On February 20, 2019 we wrote Justice Elena Kagan stating: “The state case, Hempfling v. CVDC Holdings LLC et.al. S-1100-CV-201102200 was blocked in March of 2014 without a rule 62 stay proceeding. Trial in federal court in Phoenix and subsequently in the 9th Circuit retrial proved beyond any doubt that the case had never been released. No final order had ever been issued due to that illegal hold. The state court prohibited filing anything to complain about it.
As the federal case trying to stop that hold was filed in U.S. Mail (Hempfling et al v. Voyles et al 2:16-cv-03213) it was STOLEN and redirected to an international distribution center. Mail was stolen a minimum of 2 more times during the retrial (Lee Hempfling, et al v. Kent Volkmer, et al 0:17-cv-16329). Mail was stolen two more times after the retrial and after the appeal mandate, which likewise has never been released. Nothing has been released. The 9th Circuit is well aware of these events as they managed to acquire the stolen filings.”
For details about each completed and prohibited release case see http://stolenjustice.us
The topic of this issue has changed now that we have discovered what has really happened in the Department of Justice. No investigations were ever performed, for any case. Someone’s intent mission of obstructing justice by censoring and hiding the 9th Circuit Court’s publications extended past the crimes of censorship and mail theft inside the trial. No required charging decisions seem to have been generated. Every issue of crime committed inside state and federal courts has been concealed and suppressed by bad actors within the FBI and/or the DOJ under the false pretenses of parallel criminal proceedings but in reality simply ignored away. Three complete efforts to keep the Judicial Branch in chains.
There is no possibility in reality that Court Clerks and/or Judges would not have reported crimes inside their own court trials to the FBI or Postal Inspectors or the DOJ. Judges do not commit misprision. Judges do not commit crimes to cover the crimes of those attacking them.
In May of this year we told Attorney General Garland (attached), “The Department of Justice has repeatedly, on purpose, with intent to defraud both US Court districts and appeals courts, as well as defraud and destroy Constitutional rights of all Plaintiffs involved in all of these civil cases, illegally hid the existence of criminal activity, protected the identification of accused criminals and criminally withheld publication of Hempfling v LM Communications et.al., 4th circuit; Hempfling v CVDC Holdings LLC et.al. Pinal County Superior Court and Hempfling v Volkmer et.al. in the Ninth circuit. The DOJ has repeatedly demonstrated a concerted intent to deprive due process, equal protection from the Plaintiffs in these civil cases and is now faced with a critical moment:
Existing law violations pending charges from Phoenix District Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals can still be filed or rejected. Either way will do. The problem has not been what the decision is about individual criminal charges, it has been that no such effort has ever taken place or if it has, no court has ever been told officially to stop withholding final orders and opinions of these cases. It is up to you to investigate whether your staff has violated law for years with this customary refusal to prosecute friends.”
In May of this year we told Attorney General Garland (attached), “The Department of Justice has repeatedly, on purpose, with intent to defraud both US Court districts and appeals courts, as well as defraud and destroy Constitutional rights of all Plaintiffs involved in all of these civil cases, illegally hid the existence of criminal activity, protected the identification of accused criminals and criminally withheld publication of Hempfling v LM Communications et.al., 4th circuit; Hempfling v CVDC Holdings LLC et.al. Pinal County Superior Court and Hempfling v Volkmer et.al. in the Ninth circuit. The DOJ has repeatedly demonstrated a concerted intent to deprive due process, equal protection from the Plaintiffs in these civil cases and is now faced with a critical moment:That letter was an official complaint against the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility regarding refusal to follow the Freedom of Information Act and for depriving our rights and that of the U.S. Courts in misprision. No response has been forthcoming from General Garland and that is sad, we held higher respect than that.
It is not coincidental that during the period of state sponsored censorship and U.S. mail theft, and now the known concealment of crimes by the DOJ: Pinal County Attorney Kent Volkmer and Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich (both defendants in Hempfling v Volkmer) were up for re-election. Brnovich’s wife Susan Brnovich was up for appointment to a federal judge’s position (appointed by President Trump.) Brnovoch’s Chief of Staff Michael G. Bailey’s wife, Cynthia Bailey, was under consideration for a state appeals court bench appointment. She received that appointment from Doug Ducey and is now seeking a seat on the State Supreme Court.
Since then the two Arizona assistant Attorneys General who conducted the ninth circuit cases for the state have been severed from employment. The one person with authority to oversee those crimes and was supervisor of those attorneys, Michael G. Bailey, was appointed as U.S. Attorney for Arizona by President Trump (the exact position in place to hide the rest of the infractions and cover up the entire concerted attack upon the 9th Circuit Appeals Court and the Phoenix District Court.) The Pinal County Court Clerk was forced to resign in disgrace. County Attorney Kent Volkmer and Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich are still in office, even after re-election.
