Bigot Brand Contempt Threat, Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at May 1, 2019 Hearing!

TO:  Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye          Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye
Chair, Judicial Council of California               Supreme Court of California
Comm. Judicial Appointments                       350 McAllister Street, Room 1295
455 Golden Gate Ave.                                     San Francisco, CA 94102-4797
San Francisco, CA 94102                                Fax: (415) 865-7181
Fax: 415-865-4200,415-865-4205             Tani.Cantil-Sakauye@jud.ca.gov
Presiding Judge Wynne Carville                  Chad Finke
Supervising Judge Michael Markman         Executive Officer
Judge Stephen Kaus                                    Superior Court of Alameda County
Judge Kevin R. Murphy                                1225 Fallon Street Room 209
Judge C. Don Clay                                        Oakland, CA 94612
Judge Jeff Brand                                          Fax: 510-891-6276
Judge Kim Colwell                                        cfinke@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Judge Morris Jacobson
Judge Winifred Smith                                 Charles Johnson
Judge Jon Rolefsen                                     Beth Robbins
Judge Yolanda Northridge                          Deputy Clerk
Judge Dennis Hayashi                                 First District Court of Appeal
Judge Jo-Lynne Q. Lee                               350 McAllister Street
Superior Court of Alameda County            San Francisco CA 94102
Departments 1, 6, 511, and 518                   Fax: 415-865-7309, 415-865-7209
René C. Davidson Courthouse                    Beth.Robbins@jud.ca.gov,
1225 Fallon Street                                        Charles.Johnson@jud.ca.gov
Oakland CA 94612
FAX #: 510-891-5304, 510-891-6276, 510-267-1567
dept.1@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WCarville@alameda.courts.ca.gov, MMarkman@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JRolefsen@alameda.courts.ca.gov, EGrillo@alameda.courts.ca.gov,MJacobson@alameda.courts.ca.gov, JBrand@alameda.courts.ca.gov,CClay@alameda.courts.ca.gov,WSmith@alameda.courts.ca.gov,dept.6@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KColwell@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.511@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.518@alameda.courts.ca.gov, SKaus@alameda.courts.ca.gov,KMurphy@alameda.courts.ca.gov,JLee@alameda.courts.ca.gov,YNorthridge@alameda.courts.ca.gov, DHayashi@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dept.19@alameda.courts.ca.gov,RFreedman@alameda.courts.ca.gov
Martin Hoshino                                      Victoria B. Henley
Director                                                  Director-Chief Counsel
Judicial Council of California               Commission on Judicial Performance
455 Golden Gate Avenue                    455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102-3688         San Francisco, CA 94102-3688
FAX NO. 415-865-4586                     FAX NO. (415) 557-1266
Martin.Hoshino@jud.ca.gov               Victoria.Henley@jud.ca.gov
John.Wordlaw@jud.ca.gov
Alex Tse                                                  Phyllis J. Hamilton
Director- No. District                            Chief District Judge
U. S. Attorney’s Office                          U. S. District Court- No. Division
Federal Courthouse                              6th Floor Oakland Courthouse- 2
450 Golden Gate Avenue                     1301 Clay Street
San Francisco, CA 94102                     Oakland, CA 94612
Fax No.: (415) 436-7234                      Fax No.: 415 522-3605
charles.oconnor@usdoj.gov                Phyllis_Hamilton@cand.uscourts.gov
stacey.geis@usdoj.gov                         Richard_Wieking@cand.uscourts.gov
alex.Tse@usdoj.gov                              Joseph_Spero@cand.uscourts.gov
joshua.Eaton@usdoj.gov
Barbara.Valliere@usdoj.gov
sara.Winslow@usdoj.gov
Brent and Sarah Hanson                        Anthony S. Leung, Christopher Leung
Green Key Investments                           Green Key Investments
508 Dimm Street                                    110 Franklin Street, Suite # 2
Richmond, CA 94805                             Oakland, CA 94607
                                                                 mrchrisleung@gmail.comXavier Becerra
Xavier Becerra
Attorney General of California
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
FAX No.: 916-324-8835
Xavier.Becerra@doj.ca.gov
Sean.McCluskie@doj.ca.gov
Robert.Wilson@doj.ca.gov
Laura.Stuber@doj.ca.gov
Kelli.Evans@doj.ca.gov
Marina.Soto@doj.ca.gov
Fax No.: 916-322-4532, 916-323-5341, 916-324-5567, 916-319-9421cc: ; bcc ACLU, LCCR, East Bay Community Law Center, Bay Area Legal Aid, USC Gould School Of Law, Western Center On Law & Poverty, Electronic Frontier Foundation, National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms, Equal Justice Society, Center for Constitutional Rights, Southern Poverty Law Center,
Faxed and Emailed
FROM:     Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE:     May 2, 2019
NO PAGES: 14
RE:        Bigot Brand Contempt Threat, Disparages al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at May 1, 2019 Hearing

“In another religion they honor people who serve like you with Sainthood!”” – Economics Professor Adeel Malik,Oxford University, England and World Renowned News Expert Commentator, speaking about Abdul-Jalil and the Aaron & Margaret Wallace Foundation.

GOD sent me an ANGEL” – Hammer, speaking about Abdul-Jalil.

“Jalil, YOU ARE A TZADIK (SAINT)!”– Barry Barkan, Live Oak Institute and
  Ashoka Fellow at Ashoka Foundation:Innovators for the Public

 

“I thank God for you and for bringing you into my life and for the ministry you have been given to help the people of God!”– Pastor L. J. Jennings, Kingdom Builders Christian Fellowship, speaking about Abdul-Jalil and AMWF

Dear Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Judges Phyllis Hamilton, Jacobson, Rolefson, Carvill, Kaus, Colwell, Hayashi, Clay, Lee, Murphy, Smith, Brand, Freedman, Markman and Carvill; Alex Tse, Xavier Becerra, Ms. Henley, Mr. Finke, Mr. Hoshino and OTHERS:

Bigot Brand OUTRIGHT LIES in Disparaging al-Hakim Religious Practice of Islam at May 1, 2019 Hearing
At the hearing on May 1, 2019, upon being called, al-Hakim served Brand a Challenge for Cause, upon which he complained that he had filed an answer to the previous challenge served on him just 48 hours ago, but he did NOT provide nor serve that answer on the parties present. He then announced that he would take a brief recess to read the new challenge.
Brand recalls the case, fully intent on jailing al-Hakim for contempt, nods to the the sheriffs deputy seated in the jury box next to al-Hakim, lights into al-Hakim for serving the challenge, affirming that he was going to proceed with the matters at hand regardless of the challenge that he felt could not be any different from the challenge served on him just 48 hours ago! As he is doing so, the sheriffs deputy leaves the jury box and approaches al-Hakim seated at the plaintiff’s table.
al-Hakim responded by illustrating and addressing Brand’s bigotry in his disparagement, denigration, and deprecation of al-Hakim, his religious practice of Islam and Islam had occurred just 48 hours ago at the hearing on April 29, 2019! al-Hakim dramatically argued Brand’s INDEFENSIBLE act of referring to al-Hakim’s weekly religious obligation as “I know that you say you have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday?!”in Brand’s attempts to cast aspersions on al-Hakim, his religion and it’s practice as frivolous, a Frat party, to impugn, vilify, traduce and portray al-Hakim as a nefarious hypocrite! At this point, the sheriffs deputy is standing arms distance away from al-Hakim seated at the plaintiff’s table.
Defendants then offer that the challenges are a contempt of court, wherein al-Hakim states: “you have held proceedings in this matter while there is a stay in place from the vexatious motion and have asked for a warrant for my arrest, this proceeding is a attempt to provoke and provide an opportunity for an arrest for contempt. This vexatious proceeding is just your defense strategy to prevent further exposure and prosecution of your corruption and bigotry!”. Brand responds that “I could not disagree with you more, the court takes every opportunity to accommodate every religion”.
Brand, now confronted with the clear line of bigotry that he has gone FAR beyond, trips and falls over it as he can NOT in good conscience order al-Hakim arrested for contempt as it would prove al-Hakim’s point of his bigotry!

Brand is NOTHING BUT A MISERABLE, PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, INCAPABLE OF THE TRUTH!
If Brand can make such a statement as “I could not disagree with you more, the court takes every opportunity to accommodate every religion”, then how does that comport that with his actions in the Green Key case where he DID NOT RESPOND to over THIRTEEN (13) communications, contacts, documents, faxes and emails, including TWO phone calls and voicemail messages, and hand delivered documents to him over a three week period requesting a continuance, proceeded despite the notices and issued a default against al-Hakim in favor of Green Key?

Green Key Defaulted, Failure to Appear Three Times
In the Green Key Case, Brand ignored the fact al-Hakim did NOT received any response from the court to his over THIRTEEN (13) communications, contacts, documents, faxes and emails, including TWO phone calls and voicemail messages, and hand delivered the documents with a court filed letter requests to his clerks Scott Sanchez and Cynthia Trinidad over three weeks PRIOR to the January 2, 2019 and January 3, 2019, hearings to request a reservation number to file an ex-parte motion for a continuance of the hearings he was unable to attend as the court and plaintiffs are and have been aware for over 30 years that al-Hakim has religious obligations on Tuesdays and Thursdays that do not allow for his presence in court which included the hearing, and proceeded despite the notices and issued a default against al-Hakim in favor of Green Key. Judge Brand, and Colwell before him, their Department 511 clerks and court administrations continuing fraud, corruption and collusion being solely responsible for this case as filed, NOT Green Key. They have been the sole force behind moving this litigation forward for them, as Green Key has failed to appear THREE TIMES consecutively without notice nor reason submitted to the court nor al-Hakim, have not filed an opposition to the motion to vacate the default writ of execution, and have NOT been issued a default nor al-Hakim being granted his motion to vacate the default taken against him!
Brand, who admitted that the last two continuances given to Green Key had NOTHING to do with the case, attempts to sit in SOLE judgment of his, the Department 511 clerks and court administration’s OWN Continuing Fraud, Corruption and Collusion committed on HIS and their OWN part!
The last Green Key defaulted, failure to appear was at the February 25, 2019, hearing, over two months ago, yet to date Brand has NOT issued an order despite the fact they failed to appear THREE TIMES consecutively without notice, and did not file an opposition to the motion to vacate the default writ of execution! On April 3, April 15, and April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties requesting the order from the uncontested, defaulted motion. That’s TEN REQUESTED NOTICES and it has yet to be served even though it was unopposed and thrice defaulted for failure to appear.
Due to the illegal eviction from the defaulted Green Key case, al-Hakim was forced out of his home with only two days to move and was unable to take anything! Of note is the fact he left all his personal and business computers, files that are now in the custody and control of the opposition. al-Hakim has NONE of the files he had accumulated over his life of years! Green Key has taken complete and total custody and control of ALL al-Hakim’s entire lifetime possessions, accumulation of ALL personal, family, and business belongings, things, property, goods, personal effects, assets, chattels, movables, valuables, EVERYTHING!! Over $800,000 in value that has been destroyed by Green Key and MUST BE REPLACED!!!
Four times al-Hakim has demanded the return of EVERYTHING, ALL ITEMS LEFT IN THE HOUSE, WITHOUT ANY DAMAGE TO THEM! Green Key has NEVER responded to the demand. We are sure the items of interest are in the control of the courts partners, law enforcement!
This places an intolerable burden on al-Hakim and makes it impossible to present this document in a concise and cogent manner without the necessary documentary support.
THIS BEGS THE QUESTION WHY IS BRAND FAVORING THEM AND NOT ISSUING THE ORDER UNTIL HE HAS SHACKLED AL-HAKIM WITH BEING DEEMED A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT UNABLE TO PURSUE ANT LITIGATION AGAINST HIM, THEM OR ANYONE ELSE?!!!

Bigot Brand Disparages al-Hakim’s Religious Practice of Islam at April 29, 2019 Hearing
At the hearing on April 29, 2019, Brand disparaged, denigrated, and deprecated, al-Hakim and his religious practice of Islam by referring to al-Hakim’s weekly religious obligation as “I know that you say you have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday?!”.
This bigoted, ignorant, thoughtless, irresponsible, caustic remark left al-Hakim shocked, speechless and dumbfounded! al-Hakim, humiliated at the utterance finally stumbled out “I have NEVER said that I have a religious Holiday every Tuesday and Thursday!”Brand says “Well I know you have said something like that”. al-Hakim responds “I have religious obligations every Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, they are NOT Holidays”.
Irate at the fact that he MUST conform with the law to at least a minimum, Brand asks al-Hakim “when will you be available for an appearance”, wherein al-Hakim responded “the first Monday or Wednesday after June 20, 2019”. Brand states that “you will be gone for Ramadan?”and al-Hakim says “yes, I noticed you of that fact a month ago”. Brands retorts in a very snide, rude manner “I know, I was just asking”and al-Hakim responded “I was just answering”. Brand asks “when does it start?”, al-Hakim responds “Sunday”. Brand then orders the parties to appear two days later on May 1, 2019, at 9:00 a.m.
It was clear that Brand has an agenda to move the VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Superior Court Criminal/Civil Vexatious Entrapment Litigation Strategy to completion before al-Hakim takes retreat for Ramadan so that they can gain another uncontested appeals verdict knowing al-Hakim will NOT be able to respond before June 15, 2019!
It MUST be noted that Brand had TWO sheriff’s deputies in the wings of the jury box waiting with orders in hand!
Brand attempts to cast aspersions on al-Hakim’s religion and it’s practice as frivolous, a Frat party, or Rave, to impugn, vilify, traduce and portray al-Hakim as a carouser, party animal, nefarious hypocrite, insincere. This is perhaps the HIGHEST ranking tenet in the pillars of Islam and is mandated, commanded upon ALL muslims! al-Hakim is long established at this, over 60 years, is recognized and honored world wide for his service, is consulted and relied on for his service to the Islamic community and humanity at large!
Brand and the judges have deprive al-Hakim of certain fundamental rights including the right to freedom of religion and to free speech and the due process of law and penalize him because of his religious beliefs! requiring al-Hakim to abandon his religious beliefs and practices in order to receive benefits. discriminates against al-Hakim and Muslims violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause.
This divisive case highlights the vast difference between the reality and the rhetoric of religious freedom, which is often considered to be the ideal that promotes harmony and equality in the judicial system. But, history suggests that it does lead to more conflict due to the biases and prejudices of those same justices echoing the view that religious freedom brings inequality and disunity so the government and courts systematically enact mainstream practices favoring particular races and faiths for cause and preventing religious freedom and liberty!
Brands prejudice is pathological and projects a personality syndrome linked with racism as well to establish and cultivate his own race, class and religious supremacy based on favoritism towards his own perceived group, their admiration, sympathy, and trust of his ingroup, the “Courtel”.
BRAND CAN NOT SERVE IN ANY CAPACITY IN ANY AL-HAKIM MATTERS!

Repression of al-Hakim and First Amendment Free Exercise of Religion
The Constitution, and The Bill of Rights guarantees that the government can never deprive people in the U.S. of certain fundamental rights including the right to freedom of religion and to free speech and the due process of law. In recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution to keep the government out of religion– to guarantee the separation of church and state. This fundamental freedom is a major reason why the U.S. has managed to avoid a lot of the religious conflicts that have torn so many other nations apart.
The Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment gives you the right to worship or not as you choose. The government can’t penalize you because of your religious beliefs.
Sherbert v. Verner (1963): The Supreme Court ruled that states could not require a person to abandon their religious beliefs in order to receive benefits. Sherbert v. Verner, in which a Seventh-day Adventist was fired because she wouldn’t work on Saturdays. The state denied her jobless benefits, saying she was fired for cause. The Supreme Court ruled that disqualifying her from benefits “solely because of her refusal to accept employment in which she would have to work on Saturday contrary to her religious belief, imposes an unconstitutional burden on the free exercise of her religion.” She got her benefits.

42 U.S. Code § 2000bb – Congressional Findings and Declaration of Purposes
(a) Findings The Congress finds that—
(1) the framers of the Constitution, recognizing free exercise of religion as an unalienable right, secured its protection in the First Amendment to the Constitution;
(2) laws “neutral” toward religion may burden religious exercise as surely as laws intended to interfere with religious exercise;
(3) governments should not substantially burden religious exercise without compelling justification;
(4) in Employment Division v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion; and
(5) the compelling interest test as set forth in prior Federal court rulings is a workable test for striking sensible balances between religious liberty and competing prior governmental interests.
(b) PurposesThe purposes of this chapter are—
(1) to restore the compelling interest test as set forth in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972) and to guarantee its application in all cases where free exercise of religion is substantially burdened; and
(2) to provide a claim or defense to persons whose religious exercise is substantially burdened by government.

