scum-200w

Scum Strikes Again – No Better Word for Federal Judges in Atlanta Georgia

scum-200w

The ScumBags in the federal courts in Atlanta, Georgia have struck again.

I’ve had my head down working hard for the last 10 days.  Sorry I haven’t been updating the news here!

It will come as no surprise that a whole new level of scumbagness has hit in Atlanta in an effort to stop me from exposing all the serial crooks masquerading as federal judges.

The newest scumbag is Thomas Woodrow Thrash (“TWT”).  He is masquerading as a federal judge in the United States District Court for the Northern Distreict of Georgia.

Thomas Woodrow Thrash issued a number of orders late last week to stop my efforts.  Here’s what has happened.  This is an excerpt from the Affidavit of Prejudice that I have filed against TWT:

  1. On May 19, 2011, I filed a Verified Declaratory Judgment Action in the Superior Court of Fulton County. The civil action was assigned No. 2011CV200857.
  2. On May 20, 2011, I filed a Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of Fulton County. The civil action was assigned No. 2011CV200971.
  3. On June 13, 2011, U.S. Attorney Ms. Sally Quillian Yates (“Ms. Yates”) and/or Assistant U.S. Attorney Mr. Christopher Huber (“Mr. Huber”) filed a NOTICE OF REMOVAL in regard to 2011CV200857.  2011CV200857 becameUnited States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (“N.D.Ga”) Civil Action No. 1:11-CV-01922-TWT (“01922”), and was assigned to TWT.  There is nothing in the record of any court to indicate that Ms. Yates and/or Mr. Huber represent any of the Defendants or had any authority to file anything in 01922.  The 01922 Docket erroneously shows Mr. Huber to be the attorney for various Defendants, but this is bogus.  The Notice of Removal is illegal and defective.  It was done simply to illegally move the Fulton County legal action to the federal court where the criminals can make it go away.  Th scumbag federal judges and attorneys in Atlanta had to divert my case as they could not run the risk of a jury of Georgia citizens finding them all guilty of hundreds of crimes!
  4. On June 13, 2011, I filed a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order in 2011CV200857 (docketed as Docket #2 in 01922.)
  5. On June 13, 2011, the U.S. Attorney filed a MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING OR MOTION. (01922 Docket #3.)  They don’t want to file an answer because my Verified Complaint mandates a Verified Answer (sworn under oath).  They don’t want to have to commit perjury again or admit they are criminals, so they must avoid answering at all costs.  So, they moved the case to their close friend, TWT, so he could make it go away.
  6. On June 13, 2011, the U.S. Attorney filed a MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER. (01922 Docket #4.) They don’t want to have to respond to the depositions, interrogatories, requests for documents, and requests for asmissions that i served because it will nail them all to the wall.  So, they filed a motion with their bosom buddy, TWT, and he was queued up to cover their a$$e$.
  7. On June 14, 2011, I filed a Motion to Deny Removal AND EMERGENCY MOTION FOR HEARING. (01922 Docket #5.)  This MOTION documents and cites just exactly the many ways that the Notice of Removal was illegal and defective. Based upon the statutes and case law, TWT had a legal obligation to immediately rule on the propriety of the NOTICE OF REMOVAL.  He HAD to rule that it was illegal.  He ignored these duties. I submit that this proves prejudice because the first matter to be addressed following removal is whether the removal was proper.  In 01922, the removal was facially defective. I believe anyone with a legal education or an hour of studying the law can look at it and see that it is defective.
  8. On June 14, 2011, I filed a RESPONSE TO THE MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER. (01922 Docket #6.)
  9. On June 15, 2011, I filed a Motion to DISQUALIFY Ms. Yates, Mr. Huber, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office. (01922 Docket #12.)  This Motion explains their lack of authority and details conflicts galore.
  10. On June 15, 2011, TWT denied me a hearing on the TRO and denied the motion for TRO. (A true and correct copy of the order is Exhibit 5 hereto, referenced and incorporated herein.) In this June 15, 2011 Order Denying TRO, TWT commits obstruction of justice, violates the rules, establishes his participation in the racketeering enterprise, and commits perjury.  Every party gets a TRO hearing but me.  No attorney has ever been denied a TRO hearing.
  11. TWT stated in his June 15, 2011 Order Denying TRO that the purpose of the restraining order was to restrain Judge Duffey “from violating O.C.G.A. § 10-6-5,” yet he proceeds to deny the motion by claiming it sought to be allowed to commit violations of criminal statutes. This proves prejudice and bias! TWT can’t even figure out how to disguise his prejudice and bias.