This issue involves crimes committed against The United States Judicial Branch and us, as plaintiffs in the civil actions that have been subjected to a massive obstruction of even so much as the concept of due process; in what appears to be a concerted and systemic method of dealing with self-represented plaintiffs in civil trials. General Garland was not Attorney General during these criminal acts but is Attorney General during the continued cover up.
On June 25, 2021 we received the attached response letter from the DOJ Office of Inspector General. That office has been in possession of a complaint filed against former U.S. Attorney Michael G. Bailey that has nothing at all to do with the FOIA request it professes to respond to. The FOIA request was sent to the DOJ FOIA Office as the instructions require. That office, instead of sending the request to the appropriate charging office as required (U.S. Attorney South Carolina , U.S. Attorney Arizona, etc.) sent it to the DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility who in turn, sent it to the OIG. The OIG response stated:
“This responds to your Freedom of Information Act request to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). The OPR routed your request to the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Specifically, you are seeking “all charging decision documents” regarding your complaint made to the OIG. After a thorough search, please be advised that no responsive documents were located in the OIG. We consider this response as closing your request with the OIG.”
The original January 5, 2021 FOIA request (attached) was for charging documents only related to crimes committed during and after, regarding the civil cases listed in the request. Not the OIG’s handling of the complaint filed with it. The OIG is not mentioned in the request.
It took 67 days (more than three times the legal time requirement and only after the FOIA was added to the complaint filed with Attorney General Garland) to respond to the FOIA only to find that it was sent to the wrong office, forwarded to the wrong office and responded to from a non-existent request thereby ignoring the actual FOIA request for charging documents. A tactic much like that used to commit misprision regarding serious attacks upon the Judicial Branch in both the Fourth and Ninth Circuits.
Either the DOJ purposely conspired to hide those documents by misdirecting the request (we have to give 70% chance of that being true based on prior behavior) or the DOJ is looking into the criminal misprision-obstruction complaint (which we can only attribute maybe 30% at the most to its being real) and all they did was just admit no investigations were ever conducted and no charging decisions were ever made.
Either way they have violated the FOIA law. Asking for an appeal is a complete waste of time as the DOJ has demonstrated again and again it cannot be trusted to follow the law when it applies to their own misconduct. This entire FOIA fiasco demonstrates the total lack of good faith presented by the Department of Justice.
On March 8, 2021 we wrote (attached) to Jeffrey R. Ragsdale Director and Chief Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility, referencing a March 1 letter addressed to Director Chief Counsel Office of Professional Responsibility. That letter addressed “A Whistle-blower complaint* filed with the Office of the Inspector General 9/25/20” it had nothing to do with FOIA. The DOJ has conveniently combined, misconstrued and muddled the difference in their rather wide scope of tucking crimes under rugs.
After having watched the misdirection of the original FOIA request and then complaining about its being ignored, the OIG responded in a completely twisted and purposeful diversion. But giving that 30% the benefit of the doubt, what looks like intended chicanery may be an inability to discuss on-going investigations and a hint that no criminal investigations were ever done. That 30% supports the potential the OIG is not now violating the law but DOJ employees violated misprision of felonies and outright obstruction under the color of law. But they did not invoke Exemption 7(A), a provision of FOIA that allows them to withhold information in ongoing matters. That alone should ruin the erroneous 30% benefit of the doubt.
What started out in district courts as mail theft (USPS) to disrupt and interfere in judicial proceedings and obstruct justice of defendants in civil trial: grew a second leg in state sponsored (involving the State of Arizona), state actor censorship (Google) of the Judicial Branch DURING and after TRIAL. Then in a dark triad of deception, buried those crimes to make sure no bad actor would ever face justice. Someone did remove the censorship order to Google as it stopped being censored long after the case ended. What the DOJ does with its own discipline issues is not our concern, but their continuing to prohibit publication of the civil cases has no excuse.
Attorney General Garland will undoubtedly, like the rest of the Department of Justice, continue to ignore the complaint or even misdirect it and we will, after an appropriate amount of time for mitigation, be filing directly to the Supreme Court Circuit Justice for each circuit as the issue involves a state attacking the judiciary and us through state actors; spans two circuits and districts, all being victims of criminal acts against them, and it appears to be no other Judges or district courts could be addressed: as the class of District and Circuit Courts have a vested and paramount interest in protecting the integrity of their respective circuit courts and would be instantly challenged on appeal for that bias.
This can only be addressed by the appropriate Supreme Court Circuit Justices.
The Judicial Branch has been breached. It should infuriate every person in this country.
{This piece appears as the head of the Justice Stolen Category Page and as its own page.}