42 U.S. Code § 2000bb–1 – Free Exercise of Religion Protected
(a) In general
Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Exception Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person—
(1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and
(2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.
(c) Judicial relief
A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution.
(Pub. L. 103–141, § 3, Nov. 16, 1993, 107 Stat. 1488.)

This action is PURELY RETALIATORY
Judge Jeff Brand, other judges listed herein, court clerks and superior court administration, in concert with unscrupulous Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) have committed over 150 violations under United States and California State Constitutions against Plaintiff Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim that have been graphically detailed and documented over 40 years! (United States Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, VIII, XIV, For Violations of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983).
This PURELY RETALIATORY, unjust, illegal act of revenge, calculated to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights as promised to protect those judges and these underhanded entities known and documented to have repeatedly violated the law for years and just like Brand, they have been, are and will be a defendant and witness in those expected proceedings!! This is their collective legal defense effort to eliminate any possibility of that ever happening!
Brand has a challenge matter still pending, has NOT issued a ruling in Green Key default after their failing and refusing to file an opposition to the motion to vacate the writ of execution awarded to them by default taken against al-Hakim and THREE (3) failures to appear to oppose that motion, unlawfully evicting al-Hakim from his 40 year home, thereby strategically delaying the order to avoid further evidence of fraud on the court and to defeat this alleged vexatious litigant action wherein the judges and courts have acted as defendants CSAA co-counsel and CSAA has acted as judges counsel and government agent/informant for 20 years! BRANDS ACTIONS IN THIS CASE ARE INDEFENSIBLE! THUS THIS VEXATIOUS ACTION.
Brand installed the motion practice schedule to evade evidence of fraud on the court with the long pending six (6) CSAA orders so they could not be presented in this action.
The vexatious motion was filed on February 28, 2019, with opening brief due March 22, 2019, and reply brief due April 5, 2019, and the hearing set for April 19, 2019. Brand finally issued the long pending six (6) orders on March 24, 2019; three days AFTER the submission due date for the opening brief.
al-Hakim waited to receive the orders BEFORE filing the opposition/reply brief to include the orders as further evidence of Brands fraud on the court and exposing THIS frivolous motion as his sole defense for his, the judges, and court administration continuing fraud, corruption and conspiracy.

Court Scheduled Proceedings to Take Default against al-Hakim in VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their “Muslim Ban”
Brand even had the hearing set for Thursday, April 18, 2019 and then changed it to Friday, April 19, 2019, both dates that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim. On April 3, April 15, and today, April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each time to the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and requesting the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. Thats TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”. (see April 17, 2019 email from Dept 511 under Exhibit 1)
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design! The court can not complain about the cost of litigation in al-Hakim cases when they are responsible for the constant motions to continue, when they would not address the fact THEY chose the date without any input from al-Hakim knowing that he could NOT attend and rather than make a mutual accommodation, they suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
Brand, the judges, the court administrations, and opposing parties actions have altered the course of litigation in scheduling proceedings on dates they know plaintiff can not attend and refusing to schedule proceedings on dates that he can attend, delaying and denying reservation numbers to file motions, failing to file or respond to plaintiff’s filing of oppositions and contesting to rulings and orders, demanding documents they already have or have better access to than al-Hakim, adding and removing proceedings from the docket and register of actions without any proceedings or authority, continuing the atmosphere of intolerable TERROR in furtherance of their corruption and agenda of hate induced persecution and entrapment, with their version of the targeted “al-Hakim Muslim Ban” has irreparably and irretrievably altered the legal outcome of the proceedings herein questioned! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”; and VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption)

VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION
The judges, clerks and court administration has been and are “fixing”cases against al-Hakim attempting to protect the opposition as they have scheduled proceedings DEMANDING the hearing be on a date al-Hakim can NOT attend due to religious commitments that has been known to the defendants and the court for nearly 40 years, while REFUSING to have those proceedings on a date al-Hakim can attend! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM PERSECUTION, “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES”, al-Hakim Declaration at Page 12-14;“Opposition to Case Fixing”, filed April 4, 2018, in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371)
On April 3, April 15, and April 17, 2019, al-Hakim sent two faxes and emails each timeto the court and opposing parties announcing the fact the court has scheduled these proceedings Friday, April 19, 2019, a date that Brand knows al-Hakim will NOT be able to attend due to a 40 year religious commitments know to Brand, defendants and the court, in another effort to take a default against al-Hakim in furtherance of their VENDETTA Targeting al-Hakim with their Muslim Ban and al-Hakim requested the hearing date be changed to a Monday or Wednesday. After TEN REQUESTED NOTICES FOR A CONTINUANCE and they were NOT answered. Finally, later on April 17, 2019, al-Hakim received an email from the department 511 clerk stating “Abdul-Jalil – Emailing the department is not sufficient notice for a continuance. If you need help obtaining a continuance please feel free to seek counsel or contact the self help center. This email address is only for people seeking reservations.”.
This response clearly establishes their intent to take a default by design as the court suggest that he seek legal aid in filing a motion to continue! A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY SOLELY TO PERSECUTE AL-HAKIM AND REWARD THE COURT AND DEFENDANTS!
If it is NOT possible to have litigation with the schedule proposed when the court is open EVERYDAY, the time is free and the court is paid to be there, then bigotry, Islamophobia, and Xenophobia are the specious basis for this continued Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption, Manipulation of the record and Register of Actions; Obstruction of Justice, Conduct To Pervert or Obstruct Justice, or the Due Administration of the Laws (Pen.Code, §§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 4570) 1 and Conspiracy to Pervert or Obstruct Justice (§ 182, subd. (a)(5)); the continued Fraud Upon The Court by Judge Brand regarding Motions clearly have a double standard! al-Hakim’s Religion and religious obligations on those days are NOT going to change for judge Brand nor the court.
al-Hakim has had to make multiple requests, once THIRTEEN times, another SEVEN TIMES to have a “Reservation Number to File a Noticed Motion and Ex-Parte motion to be heard on the SAME DATE as litigation previously scheduled, yet the requests were IGNORED/DENIED, and one resulted in the issuing of a default against al-Hakim by scheduling dates that the defendants and the court were aware al-Hakim was unavailable to attend.
The court has failed and refused to respond with their scheduling seeking an uncontested order, thereby making their agenda of hate apparent to all!
The judges and court administration’s continuing criminal harassment, obstruction of justice, denial of due process and corruption in his uniquely applied and enforced court rules summarily denies al-Hakim’s rights to a fair hearing without any statutory or contractual basis authorizing such a ruling and places an intolerable burden on him, denying his legitimate and undeniable rights and strikes at the heart of his fundamental civil rights and due process under the law, guaranteed by the United States Constitution and California Constitution. No statute in California authorizes the court to deny a right that is uncontroverted while in the process denying such precious fundamental rights of due process and justice. The use of judicial power to permit such injustice raises significant legal questions, and an order is necessary to prevent this abuse.
The judges mindless denials further expose and demonstrate the courts agenda of judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities criminal corruption and persecution, fixing cases against al-Hakim because he is Muslim  and Black, a Whistleblower; appointing themselves a Real Primary Party of Interest to the litigation with their OWN agenda; weaponizing vindictive rulings in furtherance of their agenda; engaging in the defense of opposing parties; the denial of due process, obstruction of justice, the harassment, provocation, and government sponsored terror, the gross examples of white class and privileged bias, prejudice, Islamophobia, Xenophobia, hate induced, vindictive, retaliatory agenda, favoritism, bigotry and racism, al-Hakim continues to experience with the courts retaliation against plaintiff by taking adverse judicial and legal actions against him as punishment of al-Hakim, his family, businesses, and communities they serve continue.
Brand has begun the specious vexatious litigant action to foreclose on al-Hakim’s civil rights to eliminate any further threat he poses to their “honor” and position, while denying al-Hakim any opportunity for truth, fair relief, and justice against them in the “legal system”! The court has heeded al-Hakim’s intentions to not only litigate his cases but some directly involve the corruption naming judges dating back nearly 40 years and the courts can not afford nor will they allow this to happen! They will shut down al-Hakim at ALL COST!
The cases and hearings, which involves contested issues of law or fact, and which had been assigned to Judge Brand, should NEVER have been assigned and no matters hereinafter arising should be heard or assigned to Judge Brand, on the ground that he is irreparably conflicted, tainted, biased, and prejudiced against the plaintiff.
Brand does not provide any answers to the Challenges served on him because he can’t afford to incriminate himself until finally he decided NOT to answer a Green Key challenge until over a month after the Challenge was served, thereby consenting to the Challenge. al-Hakim incorporated those entire challenges therein until such time as he answers the challenges!
VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Aware Superior Court Criminal/Civil Vexatious Entrapment Litigation Strategy
al-Hakim is aware that the Superior Court administration and judges have been working with law enforcement in a covert criminal undercover sting operation trying to entrap, frame and incriminate him in criminal activity that is fostered by the hearings in his cases that are selectively being recorded by the court reporter whom arbitrarily goes on and off the record at the judges silent instruction, thereby editing the proceedings while in progress, to charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim! The main purpose for the courts using this tactic and employing “court observers”, colluding with the opposing parties and the entities mention in the “WRIT RACKET” criminal, civil, vexatious entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties was to enable the filing of the vexatious motion. These entities colluding and conspiring using the judicial arm of government whom perform and serve in the roles as suspect, culprit, criminal, evidence, testimony, facts, truth, perjury, investigator, witness, defendant, conspirators, corruptors, colluders, co-counsel, judge, jury, executioner, as the opposition party with their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim through the illegal use of public funds!The court costs of addressing the challenges can NOT be a consideration when the courts has deviated far from the norm of standard litigation by employing their own private court observers, reporters, and agents in their cause to fabricate a case against al-Hakim and the vexatious motion.
Judge Kaus admits to the courts acrimony and animus toward al-Hakim, and asks to wipe the slate clean and move forward in good faith as al-Hakim deserves a chance to have his claims adjudicated with the rights to fair procedure and due process guaranteed to them by law! But it took four challenges and multiple rulings challenged for fraud on the court, abuse of discretion, bias, prejudice, perjury, and failing to disclose conflicts of interest for Kaus to finally recuse retroactive to his assignment because he failed and refused to disclose a know conflict in these cases that now have to re-litigated at a heavy cost to the parties and the court!

VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “Illegal” Proceedings are Corruption
Based on the matters contained herein, on the United States and California State Constitutional rights and on this document filed herewith, al-Hakim’s cases, these entire “illegal proceedings” are solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim!
These are cases that al-Hakim has filed, they are his cases, NOT the courts, nor judges, nor law enforcement, nor government, nor legal entities in power! Yet they have hijacked al-Hakim, his religion, his truth, his family; their home, their lives; their personal, real, and business property; his businesses; his community; those they serve; his cases; his rights; his freedom; his pursuit of happiness; justice; the Constitution; his very existence! (See Entire “Illegal” Proceedings are Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption at page 138)

VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM Grand, Systemic and Endemic Corruption
This Grand corruption is systemic and endemic in ALL al-Hakim cases involves the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in power colluding and conspiring using the judicial arm of government whom perform and serve in the roles as suspect, culprit, criminal, evidence, testimony, facts, truth, perjury, investigator, witness, defendant, conspirators, corruptors, colluders, co-counsel, judge, jury, executioner, as the opposition party with their agenda of criminal corruption and persecution to the detriment and oppression of al-Hakim through the illegal use of public funds!
Judges do not have discretion not to disqualify themselves. By law, they are bound to follow the law. Should a judge not disqualify himself as required by law, then the judge has given another example of his “appearance of partiality” which further disqualifies the judge. al-Hakim again renews the request for those affected Judges to disqualify themselves, ALL of them, including ALL those named herein.
The fact that the trial court, the judges, clerks, and court administration are parties is an insuperable moral, ethical, and legal obstacle since they are more than a nominal party. (People v. Cimarusti, supra, 81 Cal. App.3d 314, 320; U.S. Financial v. Sullivan (1974) 37 Cal. App.3d 5, 12, fn. 6 [112 Cal. Rptr. 18].)

al-Hakim 2005 U. S. A. G., DOJ- and Judge Clay’s 56 Federal Corruption Complaints
“I don’t care about challenges, they don’t mean anything to me, I’m not scared of them!”. “He has said that he files complaints, files challenges to document the actions of the court”. “He filed complaints with me when I was presiding court judge”, “his work is quite good, better than many of the attorney’s that has appeared before me!”, “he’s a litigator in his own way”
Judge C, Don Clay on al-Hakim’s challenges and 56 complaints filed with and against him over the years
In July, 2005, al-Hakim filed a Federal Corruption Complaint with the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, of a hate crime of Islamophobia and Xenophobia committed against him during the trial al-Hakim v. CSAA and Rescue, et. al”  in Superior Court of Alameda County, California.
al-Hakim’s initial investigation of his USDOJ demanded a change in this criminal, tactical policy of isolation, victimization, criminalization and the attempted entrapment of al-Hakim as the continuing victim, including the use of government initiated, Nixon era “White House Plumbers” and CoIntelpro style dirty tricks!
This State sponsored persecutory terror and civil conspiracy has brought into play Federal, Sate County and local judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies (“entities”) to further their continued investigation of al-Hakim whom has been surveilled for years and continues today with the compromising of many agents and informants covers due to their sloppiness. These actions of these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities and agencies are just one example of the continuing efforts of law enforcement to silence and eliminate al-Hakim, even by death, as their “enemy of the State” adversary when al-Hakim has caught and exposed them as they have been entrapped in their own criminal snares!
The FIFTY SIX (56) complaints listed in the 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE against judge Clay is only a small sample of documentation since 1980, and more recently 2000, al-Hakim has filed and served a variety of letters, formal complaints, legal actions and legal challenges with the United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians; regarding the many blatant civil rights violations, fraud, criminal activities and corruption of these judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities that was widely distributed over the internet and posted on many websites. (see 140 PAGE COMPLAINT and CHALLENGE of Judge Clay filed OCTOBER 3, 2018, and “al-Hakim 56 Complaints listed Document Communications with Clay Detail Corruption and Cover UP!”, filed December 19, 2018, both in al-Hakim v. Interserver Inc., RG18-888371)

“WRIT RACKET”
al-Hakim has filed multiple complaints for years against Justices Jones, Burns, James Humes, Terence Bruiniers, Sandra Margulies, Anthony Kline, and Kathleen Banke as well as Challenges for Cause against Associate Justice James Richman and Henry Needham, Jr. whom apparently sit in this group but has not openly participated in the decisions.
al-Hakim has filed multiple complaints for years against California Supreme Court Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye, former Chief Justice Ronald M. George, Federal Chief District Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton, and former Chief District Judge Claudia Wilken also.
In these matters, it has been established and admitted that there has been illicit ex parte collusion and conspiracy between Superior Court judges Wynne Carvill, Kim Colwell, Jeff Brand, Robert Freedman, Frank Roesch, Stephan Kaus, Mike Markman, Don Clay, Stephan Pulido, Ioana Petrou, Yolanda Northridge, Morris Jacobson, Jon Rolefson, Evelio Grillo, Kevin Murphy, Jo-Lynne Lee, Scott Patton, David Krashna, Jennifer Madden, Sue Alexander, Glenn Oleon, George Hernandez, Tara Desautels, Leo Dorado, Dennis Hayashi, Julia Spain, several commissioners, and the Superior Court Administration of Chad Finke and the Appeals court with the judges mentioned above. Three of the judges have offered the same unsolicited.
Additionally, Judges Ronni MacLaren, Frank Roesch and Jo-Lynne Lee issued ORDERS OF SELF DISQUALIFICATION/REFUSAL pursuant to C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(ii) and C.C.P. §170.1 (a)(6)(A)(iii). This fact demonstrates that there has been and continues to be pervasive illegal ex-parte communications between the judges regarding al-Hakim because al-Hakim has NEVER had any contact with some judges that recused.
These superior court judges have conspired with the appellant courts to independently take it upon themselves to broadcast their “dog whistle signal to the appeals court” to deny al-Hakim’s petition and issue orders in their support forcing al-Hakim into the “WRIT RACKET”! This is NOT having a trial, this is being “railroaded by the court in a case that is ALREADY fixed against you!”
This action are part of what litigants have come to know as the “WRIT RACKET” instituted by the legal system, judges, courts, the judicial administrative and regulatory agencies, both State and Federal!
These entities have made such a mockery of justice that now these judges do not hesitate to deny or violate a litigants rights and defy them to file a writ knowing that the Supreme Court, Appeals Court, Superior Court Administration, the Judicial Council, and the Commission on Judicial Performance, will cover up and white-wash their criminal activity! These criminal justices are forcing appellants into the Appeals Court cemetery for civil rights, where the Rule of Law is Overruled and Outlawed, the death of due process, where justice is a miscarriage, the treason of truth, the homicide of human rights, the dumpster for denial, where litigants rights are banished to rot in oppression, and die!
al-Hakim’s legal opponents, CSAA and others are engaged in corruption and conspired, consorted, colluded, conceived and employing this “WRIT RACKET” criminal entrapment defense litigation strategy with third parties, other judicial, governmental, law enforcement and legal entities employees, associates, members, agents, contractors, and informants of the U. S. Attorney General- Northern California, Homeland Security (NSA), F.B.I., U. S. Federal Court- Northern California District, California State Supreme Court, California State Appeals Court, Governor of California, California Attorney General, Alameda County District Attorney, Oakland City Attorney, California State Senator, California Congressperson, Alameda County Supervisors, Mayor of Oakland, Oakland City Councilpersons, Alameda County Superior Court, Judicial Council of California, among others, inciting the courts acrimony, animus, and persecution of al-Hakim with judicial calumny deceit!
To understand the “WRIT RACKET”, one needs to know what a “racket” and “racketeering” mean and depict in the legal community and population at large. The definitions are:
Racket
“A racket is a planned or organized criminal act, usually in which the criminal act is a form of business or a way to earn illegal or extorted money regularly or briefly but repeatedly. A racket is often a repeated or continuous criminal operation.”

