A BILL OF RIGHTS FOR PRO SE LITIGANTS

TEN STEPS AMERICA CAN TAKE TO ENSURE DUE PROCESS AND EQUAL PROTECTION FOR UNREPRESENTED PARTIES.

1. The senior justice of every court shall ensure that each court maintain a website that has the procedural rules and the applicable for all cases to be heard in that court. Forms for use in every possible step of the procedural path of a case should be downloadable from the website.

2. Each court shall have a reading room where law books, forms and an Internet access terminal shall be available for unrepresented litigants.

3. Laws must be enacted at the state and federal level to guarantee due process and equal protection for unrepresented parties.

4. Laws, procedural rules, and decisions must be written in plain English at the level of a high school graduate.

5. Juries shall be read instructions to refrain from construing a party's non-representation against the unrepresented party.

6. Judges must refrain from refusing to allow an unrepresented party to speak on the grounds that the party is unrepresented.

7. Individuals with power of attorney or a certificate of corporate vote or trustee's authorization should be allowed to represent entities without being licensed members of the bar.

8. No person shall be denied the right to have assistance of counsel on the basis of the selected counsel not being licensed to practice law.

9. Each state shall have an office with its Court Administration system to be responsible for the co-ordination of pro se services and the monitoring of the rights of the rights of pro se litigants. Clerk's offices shall have made to be sensitive to the needs of pro-se litigants and shall distribute pre-printed information, syllabus and forms to litigants as is sensible.

10. Congress should take appropriate steps to ensure that federal courts are completely user friendly for unrepresented parties,that entities be permitted to have non-lawyer representatives and that discrimination against litigants who are unrepresented cease.It should be understood that discrimination may take many forms, ranging from being told "this is too complex for a non-lawyer, you'd better hire an attorney," to writing decisions that are incomprehensible for non-lawyers to understand.

TO SUE A JUDGE

Sharon Stephens
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxx

September 21, 2009

DEMAND LETTER
FOR MONETARY COMPENSATION:
FALSE IMPRISONMENT;
ELDER ABUSE.

RE: Case INF054715 Defendant 92846

[Judge] THOMAS N. DOUGLASS
Riverside County Superior Court, Indio
Dept. 3N
46-200 Oasis St., Indio, CA 92201

July 15, 2009 I did present the court with a MOTION TO VACATE A VOID CRIMINAL JUDGMENT. I asked if you had read the motion; you did not indicate that you had. Rather you responded, in what I have come to experience with you in all of our court room experiences -- an angry and demeaning manner – and with no due process, “It is untimely and I am incarcerating you!” I replied, “Void Judgments never die.[ Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194].” I was then shackled and taken off to county jail and incarcerated for forty-four [44] days. (On that very night in the jail I did almost die due to an overdose of medication given by the guards, and had to be transported to JFK Hospital where I was kept for four days.) Rulings made in violation of Due Process are void. August 12, 2009 an oral motion was made to reconsider Defendant’s motion and it was denied, again as “untimely.” Either you do not know the law judge – incompetence, or, you ignored the law – unconscionable! CCP Section 473 permits a trial court, on noticed motion, to set aside void judgments and orders. Courts also possess inherent power to grant such relief. Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194. A void act or judgment may be attacked in any forum, state or federal, where its validity may be drawn in issue. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 [24 L. Ed. 565 ] (1878). (Burns v. Municipal Court (1961) 195 Cal.App.2d 596, 599.) “The most important is jurisdiction of the subject matter. ‘No person can be punished for a public offense, except upon a legal conviction in a court having jurisdiction thereof.’ (P.C. 681.) In other words, the court in a criminal trial, like the court in a civil proceeding, must have jurisdiction of the subject matter” (4 Witkin & Epstein, Cal. Criminal Law (3d ed. 2000) Jurisdiction and Venue, § 1, p. 86, citing, inter alia, Burns v. Municipal Court, supra, 195 Cal.App.2d 596, 599.) When a judge does not follow the law, i.e., they are a trespasser of the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges’ orders are void, of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974); Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980 ); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821); When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in treason The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F.Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962) You have lost your immunity: When a judge does not follow the law, i.e. ,they are a trespasser of the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original]. I shall be writing a motion to have your ruling against me dismissed, and again presenting my Motion to Dismiss the Void Criminal in the near future. THEREFORE I am making this thirty [30] day demand for $150,000. Most sincerely, Sharon Stephens

