THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION Civil Action No. 5:11-CV-352-H
|
DONNA PILCH, Plaintiff v. LORRIN FREEMAN, Defendant. |
|
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO ADD A DEFENDANT (NC Supreme Court Chief Justice Parker) Feb. R. Civ. P. 19 and 20 |
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Per North Carolina General Statute §7A-34, Supreme Court Chief Justice Sarah Parker has authority to prescribe rules of practice in state district and superior courts, and can therefore ORDER correction of the following constitutional violations occurring in the Wake County District and Superior Courts:
- Lack of probable cause hearing for adult defendants as mandated by NCGS§15A-606.
- Lack of court form to enforce probable cause hearing in district court for adult defendants as mandated by NCGS§15A-606.
- ACIS court computer system doesn’t contain a field to allow for probable cause hearings.
- Lack of control over ACIS computer system which allows court clerks to unlawfully change case status from disposed to pending, set a new court date and order unlawful excessive bail.
- ACIS computer system doesn’t differentiate between court dates and jury trials, and defendants and their attorneys aren’t notified of either, which is a fundamental obstruction of justice and violation of the 14th amendment right to due process.
- Unlawful court documents in use in the Wake County Court (Motion to continue in district court, and Transfer and appeal documents) deny defendants’ their right to due process under the law, contradict the way the court system is supposed to work, and allow judges (Stephens, Brewer and Ruth) and court clerks to continue cases without probable cause and without defendants’ knowledge.
- Wake DA’s office schedules jury trials for defendants without probable cause hearings, and without certificate of service, denying due process rights under the 14th amendment.
- All of the errors documented herein violate state and federal laws and constitutions.
II. JURISDICTION
Plaintiff invokes jurisdiction of this Court per Title 42, section §1983. Per Monroe v. Pape (1961), §1983 does not require victims of unconstitutional state action to exhaust state remedies that might be available to them before bringing suit under §1983.
Indeed, it would be futile to bring these claims to state court when the Wake County Court, N.C. Court of Appeals, the N.C. Supreme Court, the North Carolina State Bar, Administrative Office of the Courts and Attorney General Roy Cooper never noticed or rectified the harm caused by failing to enforce defendants’ right to probable cause hearing as mandated by NCGS§15A-606 or the constitutional defects in the ACIS court computer system.
Wake Court Judges Stephens, Brewer, Ruth, Clerk Freeman, Attorney General Roy Cooper and N.C. State Bar Katherine Jean filed motions to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims which contain indisputable proof of egregious, horrific and continued constitutional violations which impact a class of hundreds similarly situated to Plaintiff and potentially every person who has ever been a defendant in the state of North Carolina
Instead of performing their duties to honor the United States Constitution and correct the constitutional violations documented herein, these color of law actors knowingly and willfully continue to act as a corrupt enterprise by attempting to dismiss and conceal the crime instead of correcting it.
Chief Justice Parker is authorized to provide solutions, but has not responded to Pilch’s urgent letter to her which was delivered by UPS on November 1, 2011. Hence, this filing.
CLAIM OF HARM
Over three years of personal, professional and economic injury meticulously documented in Plaintiff’s motions previously filed. Harm is also caused to a class of others who ever were, are or will be similarly situated and potentially every person who has ever been a defendant in the state of North Carolina.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that U.S. district courts are vested with extensive equitable powers to fashion appropriate remedies to redress unlawful conduct. For example, in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenberg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1971) the Supreme Court stated, “Once a right and a violation have been shown, the scope of a district court’s equitable powers to remedy past wrongs is broad, for breadth and flexibility are inherent in equitable remedies.”
Moreover, the Supreme Court has pointedly ruled that where “the public interest is involved…those equitable powers assume an even broader and more flexible character than only when a private controversy is at stake.”
The North Carolina Court System’s purported purpose is to administer justice, but it often does not because it denies defendants due process. The N.C. Court System is an enterprise which consists of the Wake County Court, the N.C. Court of Appeals, the N.C. Supreme Court, the N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts and the North Carolina State Bar. The individuals working in the enterprise include color of law actors who continue to support the obstruction of justice throughout the state court system which, most significantly, includes failure to provide probable cause hearings for all defendants as mandated by NCGS§15A-606.
In the case of United States v. Church, 955 F.2d 688, 698-99 (11th Cir.), 506 U.S. 881 (1992) the court held that the evidence established the enterprise comprised of an association of individuals where the enterprise was devoted to making money from repeated criminal activity and protecting that money by any means necessary. This describes the North Carolina Court system.
The Wake County Court, run by Superior Court Judge in Residence Donald Stephens per NCGS§7A-105 generates unlawful revenue from repeated criminal activity which includes allowing court clerks to change case status from disposed to pending, setting new unlawful court dates and charging unlawful excessive bail for defendants who miss the court dates; and charging defendants for other people’s offenses and with costs in excess of what is prescribed by law. Superior Court Clerk Lorrin Freeman has no recordkeeping system in place per NCGS§7A-103 to prevent and curb the crime and she allows the financial crime to continue instead of seeking assistance from the state auditor. Wake Court Judge Ruth keeps defendants in court unlawfully with a fake Motion to Continue Court document. Judge Brewer convicts innocent defendants using evidence of SBI crime. Superior Court Judge in Residence Donald Stephens then denies relief, covering up the crime.
North Carolina State Bar’s Chief Counsel Katherine Jean then dismisses complaints about the Wake Court crime, even though it is the duty of the State Bar to facilitate the administration of justice and promote reform in the law.
T he state auditor’s 2011 performance audit of the Administrative Office of the Courts revealed over $100 million in mismanaged funds, which the AOC defended, instead of attempting to correct.
Therefore, this Court should consider action under U.S.C. §1964, which authorizes U.S. district courts to impose intrusive structural reforms including, but not limited to divestiture, dissolution or reorganization of any enterprise, reasonable restrictions on the future activities of any person, and prohibiting any person from engaging in the same type of endeavor as the enterprise engaged in.
- Examples of court correction performed in other countries includes mandatory rotation of judges and court clerks and forensic audits.
- Plaintiff requests this Court to ORDER Governor Perdue to establish a fund to provide financial relief to Plaintiff and the class of others who were, are and will be similarly situated in accordance with North Carolina General Statute §1D-15.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________
Donna Pilch, Pro se
This is the 23rd day of November, 2011.