Racketeering
“Racketeering, often associated with organized crime, is the act of offering of a dishonest service (a “racket”) to solve a problem that wouldn’t otherwise exist without the enterprise offering the service. Racketeering as defined by the RICO act includes a list of 35 crimes.”

Moreover, this is exactly what the judges meant by their “dog whistle” signal/statement at the hearings that they would rely on their “colleagues (in the Appeals Court)” to support their decision to ignore the Rule of Law knowing that the appellate judges would do just as Jones, Burns, Bruiniers, Margulies, Kline, Humes and Banke did, “cover-up for him”.
Brand and the courts actions are a content- and viewpoint- based restriction on speech and lacks any objective criteria for suppressing speech and censorship of constitutionally protected free speech, engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity in violation of the U. S. Constitution First Amendment and California Civil Code § 51, and Article I, section 2 of the California Constitution for Violations of Free Speech, provides: “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.” when Plaintiff‟s viewpoints, are protected speech under the California Constitution, where the court harassed Plaintiff by engaging in a severe and pervasive scheme to suppress his constitutional and statutory right to engage in protected activity, by executing against him punitive and adverse judicial actions, and termination of his basic rights to due process?
By operation and application of judges restrictions set forth herein has unlawfully deprived Plaintiff of their full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in violation of CCP §51 and abused its discretion and improperly prejudice al-Hakim, under color of law, the Judges sought to deprive him of litigation due him contrary to the right to due process and immunity from takings without due process guaranteed by the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution.
These Constitutional violations of Plaintiff’s rights and prejudices Plaintiff suffered herein, when the judges denied his civil rights and due process, an equal opportunity to participate in unbiased pursuit of his legal claims, on the basis of Plaintiff’s race, religion, whistleblowing activities, bias, Islamophobic, Xenophobic, vindictive, retaliatory agenda, prejudice, favoritism, bigotry and racism; exhibited bad faith and deceit; denied al-Hakim’s civil and human rights, the rights to the truth, justice, to evidence and testimony, to due process; illegal ex-parte communications regarding al-Hakim; denied the appeal with criminal intent under the color of law and authority in violation of the rights guaranteed by U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, XIV, Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Under Color Of State Law; Section 1983, Unruh and Ralph Civil Rights Acts, and the Bane Acts.
When the conduct of the Judges was unreasonable and undertaken intentionally with malice, willfulness, and reckless indifference to the rights of others, plaintiff’s injuries and the violations of his constitutional rights were directly and proximately caused by the policies and practices of the Appeals Court, which were the moving force behind the acts described herein caused damages to plaintiff, and will continue to cause damage to plaintiff in violation of his civil rights, and due process and equal protection of the laws under the U. S. Constitution Amendments I, V, VI, XIV by this denial of equal access to an unbiased legal process.
Given the principle involved in this case is not merely one of fairness to al-Hakim but also one of maintaining respect for the law and promoting confidence in the administration of justice. (As the United States Supreme Court stated in In re Murchison, 349 U.S. 133, 136 [99 L. Ed. 942, 946, 75 S. Ct. 623, 625]: “A fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process. Fairness of course requires an absence of actual bias in the trial of cases. But our system of law has always endeavored to prevent even the probability of unfairness. … Such a stringent rule may sometimes bar trial by judges who have no actual bias and who would do their very best to weigh the scales of justice equally between contending parties. But to perform its high function in the best way “justice must satisfy the appearance of justice.” Offutt v. United States, 348 U.S. 11, 14 [75 S. Ct. 11, 13].”)
Where the court acted as described herein with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights with the intent to injure, vex, annoy and harass Plaintiff, subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights with the intention of causing Plaintiff injury and depriving him of his constitutional rights when in these circumstances, there was denial of a substantial right rendered the ensuing commitment illegal because it is impossible for this or a reviewing court not to conclude that “a different result would have been probable if such error … or defect had not occurred or existed.”? (CCP § 475.)
Faced with the imminent threat of having to publicly confront the legal, professional, social, political and financial consequences of their twenty (20) years of GRAND CORRUPTION, filed this polemic nearly bare of supported facts or authorities, in this completely meritless motion, in a last ditch attempt to BAR al-Hakim from “coming for them” in proceedings which are finally approaching on the outstanding grand corruption matters by Brand enacting their entrapment strategy to declare al-Hakim a “vexatious litigant” in a matter brought by Brand, to heard by Brand, and judged by Brand and BRAND ALONE!!!
A determination of vexatious litigant status specifically under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §391(b)(3) requires somewhat more than a retaliatory judge conspiring with the defendant to complain that they perceive al-Hakim vexed to their mutual motive, interest, benefit, and opportunity is a reoccurring theme over the 20 years of this case where the defendants have represented the judges in this case against al-Hakim and the judges have likewise defended the defendants as “sitting judge for the defense” and “deputy defense counsel”! There are simply no meritorious grounds for this motion at all. The statutory criteria are clearly stated and easily understood. And in this case, Plaintiff show they are as far removed from meeting the statutory criteria as possible, which Brand either knew or should have known before filing this motion out of retaliation and desperation.
The court can best decide upon the merits of the plaintiffs’ motions by reviewing them on the law, not by relying entirely upon the opinion of Brand and the entities. Even a cursory review can only lead to the conclusion that the Plaintiffs’ claims are potentially meritorious.  And that in fact the tactics of the defendants, including Brand and the entities, are harassing and delaying the court and wasting its judicial resources, by preventing his actions from proceeding to due process and discovery.

VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”
al-Hakim has long been targeted by United States Attorney General’s Office- Department of Justice; Federal and California State Judges, their ruling bodies and Associations; the Alameda County Superior Court of California, United States Attorney’s Office- Northern District; United States District Court- Northern Division, Attorney General of California, Alameda County District Attorney; City of Oakland and Oakland City Attorney; Federal, State and local law enforcement; Federal, State and local politicians.
The targeting by Brand, the judges, Alameda County Superior Court Administration, Alameda County District Attorney, City of Oakland and their City Attorney, California Attorney General, Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Kamala Harris, CSAA, Wellpoint, EBMUD, AT&T, Equinix, Interserver, and others, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities in their VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM PERSECUTION, “MUSLIM BAN” by ”FIXING CASES” in Furtherance of their Corruption Agenda, IS PURE RETALIATION, with an aggressive campaign of calumny deceit, encouraged opposing parties to do all that they can to cause the ruin of al-Hakim, his family, their businesses, their business, real and personal property, his community and the clients they serve. Their tactics are more extreme than muckraking or character assassination, wherein the court and opposing parties fabricate and gathered negative, embarrassing or compromising information about al-Hakim, publish and disperse that information as widely as possible.
In the legal context, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities are encouraged to use the process of litigation to “harass, deny and win using all tactics””The Law can be used very easily to harass and enough harassment on someone will simply push them to the thin edge, well knowing that he is not privileged, will generally be sufficient to cause their professional if not physical death, possible to annihilate him by destroying his credibility and moral character in all contexts leaving him a social and legal “pariah” in society incapable of being associated with or represented, and utterly ruin him.
One of the many things they did to al-Hakim was to offer compensation to bribe members of his family in an effort to take his real, personal and business property from him and to cause him great pain and suffering in hopes that he would perish. Ultimately, the court and CSAA proceeded to bludgeon Mr. al-Hakim with over-burdensome litigation tactics, as well as communicating with and intimidating his partners into abandoning him, leaving al-Hakim standing alone.
The court and CSAA intimidated, coerced, bribed, and otherwise elicited perjurious, slanderous, libelous and false statements from various people about al-Hakim and implied prurient activities. What al-Hakim did not know at that time, however, was the fact that agents, informants, and contractors acted for and on behalf of Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities by unethical and criminal means, instigated the acts, which gave, rise to the fraudulent, corrupt orders in underlying cases.
In doing so, Brand, the judges and court administration, CSAA, their contractors and agents (including its attorneys), with unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities actions precluded Mr. al-Hakim from ever having a fair opportunity in any of his cases, and makes it explicitly clear that he is anything but a vexatious litigant in that the unanswered challenges and orders replete with perjurious, incriminating statements were not only false but obtained through criminal conduct. In short the court instigated and committed criminal acts with these entire “illegal proceedings” solely for the purpose of the unscrupulous judicial, law enforcement, governmental and legal entities illegally utilizing the full force and resources of the government in a covert criminal undercover sting operation by fostering, fabricating and manipulating any filing, pleading, argument, facts, truth, faxes, emails, phone calls, voicemail messages, letters, hearings, request, reservation numbers, motion practice, motion titles, ex-parte applications, hearings, parties, appearances, continuances, schedules, proceedings, register of actions, Court Domainweb, statements, evidence, testimony, documents, word, inference, vague reference, or gesture that they can remotely interpret as evidence of any remote action they seek to advocate to incriminate, charge, try, convict, incarcerate and eliminate al-Hakim, that DESTROYED his legitimate suits and then sought to have Mr. al-Hakim declared a vexatious litigant for seeking relief based on those criminal and civil violations of the law! (see VENDETTA- TARGETED AL-HAKIM “CAMPAIGN OF CALUMNY DECEIT”)

Respectfully,

ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
510-394-4501

Calendaring for Motion to Vacate and Set Aside Order on Amend Judgment

TO:    Judge Scott Patton                    FAX NO.: 510-690-2824
Superior Court of Alameda County    PAGES: 1
Dept. 507
Hayward Hall of Justice
24405 Amador Street
Hayward, CA 94544

Faxed and Emailed
FROM:     Abdul-Jalil
DATE:      August 10, 2016
RE:           Case MILLER VS HAKIM, Case: #OCV0574030

Dear Judge Patton:

I am sending you and Department 511 this fax and email to request a reservation number to file a Motions to Vacate and Set Aside the courts recent order on plaintiff’s motion to “Amend Judgment” issued on July 14, 2016 in the above entitled matter.
I came in today to file the motion but was asked to file a formal motion with the herein requested reservation notice. Please reply with the requested information so that we can serve the plaintiff ASAP.
We were not served in this matter for what is at least the FIFTH time and there is NO indebtedness. These facts are known to the plaintiffs and was resolved in 2007.
I am unavailable to appear in court on Tuesdays and Fridays all day and Thursdays before noon. Any time on Mondays and Wednesdays are fine as well as Thursdays after 2:00 pm.
Additionally, this matter can not be heard or ruled on in anyway by Judge Colwell as she has been involved in a previous matter that is still outstanding and has an irreparable conflict.
Call me if you have any questions,  and “Thank you” for your consideration.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil
510-394-4501

Plaintiff’s Opposition to Tentative Ruling Issued February 3, 2016 by Judge Robert B. Freedman

ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
7633 Sunkist Drive
Oakland, CA  94605
Tel: (510) 394-4501
Plaintiff

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim, Plaintiff,
vs.
East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD)
Case No.:RG14740943
Plaintiff’s Opposition to Tentative Ruling Issued February 3, 2016 by Judge Robert B. Freedman
Hearing: CMC and Demurrer Hearing Date: February 5, 2016, Continued from December 11, 2015
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: Administration Bldg., 1221 Oak St., Oakland, CA 9460712
Department 20

Plaintiff’s Opposition to Tentative Ruling Issued February 3, 2016 by Judge Robert B. Freedman On Case Management Conference and Demurrer Hearing set for February 5, 2016, 10:00 a.m., in Department 20.
I, ABDUL-JALIL al- HAKIM, hereby declare as follows:
1. I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action and this notice is submitted in opposition the tentative ruling referenced above. I have personal knowledge of the contents of this notice and, if called as a witness, could and would testify competently to them.
2. This Tentative Ruling was made on February 3, 2016 by Judge Robert B. Freedman On the Demurrer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), filed by Defendants East Bay Municipal Utility District (“EBMUD”) et al. (collectively “Defendants”) on December 23, 2014, and continued for hearing in the court’s orders of January 30, 2015, March 5, 2015 and December 11, 2015. It further states the above tentative ruling will be issued as the court’s order, and no hearing will be held, unless the contesting party contacts the opposing party or parties and the Clerk of Department 20 by 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing to state an intent to appear at the hearing to contest the tentative ruling. The Clerk of Department 20 may be contacted by email to dept.20@alameda.courts.ca.gov.
3. It is February 4, 2016 at 1:28 pm and I am herewith opposing the tentative ruling and further reiterate that I oppose any and every ruling issued by this tainted judge and have a standing objection to his continued obstruction of justice by remaining in this case prohibiting justice as “Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied!”.
4. In compliance with the courts order I have sent this notice via email to the following parties: dept.20@alameda.courts.ca.gov, RFreedman@alameda.courts.ca.gov, RMishra@alameda.courts.ca.gov, dgoldberg@crosbyrowell.comand wrowell@crosbyrowell.com.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, based on my direct first hand personal knowledge.
Date: February 4, 2016

Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim

Oakland City Attorney Barbara Parker and Public Works Dept. Stash $30,000 to Conceal Fraud and Protect Jayne Williams, John Russo’s Crimes!


