Mr. President Obama, Mariano-Florentino Cuellar was working in the White House for you in 2010 when you appointed Mr. Cuellar’s wife, Lucy Koh, to the federal bench. President Obama, did you knowingly appoint Judge Lucy Koh to the federal bench in order to conceal the crimes committed by Palo Alto Police Chief Dennis Burns and his subordinate officers?
Federal Judge Lucy Koh overturned California Superior Court Judge Thang Barrett’s decision in my case stating that it is lawful for police officers to violate the Constitution during vehicle stops.
President Barack Obama, since you appointed Judge Koh to the bench, I was wondering if you agree with her legal rational and interpretation of the Constitution regarding vehicle stops.
ONE: For clarity, do you believe that it is constitutionally legal for Police Officers to violate the Constitution so long as they do so during vehicle stops as Judge Koh has concluded?
Additionally, Judge Koh ruled that Police Officers can knowingly use falsified videos and other evidence in order to incriminate a citizen of a crime simply if the citizen is not capable of obtaining expert testimony.
Even after exposing Judge Koh’s unlawful Acts, she continued to refuse to vacate her bogus rulings and recuse herself from the case: FILED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
TWO: Do you agree with Judge Koh that Police Officers can use falsified videos in order to incriminate a citizen with a crime because the citizen does not possess the financial resources to pay an expert?
Stutchman’s Report https___ecf.cand.uscourts.gov_cgi-bin_show_temp.pl_file=7384829-0–29335
Given your recent comments regarding the potential “overreach” by an “unelected,” (supreme), court should the court overturn your health care overhaul, I would think you would want to weigh in on my case as well.
Four taser probes were fired from two separate taser guns during the incident but only one firing from one taser gun is captured on the videos. Thus, the video footage of the second firing has been removed from the videos.
In addition to the above Judge Koh committed the following acts as well:
1. Judge Koh contradicted herself numerous times in order to mislead me and undermine my right to present my case in a thorough manner during a Motion for Summary Judgment.
2. Judge Koh actually changed officer testimony to justify dismissing the 4th Amendment Claim, (Ofc. Temores testified that he did not detain me to justify his presence, Judge Koh ruled that he did detain me).
3. Judge Koh knowingly and deliberately violated federal rules of civil procedure by suppressing and concealing evidence in her chambers.
4. Judge Koh acknowledged that Attorney Steven Sherman and Police Chief Dennis Burns submitted falsified taser gun activation to the court, but ruled that because there was falsified data from the March 15, 2008 incident within the reports she would accept them.
5. Judge Koh made false statements in her ruling to dismiss my case and refused to correct them once it was pointed out to her. (She falsely stated that I did not present any relevant case law).
6. Judge Koh had a conflict of interest in protecting her co-worker from the Department of Justice, Michael Gennaco, and perhaps current Palo Alto City Councilman Sid Espinoza.
7. Judge Koh’s boss, Judge James Ware has a conflict of interest due to close relationship with Palo Alto Councilman Larry Klein.
8. Judge Koh made her bogus ruling on the evidence of falsifying the evidence in contradiction to the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Harper v. City of Los Angeles 2008.
9. Judge Koh contradicted U.S. Supreme Court Decision in MELENDEZ-DIAZ v. MASSACHUSETTS June 25, 2009 denying me the constitutional right to cross-examination of expert testimony.
10. Judge Koh covered up many violations of court rules and state bar rules violated by attorney Steven Sherman.
11. Judge Koh made these Unconstitutional and bogus rulings because she knows that the evidence is overwhelming and if I or YOU, the ATTORNEY GENERAL, were to present the evidence to a jury the jury would conclude that the Palo Alto Police did in fact edit and falsify videos and taser gun activation data.
12. Judge Koh cannot refute the fact that there are scenes of video footage missing from Temores’ MAV video and the Taser videos which is why she refused to acknowledge or even address the missing footage in her decisions.
THREE: Mr. President do you believe that a Judge who suppresses and conceals evidence in violation of F.R.Civ.P. 5(d)(2)(B); who makes false statements in rulings; who refuses to accept empirical evidence from a Plaintiff that is no different the what the defendants submitted; who believes that it is Constitutional for police officers to violate the Constitution under certain circumstances; who believes that it is okay for police officers to use falsified evidence against citizens to incriminate citizens of a crime?