How to Sue a Judge

How to Sue a Judge

By David C. Grossack, Constitutional Attorney
Common Law Copyright © 1994 All Rights Reserved

Has a judge violated your constitutional rights? Have you been discriminated against by being treated differently than other people in similar situations by reason of race, religion, national origin, gender, sexual preference or political opinion? Have you lost certain rights without a meaningful hearing or even an opportunity to be heard?

Have you been deprived of any other constitutional protection? Have you been subject to Court action for the purpose of intimidating you from exercising an opinion, or practicing your faith? Don't let them get away with it.

Although it is almost impossible to recover monetary damages from a judge (unless you can prove he or she acted ultra-vires beyond his or her legal jurisdiction) it is in fact possible to obtain relief in equity against a judge through civil rights actions. Equitable relief includes:

• declaratory relief - (rulings by another judge in the form of opinions establishing the constitutionality or lack of constitutionality of another judges actions.)
• injunctive relief - a command or order to do something or refrain from doing so.

As a general rule, however, judges cannot be held liable for money damages for acts done in the exercise of his judicial function, within the limits of his jurisdiction, no matter how erroneous, illegal or malicious his acts may be. (48A Corpus Juris Secundum §86) A minority of decisions have held that if an inferior judge acts maliciously or corruptly he may incur liability. Kalb v. Luce, 291 N.W. 841, 234, WISC 509.

Federal Civil Rights statutes, and possibly Bivens actions, appear to offer the best path for redressing constitutional grievances with state and federal judges, respectively, in Federal Court. As a practical matter, such cases will usually be brought by pro se litigants. Neither the politics nor economics of law practice permits lawyers to pursue such cases nor makes them affordable except to a small elite of citizens.

However, lawyers who do successfully sue state judges in federal court in Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 cases can recover attorney's fees from judicial defendants provided they can show time sheets kept contemporaneously with their work.

The most important step you have to take in beginning your lawsuit is in writing the complaint that will be conforming to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (available in every Government Bookstore or from the Government Printing Office in Washington, DC.)

Properly drafted complaints need not be prepared by a lawyer. All that is required is a very fundamental understanding of a few basic constitutional principles and a typewriter and paper. Handwritten complaints can also be filed in court.

Each federal court publishes its own local rules which can impose some additional requirements, but essentially there are only a handful of things you need to know. 1. Each complaint has a caption reading "United States District Court, District of (name the jurisdiction e.g. Southern New York or Eastern California.) 2. Each complaint includes a caption indicating the name of the plaintiff, and the name of the defendant. The words "individually and in his official capacity" should appear after the name of the defendant judge. The words "Verified Complaint" should appear on the right side of the caption. Your caption should appear like this:

United States District Court
District of (State)
Civil Docket No. _______

John Doe,
Plaintiff
vs. VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Bobby Roe,
individually and in his/her official capacity as Justice of the Superior Court ) of [*****] County,
Defendant

A couple of spaces below, you must begin to spell out your reasons for bringing your complaint to Court. Make an outline of your case. First, state your "Jurisdictional Basis" in Paragraph I. I usually write as follows:

JURISDICTIONAL BASIS

I. Plaintiff claims federal jurisdiction pursuant to Article III § 2 which extends the jurisdiction to cases arising under the U.S. Constitution. Next you should write Paragraph II stating the precise Statutory Authority why you brought the case. If you are suing a state judge, you will state:

II. Plaintiff brings this suit pursuant to Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 for violations of certain protections guaranteed to him by the First, Fifth, Eighth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments (select which apply) of the federal Constitution, by the defendant under color of law in his/her capacity as a judge in the Superior Court of (****) County.