Unknownname

NOWTRUTH.ORG

Award for “Distinguished Marketing and Promotional Services” from NFL Super Bowl NFL Experience,
Founder of BLACK EXPO shown with Olympic Sprinter John Carlos , Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA Conference , Dellums for Mayor, Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA Conference, Oakland Police Officers Arrested for Computer Store Burglaries, Police Found Guilty in Burglaries, Police Officers Sentenced for Burglaries,


You can click on any highlighted word to view or download that item

FAX MEMO
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
7633 SUNKIST DRIVE, OAKLAND, CA  94605-3024
PH (510) 394-4501

TO: Barbara J. Parker FAX #: 510 238-6500
City Attorney NO PAGES: 11
City of Oakland
1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 6th Floor
Oakland CA 94612

The Honorable Mayor Jean Quan FAX #: 510 238-4731
City of Oakland
One City Hall Plaza, 3rd Floor
OAKLAND CA 94612

Deanna J. Santana FAX #: 510 238-2223
Oakland City Administrator
City of Oakland
One City Hall Plaza, 3rd Floor
OAKLAND CA 94612

The Honorable C. Don Clay FAX #: 510 891-6276
Presiding Judge
Superior Court of California
County of Alameda
1225 Fallon St., Dept #1
Oakland CA 94612

Nancy O’Malley FAX #: 510 271-5157
District Attorney
René C. Davidson Courthouse
1225 Fallon Street, Room 900
Oakland CA 94612
cc: Barbara Lee, Desley Brooks, Larry Reid, Sandre Swanson, K. Carson, Courtney Ruby, Jayne Williams, bcc:
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: May 3, 2012
RE: Repairs to City Sewer along 7633 Sunkist Drive, Oakland, CA 94605 and Non-Response to Filed and Served “Whistle-Blower” Corruption Complaint

Dear Mrs. Parker,

I am in receipt of a letter dated April 10, 2012 from a Donna Enright, Administrative Assistant 1, with copies to Arlette Flores-Medina, the Open Government Coordinator from your office, with another non response to my continuing requests for ALL documents and materials related to the repair work of the sewer main along my property that was most recently allegedly performed by Andes Construction from June to August 2010. From the physical observations of the areas repaired, the same concern seems to be apparent again and the main is still in need of repair due to the negligent and improper repair from 1992 to present as a result of the main collapse in 1991. (Enright link to letter attached hereto and can be viewed and/or downloaded at: https://www.box.com/s/93e388d1d54da35a6658 )
The response from your office provided nothing related to my property but was enlightening as I have requested ALL DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS RELATED TO THE REPAIR yet nothing you offered was responsive.
The document from Gunawan Santoso, P.E., of the City of Oakland Community and Economic Development Agency dated March 26, 2012, to Andes Construction entitled “PROPOSAL REQUEST No. 2”; with headings:
PROJECT: The Rehabilitation of Sanitary Sewer in Area Bounded by Lakeshore Dr., Alice St., 20th St., and 11th St.
PROJECT NO: C59310
This City of Oakland document requests quoted estimates for the quantities of the repairs for changes in “a contracted sum or proposed modifications to the contract” and states that very sternly “THIS IS NOT A CHANGE ORDER NOR A DIRECTION TO PROCEED WITH THE WORK HEREIN.”
It further indicates that: “Note: Construction area is located in easement between Sunkist Dr and Hillmont Dr, enter from 10’ path at the side 7633 Sunkist Dr.
Per Maintenance CCTV LH 84-112-14 does not exist. Please verify.”
The document provided from Cynthia Orozco of Andes Construction dated May 18, 2012 entitled “Alice C59310-Proposal No. 2” for “Re: The Rehabilitation of Sanitary Sewer in Area Bounded by Lakeshore Dr., Alice St., 20th St., and 11th St. C59310” is addressed to Julius (perhaps Kale Jr.) Below that entitlement is another line that reads “Sub: Proposal #2- Emergency Job @ Sunkist Dr.” This Rehabilitation proposal includes “Clean & Televise Sewer Main” as a line item of the repair. It further states that Andes will “perform the aforementioned work as described in Proposal Request # 2 and as per plans provided by the City”. There is also a hand written attachment on the face of this document stating “NOTE: PLEASE USE BID ITEMS OF PROJECT C59310”. The acceptance of this Proposal for $30,297 is endorsed by Allen Law of City of Oakland Public Works on May 19, 2012.
I have a few questions that must be answered:
1) When was this “Request for Proposal #2 for the Emergency work at Sunkist Drive” prepared?
2) How was this “Request for Proposal #2 for the Emergency work at Sunkist Drive” prepared?
3) Who prepared the Request for Proposal?
4) How were bids solicited for the Request for Proposal?
5) How were bids submitted for this “Request for Proposal #2 for the Emergency work at Sunkist Drive”?
6) How many bid responses were there to the Request for Proposal?
7) What criteria was used to select the awarded bid to the Request for Proposal?
8) How was the bid awarded for the Request for Proposal?
9) When was the bid awarded for the Request for Proposal?
10) What is CCTV LH 84-112-14 ? Does CCTV LH 84-112-14 exist?
11) Where is CCTV LH 84-112-14?
12) Where are the videos of the sewer main inspection both pre and post repair?
13) Where are the photos of the repair including the one of the cleaning snake stuck in the displaced rubber donut coupling that triggered this problem in January 2010?
Both the videos and photos exist and that existence is verified in a conversation between myself and City of Oakland Engineer Julius Kale Jr. on January 26, 2012. You can listen to and/or download that conversation at: http://www.box.com/s/61971f508caaba0e67bb
It seems that perhaps the reason why you feel you are able to withhold the requested documents and materials with impunity is because this repair is just another example of the ongoing fraud in this case dating back to 1991. If the alleged repairs to my property were performed and billed as part of repairs to another property, it would conceal the fraud not only in the repair to my property but also the awarding of the bid for the repair to both properties without the existence of any record of repairs to my property, as it is neatly tucked into the ALICE C59310 repair!
On February 25, 2010 I appeared at your offices and filed a request for the documents from this event and videos of the sewer dating back to 2004. I have not received any response from your crack staff headed by Mark Morodomi, and Michele Abbey whom have pledged in former City Attorney John Russo and your office’s infamous Public Service videos for Real Oakland Administrative Reform (ROAR) to provide those documents to the public as a right of Oakland citizens.
In a Public Service Announcement entitled “Oakland Open Government” Russo point out Mark Morodomi and Michelle Abney as “The Advocate for the Public”. Morodomi proclaims “Citizens have a right to see documents” and the City motto is “Jus Por Popolo” meaning “Law in the Service of the Public” to give you(the citizens of Oakland) the tools and the resources to compete fully in our local democracy.
On Russo’s website he referred to himself as “The Leader for government transparency and civic reform!” – Pragmatic Progressive Leadership!, and describes himself as “passionate that all Oakland citizens have a right to a safe community, good job opportunities, a thriving economy, and a responsible and transparent government.” He paraded this rhetoric of Government Transparency, Accountability and Civic Reform in cleaning up Government and Law Enforcement aimed at restoring public confidence in government, and maintaining the Highest Ethical Standards designed to “make city government more accountable, more transparent and more effective” as his personal “Shield of Honor”. We shall now find out if you are any different for Russo or like Russo and really stand for the things you selectively choose to enforce on others and more like Russo, if you just want to in RUSSO’s OWN WORDS act as “most politicians, and simply keeping the game going as long as they can!”
After leaving the City Attorney’s office I went to the office of the City Auditor to inquire about the process to file an ethics and “Whistle-blower” complaint against Russo and your staff. While meeting with the receptionist, Russo entered the office in a very intimate manner with the City Auditor, Courtney Ruby. I introduced myself and gave them both cards and stated that I would be in touch them both. I am fulfilled that mention with a letter and “Whistle-blower” complaint.
I have filed and am still awaiting the City of Oakland, City Attorney, and John Russo’s answer to the notice of the Corruption Complaint filed and served on your office on May 5, 2010 and the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on your office on June 7, 2010 stemming from criminal actions committed by the City Attorney’s Office, Mr. Russo and others resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991. A copy of that complaint can be viewed and/or downloaded at: http://www.box.net/shared/4424e7822p. A documents referred to herein below are in reference to documents attached to the complaint.
My ethics and “Whistle-blower” complaint that I filed against Russo and your staff including Mark Morodomi, Randy Hall, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, Sophia Li, Demetruis Shelton, Elizabeth Allen, Erica Harrold and Michele Abbey; former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jane Williams and former employee Pat Smith; was for their fraudulently fabricating evidence in 1999 and planting that evidence favorable to the defendants in the case files SIX years AFTER the case was closed, engaged in spoliation of remaining evidence in the court files from 1991, fostering Rescue trial Judge David C. Lee’s allowance of the illegal product of fabricated and planted evidence, spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Ron Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; defense counsel Steve Barber and the law firm of Ropers Majeski; the other underlying defendants; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office; to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony based on this planted evidence in the al-Hakim v CSAA and the underlying Rescue Rooter case that was created thru EXTRINSIC FRAUD with accompanying testimony procured thru admitted suborned and solicited perjurious acts and fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury. During the Rescue trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damning nature to the defense and AAA as the hostile intervener, that were missing, altered, or incomplete, and providing the case file to defendants Stephan Barber and Ron Cook for nearly a year, Russo and your office failed to notify the court of this unpardonable illegal breach in the chain of custody of the file, and engaged in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; Russo and your office engaged in actions to coverup your unlawful acts; as you committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity.
On October 20, 2010 I filed a letter response entitled “Response to Denial of Your Claim #C28043 Served and Filed August 31, 2010” to a Mr. Doug Kapovich, Claims Administrator for Acclamation Insurance Management Services in which I stated “ I am in receipt of your letters addressed to “Abdul-Salil Al-Hakim” dated September 3, and 24, 2010 both denying a claim numbered C28043 that HE/SHE/THEY filed on August 31, 2010. Since I am not “Abdul-Salil Al-Hakim” and your information contained in both denial letters are not factually related to my claim, nor grounds for denial of my claim, it is deduced that my claim filed on the date referenced above is still active and pending unless
and until such proper notice of denial is received. His/your denial letters gave four (4) repeated erroneous grounds for denial without factual evidence to support those assertions, and in fact refute the common facts established and acknowledged in his/your letters.
Given that he and your office had ALL this information at the time of your “assumed denial letter”, it is reasonably deduced that your denial could not possibly have been related to my claim, but was in fact intended for the differently named party in the letters I received. I further requested that if I was in error, please feel free to factually correct me with a properly named, factually evidenced denial letter and not merely serve another misstep in your, the City of Oakland, City Attorney’s Office, John Russo and others bad faith, fraud, civil conspiracy, and violation of the business and professional codes. Russo and your office has never responded to the letter and the uncured defect is yours!
I have contacted Russo and your office many, many times by registered mail, phone and fax, regarding Russo and your staffs independent knowledge of the defendants absconding with the files from the City’s possession, and if such action was with the permission of the City Attorney. Russo and your office have failed and refused to effectively respond and has always denied knowing who made the request to review the files or what happened to them, while me and my attorneys at that time, Michael Michel and Jeff Fackler, had attempted several times to obtain copies of the City litigation file from October 1999 to June of 2000 and was told by the City Attorney’s Office that the file was “missing” and was last requested by defendant Ron Cook. Finally, after six months, in June 2000, Anita Hong called to notify Mr. Michel that the file had been returned and was available for viewing. At that time Mr. Fackler and Michel was told that the file had been returned by CSAA’s attorney. I called Ms. Hong and was told the file was back and available for viewing, and when asked who returned the file, she responded “it was returned by Steve Barber of Ropers Majeski”.
Although Russo and your office have adamantly denied the City Attorney’s office had anything to do with the case and was not involved as recently as your assistant Alex Katz’s threatening emails and voice mail messages left for KPFA reporter Gabrielle Wilson, then interim Program Director Sasha Lilly, and Music Director Luis Medina, that resulted in Ms. Wilson’s September 5, 2009 show being censored and canceled. Mr. Cook and Mr. Barber both recently testified in the CSAA trial that they were given the case file by your office and they did not “remove” them without notice. I have previously served multiple deposition and trial subpoenas on ALL the parties from the City Attorney’s office named above and they have ALL failed and refused to provide the information sought by me, and further failed and refused to appear under court ordered subpoena for deposition testimony twice and under court ordered subpoena for trial testimony every time.
You can read, listen to and/or download the City Attorney interactions with Ms. Wilson and KPFA at:
Gabrielle Wilson Aborted Interview Announcement 1 http://www.box.net/shared/5hrfbsm8xj
Gabrielle Wilson Aborted Interview Announcement 2 http://www.box.net/shared/0idjh3jitg
Gabrielle Wilson Aborted Interview Announcement 3 http://www.box.net/shared/t4dg2k65a3
Gabrielle Wilson Aborted Interview Voicemail from Emmitt Powell http://www.box.net/shared/l8h09yujof
Gabrielle Wilson Aborted Interview Announcement Voicemail from Luis Medina http://www.box.net/shared/2epx0xcla1
Oakland City Attorney Alex Katz email to Gabrielle Wilson http://www.box.net/shared/8csivs26ku
Oakland City Attorney Alex Katz email to Gabrielle Wilson jpg http://www.box.net/shared/17dpkclfgt
Oakland City Attorney Alex Katz email to Gabrielle Wilson for Interview Request http://www.box.net/shared/m1jqn21sr8
Oakland City Attorney Alex Katz to Gabrielle Wilson Complete correspondence http://www.box.net/shared/p941j8vxv2
Then California Attorney General Jerry Brown interview request from Gabrielle Wilson http://www.box.net/shared/i1yzhd2th1
In a voicemail message left for me by Demetrius Shelton, current President of the National Bar Association and City Attorney employee he acknowledges that Russo had in fact received the Trial Subpoenas! A copy of that voice mail is provided on the audio CD attached to the complaint or you can listen to or download the voicemail at: http://www.box.net/shared/88g62hzaky
The censoring of Ms. Wilson’s scheduled show was another instance of Russo and your office continual engaging in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; continuing to engage in actions to coverup your unlawful acts; and that Russo and your office committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity of the defendants in both the al-Hakim matters mentioned herein.
As a direct and proximate result of Russo and your office’s actions, you have caused me and my family to be forced from our $1 million plus home and office, foreclosed from two over $20 million law suits, and multi-million business for 14 years thru the City Attorneys violation of the business and professional codes, extrinsic fraud, subornation of perjurious testimony, committing these acts under the color of law with unclean hands, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I should remind you that Russo and your office again did this with the unwitting aid of the same army of City Officials that Russo eagerly employ to rid the City of criminals like himself!
We now have you, Mr. Russo, and the municipality of the City of Oakland with the City Attorney’s Office being guilty of unclean hands without notifying the court of these specious, treacherous acts and my complaint addresses the concern that Russo and your office criminal violations of the Civil Code, Business and Professions Code, the Rules of Professional Conduct; and Cal.Cannons and strikes at the heart of my fundamental civil and human rights and right to due process under the law guaranteed by the United States Constitution Amendments and the California Constitution and qualify as a Hate Crime under the Unruh and Ralph Civil Rights and the Bane Acts, while they are clear acts of religious bigotry and intolerance where such conduct rose to the level of consideration for a Federal Crime and a Civil Rights violation because the City Attorney’s Office operates “under the color of law” and certainly the violation of anyone’s civil rights is a federal crime. This deprivation of my civil, human and due process rights by the law enforcement body of the City Attorneys’ office of Oakland rise to the level of criminal activity and “misconduct by local and federal law enforcement officials. These criminal actions by you, Russo, your staff and your office demand you ALL be charged and prosecuted.
Mr. Russo, has stated “that City employees should be held to the highest ethical standards; that there is a formidable crisis of lack of public confidence in Oakland City Government”; in his ROAR video he and City Auditor Courtney Ruby state they truly believe “that City employees should be held to the highest ethical standards; that there is a formidable crisis of lack of public confidence in Oakland City Government”, that people are fatally mad about the unethical behavior, and abuse of power rampant in the City Government; and that Oakland truly deserves a new day”.
If you like Russo and your office are honestly “mad about it; that it is truly time for Oakland, in quoting Mr. Russo, “To Get On With It!” to clean up corruption”; that you, Russo, your office and Ruby “truly want to enact, and enforce your self authored Whistleblower program”; and you sincerely “want the public to believe that the City Government is operating on the level”, then you and the City should start with the complaint to investigate your office and provide answers as to why you, Russo, Mark Morodomi, Randy Hall, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, Sophia Li, Demetruis Shelton, Elizabeth Allen, Erica Harrold and Michele Abbey, and former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jane Williams and former employee Pat Smith fraudulently fabricated evidence in 1999 and planted that evidence favorable to the defendants in the case files SIX years AFTER the case was closed, engaged in spoliation of remaining evidence in the court files from 1991, fostering Rescue trial Judge David C. Lee’s allowance of the illegal product of fabricated and planted evidence, spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Ron Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; defense counsel Steve Barber and the law firm of Ropers Majeski; the other underlying defendants; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office; to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony based on this planted evidence in the al-Hakim v CSAA and the underlying Rescue Rooter case that was created thru EXTRINSIC FRAUD with accompanying testimony procured thru admitted suborned and solicited perjurious acts and fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury.
You will NEVER escape the fact that during the Rescue trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damning nature to the defense and AAA as the hostile intervener, that were missing, altered, or incomplete, and providing the case file to defendants Stephan Barber and Ron Cook for nearly a year, you failed to notify the court of this unpardonable illegal breach in the chain of custody of the file, and engaged in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; you engaged in actions to coverup your unlawful acts; as you committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity; you all failed and refused to provide the information sought by me, and further failed and refused to appear under court ordered subpoena for deposition testimony twice and under court ordered subpoena for trial testimony and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Perhaps even worst, this evidence was the ONLY EVIDENCED PRODUCED AT TRIAL BY THE DEFENDANTS in the recent al-Hakim v. CSAA trial and presented while I was away attending a funeral!
Judge John Tigar’s Admission of Fabricated Evidence, Planted in Case Files Tainted, and Spoiled by the Hostile Intervener and the Oakland City Attorney
The only evidence produced by CSAA in their defense at trial during the al-Hakim vs. CSAA trial in April 2008 was the two fabricated notes allegedly from Pat Smith taken at the time of the occurrence of 1991 back up. There was no other evidence lodged with the court reflected in the minutes of the hearing. The hearing was held in al-Hakim’s noticed absence as he was attending a funeral after a second death during the trial of an over 40 year friend.
THE AUGUST 1999 CITY NOTE (See video of Notes)