FOUR: If you don’t, will you take any action to remove Judge Koh from the bench for her unethical and unlawful conduct, Cannon 3 B (5) of the Guide to Judiciary Policy, Ethics and Judicial Conduct? Will you file a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct or seek impeachment?
“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men the great difficulty lies in this: You must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.” — Alexander Hamilton
I for one believe the Judge Lucy Koh should be impeached by the House and tried in the Senate and removed from her position on the bench, for no one should be a judge who knowingly and intentionally makes false statements and violates federal rules of civil procedure should be a judge.
You can find all of the evidence corroborating the above allegation of Judicial Misconduct and the falsification of videos at:
www.injusticesystem.weebly.com Also see: www.harrisandrosen.weebly.com
In 2009 I informed you President Obama and Eric Holder what California attempted to do.
In 2009 through 2010 Lucy Koh’s husband, Mariano-Florintino Cuellar, Tino, was working in the White House for you. You appointed Judge Koh to the federal bench in January 2010.
Prior to her appointment, Judge Koh was a Superior Court Judge in Palo Alto, the same court where my criminal case was heard.
Judge Koh’s Husband is a professor at Stanford University and all three of you attended Harvard University.
I filed my federal lawsuit against the Palo Alto Police in June of 2009. My case was assigned to Judge Jeremy Fogel who presided over it for a year.
Lucy Koh was confirmed by the Senate and took her seat on the Bench in San Jose California. Prior to that Judge Koh was a Superior Court Judge in Palo Alto, CA.
Within days of taking her position on the federal bench, my case was reassigned to Judge Koh contrary to standard procedure and actually contrary to Cannon 3 A (2) of the Guide to Judiciary Policy, Ethics and Judicial Conduct which states a Judge is to remain on the case to the end.
FIVE: President Obama, given that Mariano (Tino), Cuellar, Lucy Koh and Eric Holder, (through Mark Kappelhoff), were all informed of my case and lawsuit against the Palo Alto Police prior to you appointing Lucy Koh to the bench, were you aware that she intended to cheat, lie, suppress evidence and violate the Constitution in order to dismiss my case and thereby conceal the crimes of the Palo Alto police when you appointed her for Judgeship?
Once I was made a aware of Judge Koh’s unconstitutional ruling in the Victor Frost case and her former working relationship at the Department of Justice with Palo Alto Independent Police Auditor Michael Gennaco I requested that Judge Koh recuse herself but she refused.
Below is a list of evidence that proves my allegations of evidence tampering that I have provided to Santa Clara District Attorney Jeff Rosen, Attorney General Kamala Harris, and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder through Mark Kappelhoff and Loretta King:
1. Two police officers present during the March 15, 2008 altercation have admitted that video footage is missing from Temores MAV video.
2. Chief Dennis Burns has admitted to destroying two of the four taser probes fired during the incident without ever securing or documenting the taser probes into evidence, a confession of violating Penal Code 141b.
3. 14 hours after being shot Officer Ken Kratt apologized to me for what Burger did to me.
4. In order to cover up their crimes and to wrongfully incriminate me, the PAPD edited and falsified the videos and taser gun activation data.
5. Three verifiable scenes missing from Temores’ MAV video.
6. Empirical proof that dialog has been edited out of Burger’s MAV recording.
7. Empirical proof that dialog has been added to Burger’s MAV recording.
8. Numerous editing flaws strewn through-out Temores MAV video, (black spots where the illuminated taser wire was erased, Burger’s arms missing, Ciampi’s leg missing, Temores in two places at once, Ciampi in two places at once, Burger’s body merging with Wagner’s body etc….
9. Empirical proof that a taser gun firing has been edited out of Temores’ MAV video, Temores’ Taser video and Temores’ taser gun data port. This evidence is verified by Ofc. Burger himself.