If you are suing a federal judge, state:

"Plaintiff brings this action against (name), a federal judicial officer, pursuant to Title 28 U.S. Code § 1331, in claims arising from violations of federal constitutional rights guaranteed in the (fill in) amendments to the U.S. Constitution and redressable pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Narcotics Agents 403 U.S. 388 (1971)."

Be aware that the issue of whether federal judicial officers can in fact be sued under this authority is unresolved, but my opinion is that there is a strong implication in the affirmative based on the language in many cases.

Your complaint should then have a section entitled "Parties". The next two paragraphs would read:

III. Plaintiff (Your name) is a natural person residing at (Your address), (County), (State).

IV. Defendant is a Judge presiding at (fill in.)

Following this you must now describe your claim in detail, giving legal and factual basis for your case. This portion of the case is entitled "Statement of Case"

What kind of factual pattern would give rise to a successful claim under the federal civil rights law? Title 42 U.S. Code § 1983 reads as follows:

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.

The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff to show that the defendant judge acted unconstitutionally or outside of his/her jurisdiction. If the judge engaged in an egregious discrimination against males in a divorce court, minorities in state criminal cases, members of an unpopular religious group in confrontation with government authorities and treated suspiciously in court or members of a "fringe" political group, these situations can give rise to a claim of denial of equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.

If a judge permits an ex parte attachment, i.e. seizure of real estate without giving you notice of a hearing in a state court proceeding, this is a deprivation of property without due process, violating the Fifth Amendment as well as the Fourteenth Amendment.

Ex parte restraining orders forcing men or women out of their homes based on abuse allegations in state courts are a primary and rampant example of violations of constitutional rights today, and certainly actionable in federal court.

The first ten amendments of the Bill of Rights are self explanatory. Violations of any of the rights described in these amendments give rise to causes of action, both against state judges under Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and arguably against federal judges in Bivens actions.

Pro se litigants should give a clear and concise description of what happened in chronological order, identifying the judge, the date, time, and place of his or her action, and specifying which acts violated which constitutional amendments.

The complaint finishes with a section entitled "Prayer for Relief." In such a case you can ask for an injunction ordering another judge to so something, or to refrain from doing something. Successful use of these suits has been made to nullify attachments, end incarcerations, declare laws or court practices unconstitutional and scare the heck out of black robed tyrants with gavels. See Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1983).

I often phrase my prayers for relief as follows:

Wherefore plaintiff prays this Court issue equitable relief as follows:

1. Issue injunctive relief commanding defendant to . . .

2. Issue declaratory relief as this Court deems appropriate just.

3. Issue other relief as this Court deems appropriate and just.

4. Award plaintiff his costs of litigation.

Respectfully submitted,

(Your signature)

Your name printed
Your address
City, State, Zip Code
Telephone No.

Statement of Verification

I have read the above complaint and it is correct to the best of my knowledge.

Your signature

Complaints are filed in the Civil Clerk's Office in the United States District Court for your district.

Federal rules now allow for service of process by certified mail. You will be required to serve the defendant judge and also your state attorney general if you are suing a state judge.

The pro se road will be easier if you study the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, obtain a Black's Law Dictionary and familiarize yourself with legal research methods. You must also read the Local Rules of the Federal Court where you are suing, and learn Constitutional law fast.

Using a lawyer as a coach is helpful. Bear in mind that your lawsuit is disfavored because it is against a judge. Nevertheless, our system of "justice" is in such tough shape that suits against judges are a socio-political necessity.

Complaints should be photocopied, disseminated to the legislature, the media and political action groups.