al-Hakim had served a trial subpoena upon defendant Ron Cook to produce his entire case file at trial. Cook appeared at trial with less than 15 boxes of files claiming that these were the only ones he felt was responsive to the subpoena. Upon review of the files provided, it was clear that there were just many, many duplicates of the same documents copied over and over without there being any new information provided. al-Hakim had also subpoenaed Ronald J. Cook, Randy Willoughby, Alex Stuart, Bradley Bening and others of the law firm Willoughby, Stuart & Bening yet no one else appeared or provided their case files pursuant to the subpoena claiming that they knew nothing about the case and it was Cook’s alone as an unsupervised “independent contractor”.
During a review of Cooks files in the court room while trial was recessed for a week, al-Hakim found a document in Ron Cook’s copies of the City of Oakland files which was a note entitled “Al-Hakim v. C/O (92416)” with two bates stamp numbers 001323 and 000002 (See one page note under Exhibit C) that was discovered on April 2, 2008 during trial subject to subpoena. This document apparently states a list of “documents not provided to council requesting file”, and further mentions “Attorney-Client and work product documents”. These notes clearly address:
1) conversations between and a one page memo from EFA (City Attorney Elizabeth Allen) to RWH (City Attorney Randy Hall) and former City Attorney employee Pat Smith on August 27, 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City;
2) another conversation between and a one page memo from EFA (City Attorney Elizabeth Allen) to former City Attorney employee Pat Smith on August 27, 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City;
3) Two pages of hand-written notes from JWW (City Attorney Jayne W. Williams) to RWH (City Attorney Randy Hall) and former City Attorney employee Pat Smith on September 3, 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City;
4) Undated, one page hand-written note from JLW (City Attorney Janie L. Wong) to persons unknown;
5) Undated, one page hand-written note from former City Attorney employee Pat Smith SIX YEARS AFTER Smith was fired by the City to EFA (City Attorney Elizabeth Allen);
6) Two pages of undated, unaddressed, nondescript notes for placement into the City file.
For years al-Hakim has asked for answers to the illuminating question of “Where are the rest of Pat Smith’s alleged City case file notes allegedly taken contemporaneously during her two years of involvement from 1991-1993 in this case?”. There was never any answer because there were no notes other than the two pages of notes (See two pages of notes under Exhibit C) that were fabricated and planted into the City file after August 1999 by the Oakland City Attorney’s mentioned herein and at the behest of the defense attorney Stephan Barber.
Acting as Deputy Defense-Counsel Judge Tigar had ruled in pre-trail conference that Pat Smith’s notes would be admitted as evidence despite the fact that he noted that Judge David Lee had ruled them inadmissible in the Rescue trial. This is inconsistent with his ruling of all the previous orders of other judges relative to this case, no matter how remote, would prevail in this case and remain in full effect as he ruled on them and cited the prior judges ruling. Perhaps more revealing is that ALL those orders that he ruled on with the alleged support of previous judges orders were ALL against al-Hakim’s interest.
During pre-trial conference al-Hakim had stated to the court that the defendants could not and would not produce any of the witnesses from the Rescue trial and none would appear at this trial because they all were known to have committed perjury. During the trial Defense counsel Barber stated to the court that he had tried to locate Pat Smith at the City of San Francisco but she no longer worked there and requested of the court that Pat Smith be allowed to testify through her notes and the Rescue transcript.
al-Hakim raised the issue that the defendants had not provided any proof of their efforts to locate and serve Smith and alleging that they merely tried to reach her at her former place of employment was not enough. Tigar stated that he had read the Rescue trial testimony and notes of Pat Smith and would allow the transcript and her notes to be admitted as evidence if there was agreement that she would not appear as a witness. There was never any agreement between the parties on her not appearing as a witness and though Tigar knew there was no such agreement, Tigar admitted her testimony and notes into evidence at trial on August 6, 2008 while al-Hakim was absent attending a funeral for a second death during the trial.(See Trial ending order dated August 9, 2008)

Oakland City Attorney Was Aware At All Times Whom Had The Files And Why and Concealed Oakland City File Note Refutes Defendants Recision Claim!
This evidence proves that the Oakland City Attorney’s Office knew at all times that defendants CSAA, Ron Cook and defense counsel Stephan Barber had the case files, that they provided the case files to them, that Pat Smith’s notes were clearly constructed in fraud and planted in the case files by the Oakland City Attorney’s Jayne Williams, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, and former Senior Investigator Pat Smith at the behest of defendants CSAA, Ron Cook, defense counsel Stephan Barber, and underlying defendants Rescue Rooter with their counsel William Jemmott and Bay Area Carpets with their counsel Todd Jones. al-Hakim has previously served several deposition and trial subpoenas on ALL the parties named above and they have all failed to appear every time.
As a protective measure for his co-defendants, Judge Jon Tigar had ruled that Barber would have to testify and answer al-Hakim’s charges of spoliation of evidence and subornation of perjurious testimony stemming from his handling of the City file if there was more than one case file. If there was ever more than one case file, they were ALL missing and that fact was attributed to CSAA’s attorneys by the City Attorney. Clearly, Mr. Barber now has to leave the seat as defense counsel and take the stand as a witness and defendant! See video of Tigar’s ruling.


Since Pat Smith was terminated from the al-Hakim v. City of Oakland case for lying, fraud, and presenting false evidence before it was settled in September 1993 and she was fired from Oakland City employment shortly thereafter in 1994, there is no logical reason for her to have had such close and alleged privileged contact, conversations, and the sending and receiving of documents between her and Oakland City Attorneys Jayne Williams, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong, Anita Hong in August 1999- SIX YEARS AFTER she was fired by the City of Oakland. As she said at the Rescue trial while being examined by Rescue defense counsel William Jemmott under oath she “required her notes to respond to questions” because she could not remember what lies she had to testify to without them. The notes she previously alleged to have “created those notes at or near the time of the event as part of her claims file” is simply untrue. Her notes and testimony is why the defendants could not and would not ever produce her for testimony at trial and Oakland City Attorneys John Russo, Jayne Williams, Randy Hall, Elizabeth Allen, Eliada Perez, Janie Wong, Anita Hong could not and would not ever appear for testimony at deposition or trial in this or the underlying case.

Oakland City Attorneys Jayne Williams and John Russo Fabricated and Planted Evidence!
Now my Dear Mrs. Parker you have the honor privilege and responsibility to answer:
1) Who authored the August 1999 City note and how did they come to know the facts that were contained in it?
2) When was the note constructed?
3) What documents were provided to the requesting counsel?
4) Who was the attorney that requested the file and how was it provided to them?
5) What other documents were withheld and why?
6) Who is the Attorney and who was the Client referred to in the Attorney-Client asserted in the note?
7) What documents comprised the Attorney-Client privilege?
8) What documents comprised the work product?
9) What are the notes for, who’s file and what happened to them?
10) Did they get placed in the file, if so, by whom, when, where, why, how?
11) What was the chain of command in the handling of the notes?
12) Who approved and who knew about this illegal covert action?
13) The August 1999 City note clearly demonstrates that someone had made contact with Pat Smith before that date in order for her to engage in the illegal activities with the City Attorneys. Who contacted Smith, when, how and why?
14) She admitted during her testimony at trial in the Rescue case that she was being paid for her efforts by the defendants. How much was she paid and what was the basis for her employment?
15) When did Pat Smith review the City file after her employment ended in 1994 and October 1999?
Since there is proof from invoices that defendant Ron Cook had hired John Ratto of D. L. Glaze, later called ASU, as an alleged adjustor in this case and we have found out that they had contacted the Oakland Police Department, the City Attorney’s Office, and the Department of Insurance in an investigation of al-Hakim under the guise of adjusting/settling the claim in early 1999. It is entirely reasonable to expect that defendants CSAA, Cook and defense counsels themselves may have initiated the contact directly with both Smith and the Oakland City Attorneys office prior to August 1999 or at the very least it was another of their employees or contractors Douglas Kroll, Eller Torres, Lynn Koehler, Michael DeCesare, Gary Halpin. The blatant illegal activities of defense counsels Stephan Barber and Shawn O’Halloran are well established in this and the underlying case.

Jayne William’s Specious, Treacherous Acts
After see all the aforementioned evidence, not so shockingly Retired Judges Lee, Michael Ballachey, and Richard Hodge, though they live in three different counties, all coincidentally hired the same Oakland defense firm, Meyers Nave, run by former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jayne Williams whom was responsible for providing the files to the defendants initially that was then given to her client Judge Lee for trial by John Russo. (See July 26, 2006 letter from Kim Colwell under Exhibit B) Clearly an effort on the part of the defendants, their defense counsels, and the courts to protect their own fallen, now exposed crooks and coverup their corruption.
al-Hakim was stumped for years trying to find “Jane Williams” and was unsuccessful until recently while attending a Oscar Grant Town Hall meeting someone mentioned the Meyers Nave report on the abuses of the BART police in his murder and the general professional and ethical nature of the force. Curious about the alleged findings, al-Hakim did a web search and was surprised to find out that the principle of Meyers Nave and the City Attorney of San Leandro was none other than “Jayne Williams”! From there he found her active in many investigative roles as the finder of fact in case involving high level, high profile, governmental crimes.
How important is it to the integrity and validity of the proper investigation and analysis of high profile crimes that the finder of fact is in fact guilty of corruption, collusion, conspiracy, extrinsic fraud, breaching the chain of custody giving the case files to defendants for nearly a year, fabricating evidence, planting fabricated evidence in case files and providing that spoliated case file to the courts without informing the court! This fact alone would bring all of their cases under scrutiny with the potential to be overturned!
As you all are aware, this matter has been and will continue to be submitted to the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, among others, for further investigation and prosecution.
Thank you and I welcome and look forward to your response with the furthering of the litigation and resolution of this ongoing case.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim

” In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” — George Orwell. For The Truth In The News!

Honorable C. Don Clay Must Address District Attorney Nancy O’Malley Federal Civil Rights Violations and Corruption Complaints


Unknownname

NOWTRUTH.ORG

Award for “Distinguished Marketing and Promotional Services” from NFL Super Bowl NFL Experience,
Founder of BLACK EXPO shown with Olympic Sprinter John Carlos , Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA Conference , Dellums for Mayor, Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA Conference, Oakland Police Officers Arrested for Computer Store Burglaries, Police Found Guilty in Burglaries, Police Officers Sentenced for Burglaries,


You can click on any highlighted word to view or download that item

FAX MEMO
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
7633 SUNKIST DRIVE, OAKLAND, CA 94605-3024 PH (510) 394-4501

TO: The Honorable C. Don Clay FAX #: 510 891-6276
Presiding Judge NO PAGES: 11
Superior Court of California
County of Alameda
1225 Fallon St., Dept #1
Oakland CA 94612

cc: Judge Leo Dorado, District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Supervisor Keith Carson
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: February 3, 2012
RE: Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley Forcibly Removing Me from Davidson Courthouse Building, Threatened with Arrest if Returned and Response to Formal Complaint Served and Filed June 7, 2010

Dear Judge Clay,

I have called your office yesterday on Thursday, February 2, 2012 and left a voice mail message regarding very serious concerns mentioned above, as these Federal Civil Rights violations of my being forcibly removed from the Davidson Courthouse Building by Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, threatened with arrest if I returned and my Corruption Complaints filed with then Presiding Judge Jon Rolefsen on September 22, 2010 requesting a response to Formal Complaint Served and Filed June 7, 2010. Any effort to continue to cover up these crimes, are themselves greater crimes than the ones complained of! The matters and I are not going to magically disappear so let’s address them and move on.
I am fearful for my safety after being verbally accosted; physically threatened; attempted to be baited, provoked and intimidated into a physical altercation; threatened with arrest, disallowed from going to Judge Leo Dorado’s courtroom; forcibly removed and escorted from the courthouse building; and ordered not to return by District Attorney Officer Bob Connor on November 22, 2010 at approximately 3:45 p.m I have litigation that was to be filed in November 2010 the day of my being forcibly removed from the court house and threatened by District Attorney henchman Bob Connor whom is very well known to me. The D. A.’s office has compromised these suits and this issue also must be corrected ASAP. District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s abridging these inalienable, sacred rights are not a joke to African-Americans.
This apparently was on order from Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley and assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavy as I sat alone in the lobby of the D. A.‘s office for 30 minutes waiting to speak to Dunleavy on an update on the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on their office on June 7, 2010 stemming from criminal actions committed by John Russo and the City Attorney’s office resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991. After requesting a response to Formal Complaint Served and Filed June 7, 2010 and several conversations with the Alameda County District Attorney office, District Attorney Nancy O’Malley assigned the case to Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavy. After his review and several more conversations with me, Dunleavy decided to assign the case for investigation after he had been assigned this case in July 2010 when he told me months before that he had assigned it to another investigator.
The D. A.‘s lobby reception area is merely a very small space between the elevators and the bullet proof glass doors and windows that separate the public from the D. A. There are only a few chairs that line one side of the space and is not meant to accommodate more than 4-8 people. During the 30 minutes that I waited in the lobby, only 3 people from the general public came onto the floor from the elevators, yet 10-12 came to and from the D. A.’s office. Clearly I represented no threat to anyone, and I could have been assisted without any concern nor fear on anyone’s behalf. I’m sure that the lobby area is equipped with surveillance cameras and would verify my account of this incident.
I am familiar with officer Bob Connor from my previous interaction with him during my Oakland Police Burglary case. It is documented that he is not someone I trust or would interact with in any manner. He clearly tried to put me in harms way where I could/would have been killed in the line of duty! I made it clear then that I never intended to speak to or have any contact with him ever again in life.
It is unfathomable that such a thing could happen right in your lobby and visitors reception area in today’s highly charged racial, political, and law enforcement versus community interactive environment, especially in Oakland and Alameda County where deadly force seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Given the history of the D. A.’s office, and in your short tenure, I should have expected it!
To allow the D. A.‘s office to handle me and my complaint in such a Gestapo fashion and to use Judge Leo Dorado as a ruse is unacceptable, needs to be investigated, the responsible parties held accountable and punished.
Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavey had me forcibly removed from the Courthouse without notice, cause or legal grounds. Rodney Brooks, the Chief of Staff for Supervisor Keith Carson informed me that Dunleavey admitted to him that he had me removed from the Courthouse and gave no reason nor legal grounds for doing so. After the encounter with Connor, I spoke with District Attorney Matt Golde and Superior Court Judge Leo Dorado regarding my treatment and called O’Malley to voice my extreme concern wherein I received a return call from Dunleavy. Dunleavey expressed his concern for the fact that I knew Golde and Dorado, but not as if it would have made a difference in their decision or actions in having me threatened and removed from the courthouse. He laughed as he recanted stories about them playing on a basketball team together, never once exhibiting any remorse for his or O’Malleys’ actions. The recorded conversation with Dunleavy regarding the encounter with Connor and the investigation can be listened to and/or downloaded at: http://www.box.net/shared/x46rvjorhj.
Here’s Dunleavy’s second call stating the he will speak with the Department of Child Support Services attorney that had to admit in court several times that they and the D. A.’s office had committed fraud, embezzlement, and theft against me and my family. When I refused to pay for the D. A.’s fraud, they attempted to extort the money from me by suspending my drivers license and revoking my passport! You can listen to D. A. Kevin Dunleavy voicemail as he tells me he is going to talk with V. Harvey of CSS http://www.box.net/shared/ma0fyvzkdc.
Dunleavey had expressed to me his desire to prompt an obvious conflict with his actions, to avoid the responsibility to perform a fair and impartial investigation under any circumstances, to create an unsustainable jurisdictional issue to avoid the investigation, his very serious offense of my being Blacklisted and denying my Federal Civil Rights to enter the courthouse to file a lawsuit, being Blacklisted and denying my Federal Civil Rights to enter the courthouse as a public venue, as well as the City Attorney’s fraud. He said that he would talk with Nancy O’Malley and get back to me. He never did.
Brooks further expressed that the D.A. had concluded an investigation of the cases, found no wrong doing, and had sent me a letter of their findings and decision. I informed Brooks that Mike O’Connor, Senior Deputy District Attorney, had left me a voice mail message stating that, but in fact I have never received anything from them at all and asked him for a copy of this investigation report, and if he had read it. You can listen to D. A. Mike O’Connor voicemail stating he has ended the investigation at: http://www.box.net/shared/3oampngtby.