10. Empirical proof that the PAPD destroyed two of the four taser probes fired in order to conceal the second firing.
11. Empirical proof that video footage has been removed from Burger’s and Temores’ taser videos.
12. Empirical proof of editing flaws in Burger’s taser video, (blackened taser wire and Ciampi’s leg is missing).
13. Empirical proof that Ofc. Temores falsely stated the number of times he discharged electricity during a court hearing.
14. Empirical proof that Ofcs. Temores and Burger knowingly made false statements under penalty of perjury during a court hearing.
15. Empirical proof that Chief Burns lied about the number of taser guns used and activations that occurred during the incident in an official report to the Palo Alto City Council
16. Empirical proof that Chief Burns destroyed the taser videos downloaded to a CPU in violation of department policy.
17. Empirical proof that Chief Burns submitted falsified taser gun activation reports to the court.
18. S.C. Crime Lab Analyst Mario Soto verified that the hash values on the taser videos did not match verifying that the video files have been edited.
19. S.C. Crime Lab Analyst Christopher Corpora verified that FOUR seconds are missing from Temores’ Taser video.
20. S.C. Crime Lab Analyst Christopher Corpora verified the audio on Temores’ MAV recording picked up an audio recording that cannot be heard due to electronically controlled low volume level.
21. S.C. Crime Lab Analyst John Bourke verified that some of the individual frames of Taser video have been improperly indexed, (they are not in chronological order).
22. Deputy District Attorney Deborah Medved helped suppress the Taser gun activation data in violation of P.C. 1054.1 and 1054.5 and initially stated that the Taser Videos did not exist.
23. Deputy District Attorney Javier Alcala refused to show Judge Thang Barrett any of the videos in order to support the charges against me, however he did who Temores’ MAV video to the media prior to Judge Barrett making his ruling. Why would DDA Alacala show the video to the media and not to the judge.
24. Chief Burns first stated that Taser Camera V06-015542 did not exist that Burger used Taser Camera V07-065373.
25. S.C. Crime Lab Analyst John Bourke stated in his report that V06-015542 was the camera used by Ofc. Burger.
26. Chief Burns retracts his previous statement and claims that V06-015542 was used by Burger to record the incident.
27. The 2008 PAPD taser gun download report states that Ofc. Burger used Taser camera V07—065373 during the March 15, 2008 incident.
28. Andrew Hinz of Taser International was hired to examine the evidence and initially concluded that Taser Camera V06-015020 was the camera Ofc. Burger used during the incident.
29. Andrew Hinz then stated that Taser Camera V06-015020 was destroyed by taser international.
30. Andrew Hinz has stated under penalty of perjury that taser camera V06-065373 was first sent to the Palo Alto Police on November 26, 2008, yet the 2008 PAPD taser gun download report states that Ofc. Burger used Taser camera V07-065373 during the March 15, 2008 incident 7 months prior to 11/26/08 contradicting Andrew Hinz.
31. Andrew Hinz stated that taser camera V07-065373 had never been returned to Taser International, however, Palo Alto Police Lt. Sandra Brown stated that taser camera V07-065373 was sent to Taser International for repair during a court hearing.
Despite all of the above evidence, no one from the justice system has been willing to recover the original unadulterated video files from the hard drives, not that I would trust anyone now in putting forth an honest effort to obtain the original videos.
DA Jeff Rosen has a mirrored image of the taser video hard drives, yet refuses to recover the original videos. He even refuses to release the taser gun activation data that the crime lab ostensibly downloaded from the taser guns as a part of its investigation. The taser gun activation data which not one of the three separate crime lab analysts cite as a part of their investigations which I can only assume that the reason is because they did not like what they saw.
Ultimately I am gathering material for a book which I intend to publish in the near future of which this inquiry to you will be a part of. It is a true story about how the Palo Alto Police, the Santa Clara County District Attorney and the State of California attempted to incriminate a citizen, me, of a crime by knowingly using falsified videos and taser guns and how Judge Lucy Koh made false statements, cheated and violated federal rules of civil procedure to justify dismissing my case in order to conceal the crimes of the Palo Alto Police by preventing me from presenting my evidence to a jury of our peers.
For clarity there are five specific questions I have put forth that I would appreciate a response. Olmstead v. United States 277 U.S. 438 (1928)– “Decency, security and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy..”