Perhaps the cumulative impact of these suits will bring a healthy radical change for the American people.

The author is an attorney in private practice in Boston.

Constitutional Business
Post Office Box 90
Hull, Massachusetts 02045
Tel. 617-925-5253
Fax 617-925-3906
Copyright ©1994 All Rights Reserved

Limited License:
The right to publish this article off-line in print, or via CD-ROM, floppy diskette, tape, laser disk, or any other media, electronic or otherwise, can only be granted by the author and must be in writing. Online usage is unrestricted as long as this article, including the byline, copyright notice, publisher's address, and limited license, is published in its entirety.

Kimball, Tirey & St.John LLP

HOAs and HUD

AMERILAND GROUP

What happens when attorneys who represent homeowner associations [HOA] also represent HUD elderly, disabled and low income residents?

They pull the same dirty, and often illegal tricks on both, and bully people into silence.

When I lost my home in Shadow crest HOA because of a less than honest attorney, Brian Moreno, (French, Bryant and Green). Only later did I discover the association was suspended for failure to file a required information statement with the California Secretary of State, and could not prosecute or defend a lawsuit. (Palm Valley Homeowners Assn. v. Design MTC (2001) 85 Cal.App.4th 553, 102 Cal.Rptr.2d 350) I am now prepared to take Shadow Crest HOA back into court and take back all of the money they stole from me during that period of time.

Where does a handicapped and elderly, 68 year old woman go when she loses everything? To a low-income HUD/Sec8 apartment, and, I went to Briarwood Manor in Montclair; a building owned by AMERILAND GROUP of whom I was unaware owned many buildings and was in legal trouble for illegally evicting their residents, and under suspision for the deaths of three people in a fire.

I became involved with Resident Council, an approved HUD suto-government group of tenants, htat is also allowed according to the lease agreement of the property, who gather to help in the management of the property.

When I began to complain about unsafe living conditions at Briarwood, and criminal behavior for which there is a legal duty, which every person owes to others: "...a duty to refrain from conduct that imposes an unreasonable risk of injury on third parties" (Lamden v La Jolla Shores Clubdoninium HOA (1999) 21 Cal.4th 249)

Instead, I found myself retaliated on by AMERLAND owner, Martha Enriquez, who is also the President of LOGAN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, who is required by law to protect residents, but instead I was suffering much distress, and unable to sleep: Residents, particularly elderly have a "right...to be free from acts constituting duress" (Leeper v. Beltrami (1959) 53 Cal.2d. 195) and the propriety of a "cause of action for wrongful acts in the nature of duress...examples of such wrongful acts include a bad faith threat to breach a contract ..." (Rich Whillock v. Ashton Development, 157 Cal. App. 3d at p.1159)

My HUD/Sec8 rental contract was about to be breached.

Soon I was contacted by AMERILAND attoney, Linda Hollenbeck, a partner in Kimball, Tirey & St. John. She was less than pleasant to me, and always seemed to have an antagonistic bent in the way she talked to me, so, I researced the law office and found they were also HOA attorneys, who provides counsel on an array of homeowner association matters and it seems has the same mind-set in the way they deal with people who complain -- if the complaints weren't to their advantage. My complaints were ignored, and I was labled as a trouble-maker.

Complaints to HUD were ignored as well.

In July 2008 I was served with an Eviction, claiming I had harassed a man, Stan Harris, the self-appointed "head" of Resident Counsel, and a close friend of Martha Enriquz. He was claiming to be an MD doctor and giving out dangerous and illegal, medical advice to the elderly and handicapped residents. I revealed he was not a doctor, and for that I was being evicted. (The California Medical Board sent me a letter thanking me for notifying them of his behavior, and "saving others from him.")

Stan Harris, and his little Lord of the Flies band of terrorist are allowed to run roughshod over the other tenants, screaming and hollaring, using filty language and even threatening phyical violence against them and their guests -- in spite of ongoing complaints, including a Petition with 24 names to have him put out of office of Resident Council, which again was ignored.