Brooks said that he had not seen the report and did not have a copy. I asked that he provide a copy of the alleged “investigation report” from the D. A.’s office. Needless to say I have received nothing from Brooks, and after his actions for the last year, it is not unexpected.
Clearly something must be done as I have waited for you to get back to me to move this process forward. There is no circumstance or law that can justify this use of force, intimidation, and threat of imprisonment under the guise and color of law!. I will not allow this continuing injustice to go on unnoticed and want to know what time is best for you since I want to meet as soon as possible!
I have been waiting for the Supervisor’s Offices, Superior Court and the D. A.’s office to properly address this matter since June 2010 with the above results.
The critically serious, incriminating, willful admissions in the conversations and interactions of Brooks, Carson, Connor, and Dunleavey with O’Malley has made everyone witnesses to these actions of the D. A. and any non-action on the prosecution of these crimes will entrap YOU ALL in complicity in the commission of these crimes, in it’s corruption, conspiracy, fraud, obstruction of justice, false imprisonment, aiding and abetting the crimes mentioned, the attempted cover up of these crimes, and willful blindness, among others. It is settled law that the cover up of a crime is itself greater than the crimes themselves! Those stakes are raised exponentially when it concerns corruption on behalf of Judges, elected public officials, law enforcement and legal servants whom are embodied with protecting the public trust.
Judge Rolefsen had been called, emailed, faxed and I had come by his office several times and expected that someone would respond to my complaint, and as you are undoubtedly aware, I am still awaiting a response to the Corruption Complaint filed and served on his office on May 5, 2010 and the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on your office on June 7, 2010. The Complaint stems from criminal actions committed by several judges, John Russo and the Oakland City Attorney’s office resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991. I implore you to respond to this matter with your lawful findings immediately.
You should be further aware that this complete formal complaint has also been filed with Congresswoman Barbara Lee, State Assemblyman Sandre Swanson, Oakland City Auditor Courtnry Ruby, Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson, Oakland California Mayor Ron Dellums, Oakland City Administrator Dan Lindheim, Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley, Oakland City Councilpersons Desley Brooks and Larry Reid’s offices. I have been in contact with and expect it being submitted to the Alameda County Grand Jury while California Attorney General Jerry Brown’s office refused service of their complaint!
The Complaint against the Judges, Russo and his staff including Mark Morodomi, Randy Hall, Janie Wong, Anita Hong, Sophia Li, Demetruis Shelton, Elizabeth Allen, Erica Harrold and Michele Abbey; former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jayne Williams and former employee Pat Smith; is for their fraudulently fabricating evidence in 1999 and planted that evidence favorable to the defendants in the case files SIX years AFTER the case was closed, engaged in spoliation of remaining evidence in the court files from 1991, fostering Rescue trial Judge David C. Lee’s allowance of the illegal product of fabricated and planted evidence, spoliated evidence and unclean hands by defendant/hostile intervener AAA Insurance; Ron Cook and Willoughby, Stuart & Bening; defense counsel Steve Barber and the law firm of Ropers Majeski; the other underlying defendants; and the Oakland City Attorney’s Office; to be admitted as evidence, subjected to testimony based on this planted evidence in the al-Hakim v CSAA and the underlying Rescue Rooter case that was created thru EXTRINSIC FRAUD with accompanying testimony procured thru admitted suborned and solicited perjurious acts and fostered it’s use to prejudice the jury. During the Rescue trial, testimony revealed that there were numerous documents and photos of a very damning nature to the defense and AAA as the hostile intervener, that were missing, altered, or incomplete, and their providing the case file to defendants Stephan Barber and Ron Cook for nearly a year, Russo failed to notify the court of this unpardonable illegal breach in the chain of custody of the file, and engaged in actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; Russo engaged in actions to coverup their unlawful acts; as they committed, aided and abetted this criminal activity.
I had requested depositions, investigation and trial testimony of retired Judges Lee, Michael Ballachey, and Richard Hodge, though they live in three different counties, all coincidentally hired the same Oakland defense firm run by former Oakland and current San Leandro City Attorney Jayne Williams whom was responsible for providing the files to the defendants initially that was then given to her client Judge Lee for trial by John Russo.

During the recent CSAA trial, in April 2008, defendant Ron Cook admitted on the witness stand that he received the City file from Barber before October 1999. Barber then admitted during the next break that he got the file from the City and arranged to have it copied by AKON Copying Service and that he had said file until June 2000. It was not stolen, misplaced, nor had he absconded with it, it was given to him by the City Attorneys office!!!

As a protective measure for his counsel and co-defendants, Judge Jon Tigar had ruled that Barber would have to testify and answer al-Hakim’s charges of spoliation of evidence and subornation of perjurious testimony stemming from his handling of the City file if there was more than one case file. I had presented letters and video taped evidence that there was only one file that existed, and if there was ever more than one case file, they were ALL missing and that fact was attributed to CSAA’s attorneys by the Oakland City Attorney. Clearly, Mr. Barber now has to leave the seat as defense counsel and take the stand as a witness and defendant, something Tigar and his counsel dreaded! Keep in mind Tigar was represented by Barber in Tigar’s own recusal hearing that Tigar heard himself to determine if he should be allowed legally to sit in the case! No wonder what his ruling was! But there’s no conflict. This 14 year case was concluded the next week in the absence of plaintiff’s counsel, plaintiff’s primary witness, plaintiff’s expert, and myself while attending a funeral after the second death of an over 40 year friend during the trial, even though the leave of absence had been approved by Tigar a month earlier and I had notified the court five days before trial was to resume! Tigar, whom admitted during pretrial hearings that he had committed violations such as to merit a mistrial, did this after he had just taken a second one week “vacation” during trial and had dismissed the key witness Cook FROM THE WITNESS STAND to go on vacation and avoid any further testimony in an effort to ruin my case! But there in no bias or prejudice! I filed numerous complaints against Tigar, including one requesting that the proceedings be recorded for my protection against his repeated attempts at provocation and staging outburst of alleged contempt as even to this day I am fearful for my safety after his unrelenting display of deception and disdain using the Sheriff’s Department, Court Administration, Appeals Court and Judicial Council as his personal armed forces, investigative services and punitive legal enforcement agencies.

Cook and Barber’s admissions now corroborates the story that was told to me and my attorneys Mike Michel and Jeff Fackler in July 2000 by Oakland City Attorney’s Janie Wong and Anita Hong. However, since 1999 Janie Wong, Anita Hong and Russo have always maintained that the files were missing and were last requested for viewing by defendant Ron Cook. This statement is also perjurious and deceitful as we now know that the December 1, 2005 written statement by Oakland City Attorney John Russo about Anita Hong leaving the case files at the office counter and no one coming to review them is willfully and intentionally perjurious, deceitful and fraudulent.
As a direct and proximate result of their actions, they have caused me and my family to be forced from our $1 million plus home and office, foreclosed from two over $20 million law suits, and multi million business for 13 years thru the City Attorneys violation of the business and professional codes, extrinsic fraud, subornation of perjurious testimony, committing these acts under the color of law with unclean hands, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. I should remind you that they again did this with the “unwitting” aid of the same army of City Officials that Russo eagerly employs to rid the City of criminals like himself!
All the parties must now answer for their actions to destroy the litigation of my legal case; their committing, aiding and abetting this criminal activity; engaging in actions to coverup their unlawful acts; failing and refusing to provide the information sought by me, and further failing and refusing to appear under court ordered subpoena for deposition testimony twice and under court ordered subpoena for trial testimony. My feeling is also that they ALL should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
I have long ago exposed the corruption in the State Judicial System, tearing down the false public facade of honor the Judiciary want to extoll while they actually practice uncontrolled dishonor under the protection of your self-policed veil of secrecy.
This present civil conspiracy has brought into play County and Sate Agencies to further it’s continued investigation of me, while I have been surveilled for years and continues today with the compromising of many agents and informants covers due to their sloppiness. This effort was a major factor in my recent trials in the County and State Courts and was used to gather reconnaissance against me by Judges, Court Administration and the Judicial Council. This manifested itself as the supreme purveyor of the judicial corruption, perjury, bias, prejudice and ultimate cover-up of these crimes against me.
I have four complaints currently filed with the Alameda County Presiding Court Judge that have been being “investigated” for over three years without any response and the judges continue to rule from the bench. At least two of the complaints is being “investigated” by a judge, Richard Friedman, whom is an admitted liar and perjurer that committed fraud by fabricating court records for pay. He has admitted to illegal Ex-Parte communications in my case perviously while at the same time announced in court to be holding me to a higher legal standard than that of opposing counsel and certainly any in pro per litigant as he sanctioned me $1,000. He also happens to be neighbors that share a joint court room entryway and chambers with a judge he’s suppose to be “investigating”. No wonder the “investigation” has been three years and counting!
What happens when these judges are found, and it will happen, to have committed corruption, corrupt misconduct, gross miscarriages of justice, bias, prejudice, and perjury while serving yet they continued to serve while these crimes were being “investigated” making rulings that they legally and morally where unfit to have made? What happens to all the rulings that they made while under this cloud of veiled crime? What happens to all the parties unjustly tried and cases unjustly settled or disposed of? This fact alone will not only ruin the court system but ruin the eroded confidence of the public in the exposed truly unjust, dishonored judicial system we live today in the City of Oakland, Alameda County and the State of California.
My simple demand and concern for fighting obvious corruption problems creates a complex political and legal gridlock of civil conspiracy thru stonewalling and ignoring the concern on behalf of the very same officials that supposed stand for justice. You “stand for justice, just when it’s not us!”.
The Judicial bodies have refuse to do their constitutional duty to protect and defend the public from injustice and corruption, you do not have a choice, you must investigate and prosecute. Everyone can say I don’t like it, I’m personally against it, but you are legally bound to investigate and prosecute it! You are not endowed with the ability nor power to decide whether it’s politically or legally damaging to one of your friends or colleagues, and then ignore the constitutional obligations and ignore the complaint, it is an issue that must be resolved by the processes of which this is one.
You and all the responsible parties can no longer allow Russo the comfort of living in his own self-created, self-styled, bizarre world in which he can wallow in the same self-guilt and pity of his colleagues that they would want having also committed excesses and now feel aggrieved and victimized, and want to portray themselves, all of themselves, as co-victims in sympathy with their politically lame, corruption barred friend. Russo, whom recently held a press conference promoting Legalizing marijuana, published another Op-Ed in a national newspaper supporting marijuana usage, should put that pipe down, or pass it! Russo has exhibited some rather strange behavior with his recent citing for driving around the city with children in the car WITHOUT their seat belts buckled, and what kind of a guy gives an interviews in the “little girls room” to another guy with a camera? This is simply ridiculous! You all can not continue to blame the victim, al-Hakim, for exposing this injustice of civil conspiracy, corruption, extrinsic fraud, etc., while you express your dislike for him personally without ever having met him or known him! Your actions can not be grounded in any personal emotion or motivation and refuse to move the complaint forward due to any other factors besides justice, due process, civil and human rights, and the proper course of the laws and statutes we are all bound by. These rights can not be abridged nor will the statute of limitations be exceeded because of delays as Judges Tigar, Roesch, and others, with Russo whispers “we don’t like him, just ignore him and he’ll go away”. No, all the truth, facts, evidence, and testimony will still be waiting and you are all out of time.
It is not hard to believe that this checkered path has led all of you into this trouble and what’s most scary is that you all want to act as if you know nothing about this matter, though you all have been exposed to it in one form or another for quite some time. Although we only recently discovered new information that more clearly defines the parties roles and actions, those discoveries continues to happen weekly, and you can not refute the evidentiary connections.
It is very interesting how you all are trying to evade hallowed ground, the Constitution, the most hallowed ground in life, and with it, your responsibilities, domain, and significance in addressing this matter. While the laws and statutes of this City, County, Sate and Nation are so poorly and disparately enforced when its a Black victim whom has caught several White male of self-perceived class and privilege in white collar crime that has lasted 14 years and valued at over $20 million, it is possible that you all decided to REFUSE to acknowledge, recognize, or know about the case precisely because of it’s magnitude, impact, meaning and inevitable consequences on you all.
To continue to thumb your nose at these facts is a complete misinterpretation of the Constitution with a very different meaning from that which we the people have all grown to know and that also implies a crass tone deafness that is blinding in harkening back to slavery, or at best, the Jim Crow era in history.
The aforementioned Jayne Williams also worked with Russo and the City Attorney’s Office in the April 2008 injunction that would have banned plastic shopping bags from landfills against the Oakland City’s ordinance. Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch said that the city failed to conduct a full review of how the ban would affect the environment.
Judge Frank Roesch corruption has lead to his unjust enrichment as his ruling ignored his conflict of having an interest in a garbage company, said, “It is because of that evidence in the record and the unanimity of the uncertainty whether paper bags are less (or more) environmentally friendly than plastic bags that the city cannot assert that there is ‘no possibility’ of any significant environmental effect caused by the ban.”
 In a statement, Keith Christman, senior director of the American Chemistry Council’s plastics division, said, “They also take up more space in landfills.” “Banning plastic bags would dramatically increase energy use, double greenhouse gas emissions and increase waste. Recycling plastic bags is the right approach and makes plastic bags the environmentally responsible choice.” He said, “We encourage the city to help Oakland residents improve the recycling of plastic bags consistent with AB 2449, California’s state-wide recycling program,” and “Plastics are a valuable resource – too valuable to waste — and we believe effective implementation of the state’s recycling program is the best and fastest way to steward environmental resources and reduce litter by recycling these bags.”
Michael Mills, the attorney for the Coalition to Support Plastic Bag Recycling, said internal e-mails between Oakland officials last year indicate that they admit that compostable plastic bags aren’t any better for the environment than are regular plastic shopping Bags and he believes Oakland officials only approved the ordinance for “feel-good public relations spin.”
Law and Motion Judge Frank Roesch has raised the perception of judicial misconduct to a new all time low in official graft and carpet bagging corruption of buying and selling influence and the power of the gavel in the bowels of justice to secure illicit personal gains in politics and business.
Roesch is Chairman of the Board of Directors of Tri-City Economic Development Corporation, a local non-profit recycling company that has recently been awarded large contracts for garbage collections and recycling with the Cities of Hayward and Union City and received over $8.5 million dollars in funding supported through tax-exempt bonds that were approved by the California Pollution Control Financing Authority, chaired by state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, a Hayward resident.
Tri-City Economic Development Corporation, doing business as Tri-CED Community Recycling, a tax-exempt, nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation with no stockholders list it’s key officials as:

