Judge William S. Duffey is as Corrupt as a Federal Judge Can Be


Judge William S. Duffey is as corrupt as any judge can be.

Judge Duffey is a federal judge in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in Atlanta.

One of his favorite techniques is to have evidence destroyed.  Here’s the proof…..



I had the extreme misfortune of landing in Judge William S. Duffey’s court in 2009.  He immediately established himself as a hopelessly corrupt judge.  The list of his criminal acts is so long that I haven’t even had the time to organize them all into a Judicial Misconduct Complaint.

Judge Duffey conspires with the Clerk of the Court’s Office to block filing of documents, destroy documents, or cause documents to disappear.

No one has such a right.  Every person involved in a lawsuit has the right to file documents, evidence, motions, resp[onses and replies to motions, appeals, etc.  It is a fundamental right guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, and there are federal statutes as well as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that provide these rights.  There is no statute, no rule, and no case law to allow a federal judge or the Clerk of the Court to destroy evidence.  To do so is a crime, and both Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. and James N. Hatten, Clerk of the Court are guilty of Obstruction of Justice and Tampering with Evidence. 

Thid destruction of documents makes it impossible for the appellate courts to deal with the issue of the  documents that were not docketed or processes and/or destroyed . So, I amended my appeal to attach some of these documents.  I expect this amended appeal will magically disappear. 

There have been 24 documents that have been destroyed that I can prove were filed, but they do not show on the Docket, and they have never been processed.  Exhibits 1-15 are documents filed by me but not shown on the docket and not processed. 

Exhibit 1 is a Notice of Appeal.  Exhibit 2 is an Emergency Motion to Supplement the Record.  Exhibit 3 is a Motion for Stay.  Exhibit 4 is a Notice of Filing a Notice of Appeal.  Exhibit 5 is a Notice of Appeal to the United States Supreme Court.  Exhibit 6 is a Motion to Compel.  Exhibit 7 is a Motion for Clarification or a Motion for a Conference.  Exhibit 8 is a Motion to Vacate Show Cause Order.  Exhibit 9 is a Response to the Show Cause Order.  Exhibit 10 is a Motion for Direction on Motion to Show Cause for Contempt.  Exhibit 11 is a Request for Approval to File.  Exhibit 12 is the Affidavit of Ryan Michael Windsor.  Exhibit 13 is a Motion for Reconsideration.  Exhibit 14 is a Request for Approval to File an Affidavit.  Exhibit 15 is a Rule 60(b) Motion to Set Aside the Orders in the Case.  I field each of these documents.  I have the cover letter that accompanied each document, the document, and the signed receipt from the Clerk of the Court’s Office for each of these.  I have made numerous follow-ups asking that the documents be docketed, and both Judge Duffey and James N. Hatten have ignored these.  There is no question that these documents were intentionally destroyed (or caused to magically disappear).  Exhibits 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15 were especially troubling to Judge Duffey’s evil intentions, so he simply caused them to vanish.

Exhibits 16-24 are documents filed by my wife, but not shown on the docket and not processed. In her case, the unbelievable abuse is that her three notices of appeal have all disappeared, and she has been denied all rights to appeal.  Exhibit 16 is a Notice of Filing of a Notice of Appeal.  Exhibit 17 is a Notice of Appeal.  Exhibit 18 is a Response to Motion to Compel Discovery.  Exhibit 19 is a Notice of Appeal.  Exhibit 20 is a Motion for Stay.  Exhibit 21 is a Notice of Appeal.  Exhibit 22 is a Motion for extension of Time.  Exhibit 23 is an Affidavit.  Exhibit 24 is a Notice of Filing a Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

 Exhibits 25-27 are documents filed by my wife in the Eleventh Circuit but not shown on the docket or processed; these were returned to her because the District Court never processed her notice of appeal.  Exhibit 25Exhibit 26Exhibit 27.

 James N. Hatten, Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Anniva Sanders, Beverly Gutting, Joyce White, Margaret Callier, and others have conspired to obstruct justice and deny me and others of our due process rights under the Constitution of Georgia and the United States by intentionally and knowingly committing the crimes of obstruction of justice.

Hatten and his employees (Sanders, Gutting, White, and Callier) are obligated to file motions, documents, and affidavits that are presented to them for filing.  But in my cases, they have failed to make my filings part of the record of the court, and many of my filings have not been shown on the dockets.

This activity is by definition in violation of Obstruction of Justice — 18 U.S.C. ¬ß 1503; and as such, said violations also constitute predicate act crimes and prove violation of the RICO statute of the State of Georgia, O.C.G.A. 16-14-1 et seq.

On September 23 2010, October 18 2010, October 22 2010, October 26 2010, November 5 2010, November 10 2010, November 19 2010, December 2 2010, April 11 2011, April 28 2011, June 24 2011, June 27 2011, June 29 2011, July 1 2011, July 5 2011, July 7 2011, July 11 2011, July 20 2011, July 21 2011, July 22 2011, July 28 2011, August 1 2011, August 5 2011, August 8 2011, and on other dates, Hatten and his employees did not allow properly filed documents from me into the record in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. I can prove each of these with a copy of the cover letter, the documents, and the courier’s proof of delivery and the signature of the Clerk showing receipt.

As anyone reviewing the documents can conclude, these filings were critical to me, and I have had one lawsuit dismissed as a result claiming I failed to file a response. But I did file a response, but Hatten and his staff have hidden it.

I have been denied the right to have these documents considered, and I have lost the benefit of these filings on appeal. For Hatten to knowingly ignore his ministerial duty to docket documents filed by me, he has obstructed justice, committed fraud upon the courts, and damaged me.

When this wrongdoing was brought to the attention of Hatten, he intentionally ignored it. Because of the strenuous efforts to address this issue and the rejection of these efforts by Hatten, I can further demonstrate this was not error but intentional reckless, criminal, and conspiratorial acts.

I learned from the couriers with Courier Connection, who deliver my documents for filing to the Clerk of the Court, that the Deputy Clerks were not file stamping the documents upon receipt; they were stamping Post-Its. They would then remove the Post-Its to change dates or if it was decided that my documents would not be docketed. I was able to obtain a copy of one motion that was returned without any file stamp or Post-It, and one with a stamped Post-It was sent to me as well. Exhibits 1 and 2 are true and correct copies of these documents.

Upon information and belief, documents have been tampered with.

I have evidence that proves docket entries were backdated. I will be able to prove a significant amount of this once Hatten is compelled to produce Notices of Electronic Filing that he has refused to allow me to see.

Detailed proof of a wide variety of wrongdoing is available in copies of the documents presented for filing, cover letters listing the documents, proof of receipt by the Office of the Clerk of the Court, docket print-outs showing the documents were not docketed, affidavits from the couriers who delivered the documents and obtained signed delivery receipt, and my affidavit. A separate Affidavit is available with more detail, and relevant documents are on CD-ROM.

I filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus to disqualify Judge Duffey as a judge in my cases.  It was denied by the Eleventh Circuit judges who I find to be just as dishonest as Duffey:

Petition for Writ of Mandamus

Appendix – Volume A

Appenmdix – Volume 1

Appenmdix – Volume 2

Motion to Compel Production of Documents for In Camera Inspection

I need to add a great deal more about this crook.  He is a gangster — an out-and-out criminal masquerading as a judge.  There should be a special place in Hell for people like Duffey.

William M. Windsor

{jcomments on}

Leave a Reply