Soon I was in court and Attorney Hollenbeck brought "paid for" witnesses, including Stan Harris who provably perjured himself in court. One advantage for me, they didn't meet the burden of the law of proving harassment, and now we are in Appeal.

In the interim, Attorney Hollenbeck, AMERILAND, and Logan Property Management have filed four bogus TRO's against me, in which they again did not follow the law, and I have been falsely arrested twice on these sham TROs, and ended up in the hospital on both occasions.

No different than other HOA attorney complaints.

HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATIONS AND JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT

RE:
HONORABLE B.J. BJORK
Larson Justice Center
46-200 Oasis Street; Indio, CA

When I purchased my home in Shadow Crest Homeowners Association (HOA) in Cathedral City, California in 1996 I knew nothing about HOAs being entities that exist purely for the development, sale, and administration of residential real estate, and that every aspect of my life within the HOA would be governed by the association, and I certainly had no idea that what I had initialed at Closing was a binding adhesion contract with a private corporation and that I had surrendered my constitutional rights and civil liberties to the will and whim of the HOA, and its vocal and active, albeit minority of the board of directors, a management company, and, the all pervasive legal wolves who could snatch my home in non-judicial foreclosure with out ever going to court. It would be months later that I would come to truly understand that I did not even own my own property, but was only a shareholder in a non-profit corporation.

However, in my ignorance, the first few months were wonderful, and peaceful, and I loved my home.

When a drug family, related to a board member moved in across the street, I found little help from the HOA board, HOA attorneys, Wayne Guralnick, Kendal Berkey, Ron Green, Jeffery French, and Brian Moreno, my neighbors, the police, or the courts. Later I would discover that there is a well-grounded government system in place -- a type of shadow government -- that supports the the infrastructure of HOAs, rather than the people who live in them. The more I delved into the laws that regulated HOAs, and the more I tried to find some common ground for mutual communication, the more obvious it became that I was upsetting some sort of corporate boat that was not going to allow itself be rocked, and, would retaliate in the worst of ways against anyone who dare challenge them.

When I approached Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, she refused to help, and then provably conspired with Cathedral City, City Attorney, and my HOA board to drag me before judges, who handed them bogus, void-on -the-face restraining orders; orders with no judisdiction that did not meet legislative statatory, or case law to be granted. All to keep me out of meetings, surpress my writing of a newsletter, and even to try and keep me from making complaints to the police, or legislature. I was working on getting all of these orders dismissed, and in the process had made complaints against judges and commissioners for handing out these void judgments.

JUNE 8, 2006 I was falsely arrested while going into court to dismiss a void-on-the-face restraining order, by Riverside County District Attorney, Rich Twiss on a 422.6 (A) PC, Misdemeanor hate crime action. There was absolutlely no basis for this charge, and I was ont allowed to ask why I was being arrested. Twiss handcuffed me, refused to let me appear in court, and would not hear what I had to say; he literally marched me through the court house, to the HONORABLE B. J. BJORK, who imposed on me the excessive, unconstitutional, unreasonable bail of $500,000 -- on a unproven misdemeanor! The Eighth Amendment itself does not speak of any right to bail, but it does prohibit the imposition of excessive bail.

I asked Judge Bjork for release on my own recognizance (O.R.), and told him the order is void. In a most rude, and insensitive manner, Judge Bjork denied me O.R., and told me, You had better hope the order is void! and then he had me incarcerated in jail, where I was not allowed even a phone call until June 22, and remained for over a year, suffering much well-documented abuse. Ilost my home, thousands of dollars, my health, and my reputation.

MAY 23, 2008: I filed a complaint against B.J. BJORK with the California Commission on Judicial Performance charging him with recklessness, oppression, fraud and malice, and elder abuse in his actions against me.