Frank Roesch, Board Chair

Richard Valle, President and CEO

Michael Mahoney, Secretary/Treasurer

33377 Western Avenue, Union City, California 94587
On Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at the City of Union City, City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting, at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at 34009 Alvarado Niles Road, Judge Frank Roesch performed the swearing in of Richard Valle. Councilmember Valle thanked his family and supporters for helping him to win re-election. Roesch also performed the swearing in of Councilmember Manny Fernandez.
On February 6, 2007, the City Council of Union City awarded Tri-City Economic Development Corporation, doing business as Tri-CED Community Recycling, a tax-exempt, nonprofit 501(c)(3) corporation with no stockholders that is allegedly in the business of collecting curbside wastes in the cities of Union City and Hayward, and provides community recycling, education, job training and economic development a $5,595,937 loan through the California Pollution Control Financing Authority Bond Financing Program and assistance from The Small Business Assistance Fund. The company has recently received over $8.5 million dollars in funding.
The City Council Authority received letters in support of the Project from Assemblymembers Mary Hayashi and Alberto O. Torrico and Senator Ellen M. Corbett. Months earlier leading up to the loan, Senator Ellen Corbett held a private closed door session with the Union City Council.
Recently filed December 2006 State of California statements of political fundraising and contributions of politicians reveal contributions to the campaigns of these politicians by “Caca” Roesch and company.
Roesch and TRI-CED used what can clearly be perceived as official and political graft with corrupt influence in securing the contract with the City of Hayward. In June 2006, Michael Sweeney was elected Mayor for the City of Hayward and had been appointed by the City of Hayward to the Board of Directors of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency in 2006. Mayor Sweeney was first elected to Hayward’s City Council in 1982, and previously served as Mayor from 1990 to 1994. He became a member of the state legislature representing the 18th Assembly District from 1994 to 1998. From 1999 to 2003, he served as Governor Gray Davis’ Undersecretary for the California Resources Agency. He assisted the Secretary in developing policy and overseeing a $5.2 billion budget and 31 departments, conservancies, boards and commissions. Sweeney worked as a consultant with TRI-CED were he assisted TRI-CED with the development of their e-waste program, community relations, contract negotiations, and obtaining the grant funding. The political connections are like a veritable Who’s Who in local/statewide politics with TRI-CED employing, among many others, the services of John Dutra, former Assemblymember, to give presentations. Something smells besides the garbage in the East Bay but rest assured there will not be a strike in cockroach’s land. If an African-American judge or politician had done this they would be Under jail!
Roesch has been charged in legal proceedings with, among others, exhibiting willful corrupt misconduct, hostility, bias and prejudice, is an unmitigating liar, crook, thief, racist, bigot, has unclean hands, and is incapable of the fair and proper administration of justice and has gone to extreme lengths to establish that fact as he finds truth inconvenient, evidence oppressive, law inapplicable, and justice intolerable!. He simply utters convenient lies that do not pass the applicable test of truth.
The Superior Court is essentially out of time with the delay tactic and I expect an answer to the complaint, not an attempt to avoid it. I know that you may not want to address this issue against your friends and colleagues, but you have no choice, you are the Presiding Court Judge, you have the job with the responsibility.
As I explained to Judge Rolefsen’s clerk Maggie Takeda, how does it sound to the legal community and look to the public when the Alameda County Presiding Court Judge lost a Criminal Corruption complaint (the dog ate it!) and therefore wants avoid investigating and ruling on his findings and requested the complaint be filed with the notorious Council on Judicial Performance without having read the complaint! Judge Rolefsen had before him as you do right now a complaint against the infamous Jon Tigar for the very same thing of ignoring a 750 page challenge for cause and admittedly denying it from the bench without reading it because “I just want to (get out of this case and) make a ruling”. The Appeals Court may not agree with my actions, but I’m going to rule on the Matter! I guess corruption in the county courts is truly “business as usual”! Judge Rolefsen asked that it be filed with the Council on Judicial Performance.
After speaking with Ms. Takeda on an occasion wherein she admitted the complaint was missing, even though I personally served her and observed as she took the complaint, placed it in your chambers and signed the receipt for service of it, I sent her an email that had the link to the complaint so that she could view and/or download the complaint for your use. There was also links to the audio CD that accompanies the complaint. She sent me a responding email and phone call acknowledging the receipt of the email, however she later called to assert that you would not respond to an email regardless of the nature and circumstances of the “lost” complaint. She wanted to know who the complaint was being filed against and again asked that it be filed with the Judicial Council. Judge Rolefsen’s dereliction is not even pitiable! What would happen it I lost a pleading that had been filed in your court and asked you to rule in my favor by default, even before and without considering it on summary judgment?
Given the circumstances, the nature of the allegations confronting these parties, the scandal it continues to cause, the crisis of confidence in the the Alameda County Superior Court Judicial system, the Alameda County District Attorney and Oakland city government, everyone knows how this particular issue might affect you. But the continued delay tactic, it’s related actions and conduct only places you in harms way as an accomplice in this civil conspiracy!
To not address the complaint, is not something that the Presiding Court Judge has a choice in. The complaint has been filed, you can not even consider NOT pursuing it! To NOT pursue the complaint is to engage in Civil Conspiracy, aid and abide the crimes committed and further the cover up of the crimes! You expose yourself to further investigation and civil liability!
You, as a guardian of the public trust, can not allow, nor can you afford, to attempt to hypocritically sit by silently while these parties remain at work continuing their crime spree! It’s time for them to face the music publicly, or face the music with them.
I am now in pursuit of the justice that has been delayed far too long, anxious and willing to prosecute and sue EVERYONE that partners with these parties to avoid investigation, prosecution and litigation. You chose which side of the answer you want to be on- the corruption side your bread is buttered on, or the prevailing truth with uncontested, uncontroverted, undeniable, irrefutable, proven evidence of documents, witnesses and testimony!
I met with City Administrator Dan Lindhiem on Monday, September 20, 2010 and he felt the matter should be submitted for further investigation the Corruption complaint.
I am still awaiting the Courts answer to the Complaints and I will give you two weeks from today to to provide a written response or status report with a time sensitive direction clearly stating your position, intention and plan of action to address these matters or I will know that you have chosen to be their criminal guardian. I am fine with whatever position you take, it’s nothing personal, but I implore you to respond to this matter as soon as possible. The evidence is clear, there is no need for more than a few hours of review. I have litigation that was to be filed in November 2010 the day of my being forcibly removed from the court house and threatened by District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s henchman Bob Connor. The D. A.’s office has compromised these suits and this issue also must be rectified ASAP.
As you are aware, this matter has been and will continue to be submitted to the United States Attorney General, Department of Justice, among others, for further investigation and prosecution.
Thank you and I welcome and look forward to your immediate response with the furthering of the litigation and resolution of this ongoing case.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim

Occupiers Redeem Kings Dream While Keith Carson and His Poverty Pimps are Killers of Kings Dream- Sell It Out


Unknownname

NOWTRUTH.ORG

Award for “Distinguished Marketing and Promotional Services” from NFL Super Bowl NFL Experience,
Founder of BLACK EXPO shown with Olympic Sprinter John Carlos , Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA Conference , Dellums for Mayor, Hip Hop’s Islamic Influence, 1979 National BALSA Conference, Oakland Police Officers Arrested for Computer Store Burglaries, Police Found Guilty in Burglaries, Police Officers Sentenced for Burglaries,


You can click on any highlighted word to view or download that item

FAX MEMO
ABDUL-JALIL al-HAKIM
7633 SUNKIST DRIVE, OAKLAND, CA 94605-3024 PH (510) 394-4501

TO: Supervisor Keith Carson FAX #: 510 271-5151
County of Alameda NO PAGES: 13
1221 Oak Street, Suite 536
Oakland CA 94612
cc: Congress woman Barbara Lee, Assemblyman Sandre Swanson
FROM: Abdul-Jalil al-Hakim
DATE: February 6, 2012
RE: Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley Forcibly Removing Me from Davidson Courthouse Building, Threatened with Arrest if Returned and Response to Formal Complaint Served and Filed June 7, 2010

Dear Supervisor Carson,

In 2011, I played phone tag with Rodney Brooks, the Chief of Staff of your office, for several months before we could just set a time for a meeting to discuss the very serious concerns mentioned above, as these Federal Civil Rights violations are not a joke to true African-Americans. I had also left many messages over the previous nine months dating back to June-July 2010 that I wanted to meet with you AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!

Clearly no one is that busy and this is after I spoke with Rodney about this matter in July 2010. It’s obvious you guys are running from the case as if you got caught in the fraud yourselves and to continue to do so as you cover up the crimes, are themselves greater crimes than the ones complained of! The matters and I are not going to magically disappear so let’s address them and move on.

I have expressed my fear for my safety after being verbally accosted; physically threatened; attempted to be baited, provoked and intimidated into a physical altercation; threatened with arrest, disallowed from going to Judge Leo Dorado’s courtroom; forcibly removed and escorted from the courthouse building; and ordered not to return by District Attorney Officer Bob Connor on November 22, 2010 at approximately 3:45 p.m I have litigation that was to be filed in November 2010 the day of my being forcibly removed from the court house and threatened with arrest if I returned by District Attorney henchman Bob Connor whom is very well known to me. The District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s office has compromised these suits and this issue also must be corrected ASAP. District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s abridging these inalienable, sacred rights are not a joke to African-Americans.

This apparently was on order from Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O’Malley and assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavy as I sat alone in the lobby of the D. A.‘s office for 30 minutes waiting to speak to Dunleavy on an update on the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on their office on June 7, 2010 stemming from criminal actions committed by John Russo and the City Attorney’s office resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991. After requesting a response to Formal Complaint Served and Filed June 7, 2010 and several conversations with the Alameda County District Attorney office, District Attorney Nancy O’Malley assigned the case to Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavy. After his review and several more conversations with me, Dunleavy decided to assign the case for investigation after he had been assigned this case in July 2010 when he told me months before that he had assigned it to another investigator.

The D. A.‘s lobby reception area is merely a very small space between the elevators and the bullet proof glass doors and windows that separate the public from the D. A. There are only a few chairs that line one side of the space and is not meant to accommodate more than 4-8 people. During the 30 minutes that I waited in the lobby, only 3 people from the general public came onto the floor from the elevators, yet 10-12 came to and from the D. A.’s office. Clearly I represented no threat to anyone, and I could have been assisted without any concern nor fear on anyone’s behalf. I’m sure that the lobby area is equipped with surveillance cameras and would verify my account of this incident.

For background, Rodney scheduled to meet me on January 14, 2011, at 3:30 p.m. at his choice of locations, Coffee with a Beat, 458 Perkins St, Oakland. I waited for an hour, but he never showed up nor did he call, not even after I called him from the coffee shop as I waited.

I spoke with Rodney on January 18, 2011 about this and he just gave an implausible excuse regarding a family member that we had already resolved before he set the date and time for the meeting. We then talked for 30 minutes regarding the need to address this very serious Federal matter ASAP! At that time we discussed the cases regarding District Attorney Nancy O’Malley’s Office, describe the on going actions on their part, including Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavey’s desire to prompt an obvious conflict with his actions, to avoid the responsibility to perform a fair and impartial investigation under any circumstances, to create an unsustainable jurisdictional issue to avoid the investigation, his very serious offense of my being Blacklisted and denying my Federal Civil Rights to enter the courthouse to file a lawsuit, being Blacklisted and denying my Federal Civil Rights to enter the courthouse as a public venue, as well as the City Attorney’s fraud.

We discussed the fact that after the encounter with Bob Connor and my ouster from the Courthouse that was ordered by Dunleavey, I spoke with District Attorney Matt Golde and Superior Court Judge Leo Dorado regarding my treatment and called O’Malley to voice my extreme concern wherein I received a return call from Dunleavy. Dunleavey expressed his concern for the fact that I knew Golde and Dorado, but not as if it would have made a difference in their decision or actions in having me threatened and removed from the courthouse. He laughed as he recanted stories about them playing on a basketball team together, never once exhibiting any remorse for his or O’Malleys’ actions. The recorded conversation with Dunleavy regarding the encounter with Connor and the investigation can be listened to and/or downloaded at: http://www.box.net/shared/x46rvjorhj.

We discussed Dunleavy’s second call to me stating the he would speak with the Department of Child Support Services attorney Valgeria Harvey that had to admit in court several times that they and the D. A.’s office had committed fraud, embezzlement, and theft against me and my family. When I refused to pay for the D. A.’s fraud, they attempted to extort the money from me by suspending my drivers license and revoking my passport! You can listen to D. A. Kevin Dunleavy voicemail as he tells me he is going to talk with V. Harvey of CSS http://www.box.net/shared/ma0fyvzkdc.

At the conclusion and throughout the conversation Rodney said that he would talk with Nancy O’Malley and get back to me.

Again on February 23, 2011, I spoke with Rodney for 25 minutes wherein he said that he had discussed the case with Assistant District Attorney Kevin Dunleavey, the same DA that had me forcibly removed from the Courthouse without notice, cause or legal grounds.

Rodney informed me that Dunleavey admitted he had me removed from the Courthouse without notice, cause or legal grounds and gave no reason nor legal grounds for doing so. Rodney further expressed through his “teeth clenched disdain” that the D.A. had concluded an investigation of the cases, found no wrong doing, and had sent me a letter of their findings and decision. I informed Rodney that Mike O’Connor, Senior Deputy District Attorney, had left me a voice mail message stating that, but in fact I have never received anything from them at all and asked him for a copy of this investigation report, and if he had read it. You can listen to D. A. Mike O’Connor voicemail stating he has ended the investigation at: http://www.box.net/shared/3oampngtby.

Rodney said that he had not seen the report and did not have a copy. I asked Rodney if he trusted the person whom ordered me removed from the courthouse to conduct a fair and impartial investigation of his employer, boss, co-workers, department, friends, allies and himself- he couldn’t answer, but he didn’t need to. I reiterated my request for a copy of the alleged “investigation report” from the D. A.’s office and that this matter be referred to the Justice Department and the Alameda County Grand Jury for investigation. Throughout the entire conversation Rodney was clearly discourteous to the point he was aggressively attempting to provoke a verbal response from me such that he could abruptly end the conversation. I merely acknowledged his attitude and stayed the course to ascertain that he would respond to my requests in writing and provide a copy of the alleged “investigation report” from the D. A.’s office. Needless to say I have received nothing from Rodney, and after his actions for the last year, it is not unexpected.

It is unfathomable that such a thing could happen right in your lobby and visitors reception area in today’s highly charged racial, political, and law enforcement versus community interactive environment, especially in Oakland and Alameda County where deadly force seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Given the history of the D. A.’s office, and in your short tenure, I should have expected it!

To allow the D. A.‘s office to handle me and my complaint in such a Gestapo fashion and to use Judge Leo Dorado as a ruse is unacceptable, needs to be investigated, the responsible parties held accountable and punished.

Clearly something must be done as I have waited for you to get back to me to move this process forward. There is no circumstance or law that can justify this use of force, intimidation, and threat of imprisonment under the guise and color of law!. I will not allow this continuing injustice to go on unnoticed and want to know what time is best for you since I want to meet as soon as possible!

The critically serious, incriminating, willful admissions in the conversations and interactions of Rondey and yourself with D. A.’s Connor, Dunleavey and O’Malley has made everyone witnesses to these actions of the D. A. and any non-action on the prosecution of these crimes will entrap YOU ALL in complicity in the commission of these crimes, in it’s corruption, conspiracy, fraud, obstruction of justice, false imprisonment, aiding and abetting the crimes mentioned, the attempted cover up of these crimes, and willful blindness, among others. It is settled law that the cover up of a crime is itself greater than the crimes themselves! Those stakes are raised exponentially when it concerns corruption on behalf of Judges, elected public officials, law enforcement and legal servants whom are embodied with protecting the public trust.

I have been waiting for the Supervisor’s Offices, Superior Court and the D. A.’s office to properly address this matter since June 2010 with the above results.

Now for you Keith!

In the more recent past when I discussed with you some of the more intricate aspects of these related cases, and the involvement of some of these parties, you referenced your “friendship” with them, which was closely followed by your allegiance and devotion to them, clearly establishing that our much longer “friendship” did not matter. If I were you, I would not confuse your political allies or working associates with friends! That’s not just fool hearty, but dangerous, as you begin to see yourself as “massa’ good ole House boy”. It has been apparent for years that you have served your political handlers and their special interests to the detriment of those that elected you.

Herein below in RED are quotes from you and your collection of Poverty Pimps- The Black Elected Officials and Clergy of the Eastbay and/or Black Elected Officials & Faith Based Leaders of the East Bay after the Mehserle verdict:
“Alameda County Supervisor Keith Carson is a member of the Black Elected Officials and Clergy of the East Bay. (The Black Elected Officials of the East Bay works to enhance the quantity and quality of Black elected representation through networking and relationship building. The organization consists of over 50 elected and appointed officials in Alameda and Contra Costa County and meets bi-monthly. Mission: To improving the quality of life for all African American communities ) The group issued an open letter to the community, urging calm after the verdict.

Carson said if Mehserle is not found guilty, the group will push for other legal action.
“We will go to the justice department,” Carson said. “We will go to our legislators, as people have done before us to address it.”

I come to you and asked that this case be placed before the Justice Department and Grand Jury, and I get more crime, cover up and corruption from you as I did from the perpetrators?

Again after the sentencing of Mehserle, you and your collection of “Poverty Pimps” held another Press Conference to advance your own political agenda and motives with the express purposes of gaining media exposure in form of photo ops and sound bites and issued this statement:

“The organizations and individuals listed below condemn today’s sentencing of former BART Officer Johannes Mehserle. The sentence of two years minus time served is far more lenient than would normally be handed down in similar cases not involving law enforcement defendants. Combined with an already lenient conviction for involuntary manslaughter, the slap on the wrist for the murder of Oscar Grant is a snapshot of everything wrong with the criminal justice system.”

“Were the roles reversed and a white police officer had been killed by an African American civilian, the chances are high that the defendant would be facing life in prison if not capital punishment. In this case, Mehserle could have faced only as many as 14 years in prison for an involuntary manslaughter conviction with a gun enhancement. Instead, he will spend as little as seven months in prison.”

“Police officers across the country shoot and kill an average of one person a day and people of color are an overrepresented proportion of the dead. These victims are often unarmed, yet the perpetrators are rarely prosecuted much less disciplined. Civil lawsuits brought by family members are occasionally successful, but because of the nature of law enforcement shootings, much of the evidence in such cases is collected by law enforcement and therefore suspect.”

