duty to abate a nuisance, reducing property value without compensation, wasting public funds and violating the state environmental act and state and federal acts protecting people with disabilities.

Carter’s order came the day that Mayor Eric Garcetti released his budget for the next fiscal year, which includes nearly $1 billion in spending on homelessness. The longtime federal judge also ordered “that $1 billion, as represented by Mayor Garcetti, will be placed in escrow forthwith.” 

Of the $1 billion in homeless spending planned by Garcetti, more than a third would come from Proposition HHH, the 2016 bond measure to build permanent housing for homeless residents. Garcetti aides said they expect the city will be building or developing 89 HHH projects over the next fiscal year, for a total of 5,651 housing units. 

Whether Carter’s order will disrupt those activities is unclear. In his order, the judge said he wants a report in 90 days of every developer receiving funds from HHH, as well as new regulations to “limit the possibility of funds being wasted.” 

At a press conference Tuesday afternoon, Garcetti declined to say whether the city would file an appeal of the order, saying he first wants to read it. But he suggested that Carter’s order could slow down the construction of HHH projects.

“Roadblocks masquerading as progress are the last things we need,” he said.

David Barker, 56, is visiting with his friend living in a tent on skid row in Los Angeles, Calif. on Thursday, March 19, 2020. David is not homeless but he works in the area. Because of the coronavirus pandemic city and county workers are working to move people living on the street inside.


Can L.A. really clear homeless people from skid row by October? Here’s what we know

Because the $1 billion for homelessness doesn’t yet exist — some of it hasn’t arrived from Washington and none of it has been approved by the City Council for the coming year — Garcetti said he also fears the city will be asked instead to put some other source of money in the escrow account.

Carter has also asked for a number of reports from city and county officials about how money for combating homelessness has been and is currently being spent. He has also ordered that the city and county cease any sales or transfers of city or county property before such reports are provided.

The lengthy ruling also skewered corruption scandals involving housing projects, “excessive delays and skyrocketing costs” under the HHH bond measure, and L.A.’s failure to seek federal reimbursement for Project Roomkey rooms.

Councilman Kevin de León, whose district includes skid row, welcomed the judge’s decision. Although L.A. needs more clarity about setting aside $1 billion, he said, the tight timeframe to offer shelter or housing to skid row residents “lights a fire under the city to act with a real sense of urgency and to match the rhetoric with real outcomes to save lives.” 

“It’s a strong shot across the bow — and he is expecting action,” de León said. “Not continued negotiations or studying everything to death.”

Pete White, executive director of the skid row-based Los Angeles Community Action Network, which is an intervenor in the case, said his organization had “grown concerned that politicians are using this litigation to justify investment in emergency shelters instead of housing.”

“We all know that shelters won’t solve our housing crisis, and they definitely won’t address the structural racism that got us here in the first place.”

Skid row activist and resident Jeff Page echoed White , saying the tight window for moving people means they won’t be going to permanent housing but instead to “dorm style living that in and of itself is problematic.” What’s needed, he said, is more permanent housing in the neighborhood to be built as quickly as possible. 

“We need more housing here. We need more services,” he said. 

In his order, Carter outlined historic forms of discrimination that had cut Black people out of housing opportunities, including redlining, segregated systems of assistance during the Great Depression, highway construction that displaced Black families, and criminalization that has disproportionately affected Black communities. 

Racial inequity has continued to color government handling of the crisis, Carter concluded, opining that current city and county policies “compound and perpetuate structural racism, threatening the integrity of Black families in Los Angeles and forcing a disproportionate number of Black families to go unhoused.”

The judge has previously compared the situation to the aftermath of the seminal civil rights case Brown vs. Board of Education, saying there are times when the federal judiciary may need to act “after a long period of inaction by local government officials.”

Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School, called the 110-page order a “deep dive into the problems of homelessness in Los Angeles and an expression of Carter’s frustration with how the city and county have responded to this crisis.” She noted that judges in the South during the 1950s and 1960s had used similarly expansive injunctions to make desegregation a reality and in other cases to implement prison reform. 

She wasn’t sure how a higher court might rule if this case ends up getting appealed but said it was “certainly a landmark decision.” 

“It is an open question whether the appellate court will step in,” she said. “As Judge Carter acknowledges, there is usually a hearing before such an order. However, he has loaded up his decision with facts that he says obviate the need for a hearing. The judge has made a bold move.”

News of the injunction had not trickled down to the streets of skid row Tuesday, but people reacted favorably when informed of it. Hasan Saleem, 58, who was sitting outside his tent on 6th Street, said he would take housing “right away” if offered, even if it takes 180 days. Still, he remained skeptical.

“I wouldn’t mind waiting if it was true,” he said. “I don’t know if it’s true or not.”

“It’s better than how they used to do it when they just take your stuff and put you to jail,” said Peaceful Bolden, who was standing with a small group across the street from the Los Angeles Mission. “At least they’re trying.”

But Bolden said she did not think housing alone would be enough.

“Some of these people are just refugees from whatever life they used to have,” she said. “They need mental health. They need hospice, some of them. A lot of them don’t want to leave because they don’t want to be under anyone’s rules.”

Andy Bales, president and CEO of the Union Rescue Mission, had heard the news and hailed it as the “wall of reality” that the city and county are finally running into.

“It’s what I came to Union Rescue Mission to accomplish,” Bales said. “I’ve always wanted to decentralize skid row and regionalize Services throughout the County. My hope is this will do that.”

  • Please Support AMWFT Efforts with Your Secure Paypal Sponsorship Donation

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 56 other followers


  • ABC-TV Breaking News

    [clearspring_widget title=" news, weather & video" wid="4921ce44d2cc0f1e" pid="4a4c63c6d26c3e46" width="304" height="254" domain=""]
  • Now Truth! Twitter Roll