BACKGROUND ON B.J. BJORK

MARCH 1994: Judge Bjork granted a judge's family member traffic school rather than have them answer for driving while not in possession of a valid driver 's license and a failure to appear. This was done again a second time based on a request by the same judicial colleague, which is contrary to Canon 2A of the California Code of Judicial Conduct, which provides that a judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, and Canon 2B, which provides that a judge should not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge's judicial conduct or judgment, and that a judge should not convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence them.

Judge Bjork consented to public admonishment.

FEBRUARY 1997: B.J. BJORK was the judge in an alleged fraudulent foreclosure sale of New York attorney George Harder's Palm Springs home by David Peters of Peters & Freedman. Some have reported that Peters has been selling the homes he forecloses to his long time associate Carlos Sosa, a lawyer in Los Angeles. Bjork denied George Harder 's request to postpone his trial to come from New York for the case in Riverside, California. Bjork held the trial without Harder and ruled for Peters & Freedman and Sosa. George Harder lost his home.

JUDGE, B.J. BJORK TODAY: Judicial Council Assignments for Riverside Superior Court: Judge B.J. Bjork, Retired, Superior Court, Riverside Assignment #TBD; June 9 through June 20, Dept. 1CI

The California Commission on Judicial Performance has promised an investigation.

I am filing a motion for dismissal of my case.

Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, Eight Bogus Restraining Orders, Conspiracy and False Arrest

The Assemblywoman Garcia from Cathedral City, California

is NOT a friend of homeowner associations,

or, the people she has taken an oath to defend.

Falsely Jailed by aide of Bonnie Garcia
on bogus and void restraining order

SUMMARY OF EVENTS:

December 7, 2004: Press Conference with Pat Cooper, aide to Senator Ducheny, Kim Trone, a reporter from the Desert Sun, and a documentary film maker, Madelene Hunter-Patterson. We also had a number of homeowners from other association at the meeting. Candy, from Bonnie Garcia's office called and said she was coming. She never did make the meeting, and did not even call to apologize. So, I went into the Garcia office in Cathedral City to try and make an appointment with Mrs. Garcia, with the stated purpose of speaking to Homeowner Association problems. I was given an appointment with Mary Brhel.

January 29: I went into Ms. Garcia's office in Cathedral City for an appointment with her aide, Mary Brhel (wife of ex-Deputy District Attorney, Martin Brhel) about involvement with the problems with homeowner associations. [Hispanics are the most foreclosed group of people in the State of California.] She refused to let me address the problems of HOAs in general. Rather she wanted to hear, and insisted I tell her my "personal" story! So, I told her all about Shadowcrest HOA, and the problems we were experiencing, including void restraining orders to keep me out of board meetings, my false arrests, stalking and battery by board members, perjury, false and illegal fines, and of course the attempts made on two families for non-judicial foreclosure. Brhel acted rightly, and truly shocked, as do most who hear these stories of out of control HOA boards, unethical attorneys, and greedy management companies. We had a good conversation, and she even gave me a bouquet of flowers and congratulated me for being "an activist".

However, before going to the Garcia Office that morning I had been in the Cathedral City Police Department (CCPD), at their request; they had called me in on a ruse, as I would discover months later, telling me they were "doing an investigation of a complaint" I had made against Sergeant Hatfield, for his participation in a false arrest, abuse of process and abuse while in custody and I told two officers, Sgt. Charles Robbinson, and Captain Kevin Connor I was going to the Garcia Office that morning; CCPD is next door to the Garcia Office.

February 2: Mary Behel called me back, stating "You have made all kinds of problems with the Cathedral City Police Department, and other government agencies, and you are a threat, and I am placing you on a list in Sacramento as a threat"! She hung up on me without telling me where she had received this information.