“The undersigned call for greater transparency regarding police misconduct. This includes, among other things, greater access to previous complaints against officers and agency-wide information about shootings.”

“The undersigned call for genuine civilian oversight of law enforcement. Police must be accountable to the communities in which they work. Although BART is creating a civilian oversight board for its police force, like many other California police oversight structures, this new board will not have real power to take necessary action against officers.”

“Finally, the undersigned urge the Justice Department, which is already looking into the matter of Oscar Grant’s killing, to take action and prosecute Mehserle since the state proceeding has lacked the due process and thoroughness necessary to reach a just outcome.”

“These actions are necessary if California is to have safer, healthier communities, and if shootings like Oscar Grant’s are to be prevented in the future.”

The Black Elected Officials and Faith Based Leaders
The California Branch of the NAACP
The Oakland Branch of the NAACP
The Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights, San Francisco Chapter
Black Women Organized for Political Action, California Chapter
Minister Keith Muhammad, Nation of Islam
Rabbi David Copper of the Kehilla Community Synagogue

Here’s a dose of reality in Purple of a small sampling of the response to your Press Conference and “Condemnation Statement”:

Your preemptive denouncements of potential disruption in the wake of the verdict in the Mehserle trial have displayed your true colors. It’s no coincidence that you speak the language of the police; you have the same interests. You are aware that any disruption of the functioning of the city of Oakland will destabilize your positions of power.

Many of you have attempted to exacerbate racial divisions in our community, to pit white “outsiders” against black and brown youth. Your attempts will fail, just as they failed in January of 2009. We support those white radicals who fight alongside us in the streets. Police violence is a threat to us all, it is only because we are divided along these racial lines, the same racial lines many of you seek to fortify, that we can continue to be victims.

It is unsettling the way some of you have used the police murder of Oscar Grant as a springboard for your careers, as a talking point used to get more people to your sermon or to gain a promotion at your non-profit job.

Clergy, Non-Profit Executives, and Elected Officials: you are just another part of the power structure, the structure that can only be upheld by the violence of the police. You have no interest in changing the system, only in changing its color: a darker shade of American political corruption.

Financially advantaged people in positions of power have no place issuing decrees to working class people. When you say that this is “your community” it is clear that this statement comes from a position of ownership rather than from a perspective of collective residence and participation.

You are the same people who told Robert F Williams that God would stop the Klan, the same people who advised the Panthers to turn the other cheek, the same people who tell the survivors of police violence to get on our knees and pray. We have already spent too much time on our knees. We will live a dignified life, we will tell future generations that we refused to submit and follow the orders of the police. We’ve had enough of masters.

The streets do not belong to you. Keep your phony resistance for the press conferences, save your preaching for Sunday. Your attempts at dividing the younger generation are falling apart.

Your gods can not save you.

We intend to stand together.

Keith, you condemn the conviction and sentencing for it’s leniency as a slap on the wrist for the murder of Oscar Grant is a snapshot of everything wrong with the criminal justice system.” Yet you try to aid and abide the criminal activity for which you have now become a witness to? You have taken a front row seat in that snapshot of everything wrong with the criminal justice system!

You talk about the consequences if the roles were reversed and a white police officer had been killed by an African American civilian, the chances are high that the defendant would be facing life in prison if not capital punishment. Yet you take the same approach when defending the actions of your “friends” as if the lives they have taken from me and my family for 14 years to be forced from our $1 million plus home and office, foreclosed from an over $20 million law suit, and multi million business for 14 years thru the City Attorneys violation of the business and professional codes, extrinsic fraud, subornation of perjurious testimony, committing these acts under the color of law with unclean hands, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. He did this with the aid of this same army of City Officials!

You state that “Police officers across the country shoot and kill an average of one person a day and people of color are an over represented proportion of the dead. These victims are often unarmed, the perpetrators are rarely prosecuted, civil lawsuits are occasionally successful, but because of the nature of law enforcement shootings, much of the evidence in such cases is collected by law enforcement and therefore suspect.” That being the facts, why would you cover up the criminal actions of your “friends”? I told you that I am fearful for my safety after being verbally accosted; physically threatened; attempted to be baited, provoked and intimidated into a physical altercation; threatened with arrest, disallowed from going to Judge Leo Dorado’s courtroom; forcibly removed and escorted from the courthouse building; and ordered not to return by District Attorney Officer Bob Connor on November 22, 2010. I am familiar with officer Bob Connor from my previous interaction with him during my Oakland Police Burglary case. It is documented that he is not someone I trust or would interact with in any manner. He clearly tried to put me in harms way where I could/would have been killed in the line of duty! I made it clear then that I never intended to speak to or have any contact with him ever again in life. He has shown me he will kill or arrange it! Connor is an investigator for the D. A.’s office, was the investigator on the Oscar Grant case and was the featured witness FOR THE DEFENSE, even though he worked for the prosecution! He’s not suspect, he’s confirmed, and you can have blood on your hands as you continue to coverup Keith!

You ask for greater transparency regarding police misconduct that includes, among other things, greater access to previous complaints, agency-wide information, for genuine civilian oversight of law enforcement, and being accountable to the communities in which they work. Yet you coverup your friends criminal activities! Does the need for transparency extend to you and your friends being transparent and revealing your actions in this case? Has anything been done to those whom have partaken in these acts of misconduct? What has the investigation revealed regarding previous complaints and is there any agency-wide information that would detail more activity even that of others? Can the Grand Jury and Justice Department provide some modicum of oversight in the absence of the public since you refuse to do so? Does the need for t accountability extend to you and your friends and when are you to held accountable?

You request the Justice Department take action and prosecute since the state proceeding has lacked the due process and thoroughness necessary to reach a just outcome and that these actions are necessary if California is to have safer, healthier communities, and if shootings like Oscar Grant’s are to be prevented in the future. I agree, but when I made the same request, you ran the other with your “friends” and have attempted to cover up their criminal activities!

Also after the verdict in the Oscar Grant case, you were up front and center with your collection of Poverty Pimps- The Black Elected Officials and Clergy of the Eastbay and/or Black Elected Officials & Faith Based Leaders of the East Bay when you said in their “An Open Letter to the Community:

“This case has struck a nerve in Oakland and around the world. In anticipation of the verdict the Black Elected Officials and Clergy of the Eastbay wanted to share some information with our community.”

“Representatives of our organization have been monitoring this case since Oscar Grant was senselessly murdered by Johannes Mehserle on January 1, 2009. We demanded that a reluctant District Attorney file criminal proceedings against Mehserle; we helped to organize community pressure on BART to bring about organizational change and implementation of polices and procedures to ensure that a tragedy like this never happens again; we have attended all of the court proceedings; and most importantly we have demanded justice for Oscar Grant, his family and everyone that Oscar represents — because we all could be Oscar Grant.”

“A community needs to know that its leadership will stand to protect their interests. While we are hopeful that our Justice System will be just; we are mindful of incidences where it has failed us. When the system failed us in the Rodney King case, the Justice Department stepped in to ensure that the Community’s interests were protected. We, the Black Elected Officials and Clergy of the Eastbay, stand prepared to call upon all State and Federal agencies to seek any and all recourse if an unjust verdict is rendered in this case.”

We know that emotions may run high depending on the outcome of Johannes Mehserle’s criminal proceedings. The current State Court proceedings are just one step on the road to justice for Oscar Grant. As such, we are asking that you work with us to shut down anyone who would engage in destructive behavior in our community. We are also asking that you work with us as we continue to demand justice for Oscar. We have been assured that the Justice Department is monitoring the Mehserle case.

Martin Luther King said that peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice. In the same vein as Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Rodney King, and many others we will receive JUSTICE FOR OSCAR GRANT.”

The struggle continues,

Hon. Desley Brooks
Hon. Keith Carson
Minister Keith Muhammad
Rev. Dr. Harold R. Mayberry
Rev. Zachary Carey
Hon. Darleen Brooks
Hon. Kathy Neal
Hon. Marlon McWilson
Bishop Keith Clark
Rev. Dr. Kevin Barnes
Hon. Darryl Moore
Hon. Alice Spearman
Partial listing

Here’s a dose of reality in a small sampling of the response to your “Open Letter”:

Black elected officials in the Democratic Party machine are as dependent on the white supremacy power structure as the police are! They’ll never challenge it structurally. They need to perpetuate it so they can continue to pose themselves as “leaders” to the poverty-stricken communities they claim to represent and whose votes they need to stay in power, while in fact they are making bank selling out to San Francisco developers—selling out whole communities, allowing them to deteriorate and disintegrate into crime ridden cesspools so that when their true constituents, the landgrabbing developers decide the time is right to gentrify these areas, the property values will be as cheap as possible, and then they can just use their cops to sweep the Black and poor communities aside. That’s the real agenda of these Black politicians. They know what they are doing, and they are well compensated for their work. Boots Riley got it right in “Fat Cats and Bigga Fish” by Oakland’s own The Coup.

Need an example? Look at the selective enforcement of city “quality of life” ordinances going on right now in North Oakland (west of Telegraph, south of Stanford, north of 40th, east of the Emeryville border). Black and poor people are being harassed out of their historic neighborhoods by zoning and “quality of life” code enforcement officers, for such “infractions” as having a car, registered as “non-op”, on their property. But just go about blocks east, to the trendy, yuppified “Temescal” district north of Telegraph, all the way up into Rockridge, and tell me how many cars you see in backyards, front yards, etc. These affluent mostly white areas are not being harassed by the city code enforcement for the same “infractions”. This is in an area where Black families—former middle class homeowners—have been hardest hit by foreclosures resulting from the premeditated land grab of the sub-prime mortgage industry’s collapse in 2008!

And presiding over this race- and class-based selective enforcement is the Black-led “Rainbow of Diversity” Oakland Democratic Party establishment!

So just shut up already with your “simmer down” talk. Social injustices you keep in motion and profit from have the people righteously riled up! You are responding to the wrong emergency. The real emergency is the social and economic conditions in the Black and poverty-stricken communities of Oakland.

You wanna us to “simmer down”? Do something about these social conditions. Get us some quality education and some real economic development. Some REAL JOBS, DECENT HOUSING, HEALTHCARE, SCHOOLS THAT TEACH KIDS THEY ARE SOMEBODY AND THAT ARE FUNDED ON AN EQUAL LEVEL WITH SCHOOLS IN ROCKRIDGE, MONTCLAIR AND PIEDMONT. Economic security is the best deterrent to crime and drug dealing! Give us community control of police. Require all OPD officers to live in Oakland and be demographically reflective of the communities they ostensibly “serve and protect”, not some old rednecks from Tracy who consider us to be animals. That would be a start in the right direction. Until you start doing these kinds of things, the people are gonna see y’all for the sell-outs you are.

The largely Black neighborhoods in Oakland see this open letter for what it really is– another reminder that the elected officials and many of the Oakland clergy want to keep this population down for their own political gain; “Listen to us, vote for us”. What have they done for you? Violence and poverty are at an all time high, and access to a good public education is pretty much non-existent in East and West Oakland. If they really cared about these folks, they would be helping them fight the gangs and drug dealers to get their neighborhoods back and demanding a better education system. Instead it’s give them liquor stores and Cannabis establishments. What a shame. All of Oakland has the potential to be a great city, not just the preferred areas.

I want reform too– but giving license to rioters to turn Oakland into the twilight zone is the same as handing even more power to the same cops you say you don’t like. It’s really handing over even more of your freedom, not “providing cover.” What’s so hot about that?

I think the Black clergy, and Minister Keith Muhammad in particular, should have thought twice before they decided to aid and abet the city and the cops in their Open Letter. Demonizing Black youth and the community at large in this way is counterproductive.

These community leaders deserve much credit for all the countless hours of work they have put in fighting for justice since Jan. 1, 2009, but this prediction of and warning against a coming “destruction in the community” only plays into the hands of the power structure that killed Oscar.

Knowingly or unwittingly, the Black clergy are providing cover for the riot cops and other pigs who will retaliate and intensify their brutalities against Black youth all over Oakland after the verdict is announced.

In their Open Letter, Black community leaders are endorsing the actions of the police in advance, giving them permission to conduct the onslaught they’ve been planning.*

In your “Open Letter to the Community” you state that the Oscar Grant case has struck a nerve in Oakland and around the world where our own Nowtruth.org has accumulated over 80,000 signed petitions asking for the criminal actions of the complaint filed with your office to be investigated. Is that not national enough for you or do you prefer to cover up for your “friends”?

You and the Representatives of your organizations have been aware of this case since 2005, if not earlier. We have demanded and ask that you demand that a reluctant District Attorney file criminal proceedings against all parties named in the formal 200 page Corruption, Extrinsic Fraud, Criminal Misconduct, Ethics and “Whistle-Blower” Complaint complete with audio CD filed and served on their office on June 7, 2010 stemming from criminal actions committed by John Russo and the City Attorney’s office resulting from the sewer main collapse alongside my home in 1991 and the District Attorney with the Department of Child Support Services that has admitted in court several times that they and the District Attorney’s office had committed fraud, embezzlement, and theft against me and my family. This is a prime opportunity to organize the community to put pressure on law enforcement and the Judicial system, to fight for organizational change and implementation of polices and procedures to ensure that a Federal Civil Rights tragedy like this never happens again.

You should be in the forefront demanding the court proceedings; and most importantly, have demanded justice for my family as for Oscar Grant, his family and everyone that Oscar represents — because we all could be Oscar Grant. WE ARE AND HAVE BEEN OSCAR GRANT BEFORE HE WAS MURDERED! Will you continue the cover up and have our blood on your hands Keith?

You say that the community needs to know that its leadership will stand to protect their interests though hopeful that our Justice System will be just; we are mindful of incidences where it has failed us. When the system failed us in the Rodney King case, the Justice Department stepped in to ensure that the Community’s interests were protected. You said that you stand prepared to call upon all State and Federal agencies to seek any and all recourse if an unjust verdict is rendered in this case. Have you forgotten that this is just what I asked of you, yet you continue the cover up? What justice do you REALLY stand for and whose interests are you REALLY protecting? In fact, haven’t you been aiding the State and Federal agencies efforts to undermine this case, silence my efforts and entrap me in your crime?

You state that you know that emotions may run high depending on the outcome of Johannes Mehserle’s criminal proceedings and you are asking that people work with you to shut down anyone who would engage in destructive behavior in our community and ask that they work with you as we continue to demand justice for Oscar. You have been assured that the Justice Department is monitoring the Mehserle case. From the response of the people, they feel that you are asking them to use force or snitch on anyone that they might consider to be engaging in destructive behavior as if that is demanding justice for Oscar. The people saw through that facade and clearly identified you ALL as the self proclaimed, false prophets of the people- a sad collection of Poverty Pimps that mutually share in the few trinkets that Massa’ gives to you to divide among the house Niggas!

Martin Luther King said that peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice. In the same vein as Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, Rodney King, and many others we will receive JUSTICE FOR OSCAR GRANT.

You have become a complete insult to the Civil Rights Movement and even an advocate and agent provocateur of the same elements that denied, took the life and legacy of the great Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.!

You have become that same “COON” that King so despised and warned of that could not be trusted under any circumstances and would destroy any movement for the advancement of the People to the profit of his handlers for his own advancement. You have killed EVERYTHING that the great man stood, lived and died for as if you shot him yourself.

Please respond with a time ASAP and I will accommodate that time.

Thank you and I welcome and look forward to your immediate response with the furthering of the litigation and resolution of these ongoing cases.

Respectfully,

Abdul-Jalil

  • Calendar of Posts

    December 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « May    
    1234567
    891011121314
    15161718192021
    22232425262728
    293031  
  • Purchase SUPERSTAR MANAGEMENT Lecture Series

    Lecture Series Purchase Prices
    Lecture Series Discount Offer $50.00 USD Lecture Series CD Special $99.00 USD Lecture Series DVD Special $149.00 USD Lecture Series CD Standard Discount $199.00 USD Lecture Series DVD Standard Discount $399.00 USD Lecture Series CD Standard $450.00 USD Lecture Series DVD Standard $750.00 USD
  • RSS Abdul-Jalil Lecture Series

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • 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 3 other followers

  • SUPERSTARMANAGEMENT’S iTUNES Podcast’s

  • ABC-TV Breaking News

    [clearspring_widget title="abc7news.com: news, weather & video" wid="4921ce44d2cc0f1e" pid="4a4c63c6d26c3e46" width="304" height="254" domain="widgets.clearspring.com"]
  • Now Truth! Twitter Roll

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.