February 3-5: CONSPIRACY begins between the Garcia Office staff, the Cathedral City Police Department, my HOA Board of Directors, and stretching all the way to the Riverside County District Attorney's office in Indio began.The proof of this conspiracy is well documented by Cathedral City Attorney, Kendall Berkey in the 65 page Memo of Cost in Case No. 0424575 ROBINSON v. STEPHENS, Riverside Count Superior Court, Indio, CA.

February 9: Madelene Hunter-Patterson called Ms. Brhel at her office and was given to Richard Harmon, Chief of Staff. He told her that "We had a couple of officers in here that said, 'Sharon is crazy, and has been arrested multiple times. She is a threat, and you should not talk to her'".

Because of this, I was interviewed by Edwin Olavie, Investigator with the California Highway Patrol: Mr. Olavie "Did not consider me a threat"!

April 6: Ms. Garcia sent me a rude letter, that basically said, "I can do nothing to help you, stay out of my office!"

April 8: LETTER SENT TO BONNIE GARCIA:

Bonnie Garcia
PO Box 942d849Sacramento, CA 94249-0080
Re: In response to your April 6, 2004 letter

Dear Mrs. Garcia;
1-Last Tuesday I spent an hour talking, [taped] with Investigator, Edwin Olavi, CHP [213-897-4564], regarding Mary Brahby's bogus accusations against me when I stopped by to tell her, "There is going to be an investigation into the officers who went into the office in Cathedral City and slandered me". I have already been publicly in front of the City Council addressing this issue, and I intend to push for further investigation. I also intend to continue to tell all I meet just how you responded to this, without every asking for my side of the story, You are basically an untrustworthy politician, who does not take responsibility to discover all of the facts.
2- I have NEVER asked for "your assistance"! Your Cathedral City officer had an invitation to attend a meeting in my home with Senator, Denise Moreno-Ducheny's aid, Pat Cooper, Kim Trone, Desert Sun reporter, Madelene Patterson, documentary filmmaker, along with several homeowners from various associations regarding HOA problems of non judicial foreclosure. Your officer called and said she would attend and NEVER came. So much for YOUR interest in the problems of "the people" -- Hispanics are the most non-judicially foreclosed on group of people in America.
3- I have no interest in ever contacting your office again. It is quite obvious you have no interest in this cause, even though it is right in your own back yard.
STOP sending me YOUR political propaganda - I will never vote for you! In fact, I and many others in HOAs will be supporting any candidate who challenges you, and telling them, and everyone else what you have done to me.
Let this letter serve as final notice to you to remove my name from your mailing list, and, stop harassing ME!

Cc: Senator Denise DuchenyEdwin Olavi, Investigator, CHP; Sergeant Laura Hanlon, "Professional Standards"CCPD; AHRC. com All other interested parties

Investigator Olavi has found me to not be a threat!

May 14: Ms. Garcia, out of mean-spiritedness filled 8 petitions for a restraining order against me, with no police reports, no proof of statutory criteria, and in violation of my constituionally protected rights.

May 2006: The restraining order of Bonnie Garcia is void on the face, and Commissioner J. McCoy agreed to dismiss it as such if I would have Brhel and Harmon personally served. One of Garcia's office workers, "Candy H." was in court during these proceedings, yet I was still falsely arrested when I went to the Garcia office -- to challenge this bogus, void on the face order, and at a Preliminary Hearing, the Garcia staff member lied, and did not bother to tell the court the truth of this being a void order!

June 2006, Bonnie Garcia's aide then went into a Preliminary Hearing, RE: People v. Sharon Stephens; Case: INF054715 , and lied, stating I had violated [a void on the face] restraining order by going to her office, to make a complaint.

I am filing a petition to have all of these bogus orders dismissed, but I spent over a year in jail, much of it in 24 hour a day solitary confinement, as is documented on this blog, with much abuse.

Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia could dismiss these void orders on her own, but refuses to do so.

TAKE NOTE: Constitutionally protected activity, such as making police reports, or complaints of any type are excluded from the meaning of "course of conduct" with regards to a restraining order. Schraer v. Berkeley Property Owners Ass'n, 207 Cal.App.3d 719 (1989). Schild v. Rubin, 232 Cal.App.3d 755, 763 (1991)

Course of conduct" is defined as a "pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Code of Civil Procedure 527.6(b); see also Leydon v. Alexander, 212 Cal.App.3d 1, 5 (1989)

A trial court may not issue an injunction against harassment unless it finds by clear and convincing evidence that unlawful harassment already exists in fact. Code of Civil Procedure ß 527.6(d); Schraer, supra, 207 Cal.App.3d 719.

Constitutionally protected activity is excluded from the meaning of 'course of conduct', Code of Civil Procedure 527.6(b), there is no need to entertain the traditional inquiry as to whether clear and convincing evidence exists warranting injunctive relief.

There must be medical, psychological, or other evidence establishing that the 'harassing' activity is the cause of "substantial emotional distress" within meaning of C.C.P. 527.6(b)). Schild v. Rubin, 232 Cal.App.3d 755, 763 (1991)

Elder Abuse Law: Penal Code 368: Elder abuse protection applies to any resident in California who is 65 years of age or older; Broadly speaking, abuse includes physical abuse, neglect, fiduciary abuse, abandonment, isolation or other treatment with resulting physical harm or pain or mental suffering...

I want Bonnie Garcia's bogus and void order dismissed, and my name removed from the "Threat List" in Sacramento. I shall continue to pursue this.

Such void on the face judgments lack jurisdiction and can legally be ignored as they neither bind, nor bar anyone. Obviously a judgment, though final and on the merits, has no binding force and is subject to collateral attack if it is wholly void for lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter or person, and perhaps for excess of jurisdiction, or where it is obtained by extrinsic fraud. [Citations.]" 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, Judgment, Â 286, p. 828.

MRS. BONNIE GARCIA, Assemblywoman from Palm Springs California is NOT a friend of homeowner associations, or the very people she has taken an oath to protect.

Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, and Cindy Uken's Yellow Journalism

Homeowner requests fair news reporting by the Desert Sun
June 19, 2004
By Sharon Stephens
Cathedral City, California -

The following is a letter to Ciny Uken, the opinion editor of The Desert Sun in Palm Springs, California from a homeowner, Sharon StephensDear Cindy Uken,Re:

Your "story" PHONE, FAX OPEN DOOR TO WOMAN'S 'HARASSMENT' What a slanderous and slanted piece of commentary this is!!! And, you didn't even ask me for my side of the story.

You are a journalist?

Then there are the FACTS:Bonnie Garcia , my local State Representative, was not in court on Thursday. However, she will be on July 19, at 8:30 AM to answer to this blatant SLAPP suit.

Garcia didn't file for these 8 Restraining Orders, using taxpayer's money of over $2,000 until after I said I would "not vote for her, and would tell everyone what she did to me. Now Garcia is using individuals from my homeowner association as her "witnesses." These are men named in my cases against the homeowners association for battering me and other illegalities. These men are her "witnesses"; even though they are being sued right now, and have cases pending in the District Attorney's office for battery. Great guys to associate with Bonnie!

As for the Cathedral City Police, they filed a Restraing Order against me when I demanded an investigation into the Bonnie Garcia incident, where two officers went to Garcia's office and slandered me to her staff. I have a witness, [Madelene Hunter-Patterson.]

They want me to "shut up" about this incident, and, what better way? ALL of the phone calls I made were to make a legitimate police report, and the dispatcher continued to hang up on me, refusing to take the report, or to connect me to an officer who would take the report.

Wonder if the Desert Sun will allow me to answer this piece of yellow Journalism?
I doubt it; they have continuously refused to do stories on real homeowner association problems.

The readers of the Desert Sun need to ask, WHY they sensationalize "stories" that refuse to present both sides of the issue?

.