  12. TWT stated in his June 15, 2011 Order Denying TRO that the Motion for TRO fails because I was seeking to commit the unauthorized practice of law.  This is perjury.  Nowhere in my Motion for TRO does it ask to commit the unauthorized practice of law.  The Verified Complain in this Civil Action 01922 and the Motion for TRO make it absolutely clear that the only thing I am seeking is a declaratory judgment as to exactly what a person can do under the Georgia statute that authorizes use of a “power of attorney.”  The unauthorized practice of law is a criminal offense.  No one in their right mind would file a motion with a judge asking to commit a criminal offense.
  13. With no testimony of any type from anyone claiming I am seeking to commit the unauthorized practice of law, there isn’t even a fact issue.  TWT proved his prejudice by committing perjury for the purpose of furthering the racketeering enterprise that he belongs to.  He lied to damage me and protect his fellow racketeers.
  14. This wasn’t an error by TWT.  If it was, he could have immediately corrected it when I filed a motion for reconsideration of the order.  This was intentional by TWT because he is criminally prejudiced for the Defendants and criminally biased against me.  Anything that he does is going to be done to further the racketeering enterprise that the federal judges in Atlanta operate.
  15. Every party presenting a motion for a temporary restraining order is allowed the opportunity to present their arguments to a judge.  TWT denied me this established right.  This proves his prejudice because he did this to further the racketeering enterprise that he belongs to.  He lied to damage Windsor and protect his fellow racketeers.
  16. On June 17, 2011, I filed a RESPONSE TO THE FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING OR MOTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE. (01922 Docket #23.)  The Clerk of the Court failed to file the motion; Docket 23 is merely the “notice of filing of the motion” that every pro se party is required to file with the motion. This is one of the ways the staff of the clerks of the court participate in the corruption and racketeering.  Things that I send to the clerk’s office for filing simly disappear in thin air.  (Fortunately, I always have a cover letter and a courier receipt showing exactly what was sent, who signed for it, and when.)
  17. On June 17, 2011, three days after the U.S. Attorney filed its non-expedited, non-emergency motion, I received an order (the “01922 EXTENSION ORDER”) dated June 16, 2011 (Docket #19) by mail. (Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of the June 16, 2011 EXTENSION ORDER, referenced and incorporated herein.)  TWT violated my rights under the FRCP and L.R. by issuing the EXTENSION ORDER before giving me the prescribed period of time to respond to the motion.  Everyone gets 14 days to respond; I was given no response.  This served the needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.
  18. On June 17, 2011, I filed an EMERGENCY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING TRO AND AN EMERGENCY MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HEARING. (01922 Docket #22.)  The Clerk of the Court failed to file the motion; docket 22 is merely the “notice of filing of the motion” that every pro se party is required to file with the motion. More criminal activity by the office of the clerk of the court.
  19. On June 17, 2011, TWT entered an order (“01922 PROTECTIVE ORDER”) (01922 Docket #25.) (Exhibit 9 is a true and correct copy of the June 17, 2011 01922 PROTECTIVE ORDER.)  TWT violated my rights under the FRCP and L.R. by issuing the PROTECTIVE ORDER for the many reasons detailed in 01922 Docket #6.  In addition, TWT committed obstruction of justice, perjury and proves his criminal bias.  TWT had no evidence before him of any type from any of the Defendants.  The only evidence before him was the sworn under penalty of perjury testimony from me, yet TWT said: “This is the latest in a series of frivolous, malicious and vexatious lawsuits filed by the Plaintiff.”  This is absolutely false, and it served the needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.  01922 is simply a declaratory judgment action that asks the Fulton County Superior Court to clarify a state statute.  TWT ignored all of my filings because he was acting as a racketeer rather than as a judge.
  20. In the 01922 PROTECTIVE ORDER, TWT (who no longer has jurisdiction in 01922 due to his illegal acts) purported to quash discovery, though there was not even a motion before the court seeking to have discovery quashed.  This proves prejudice because a judge is not supposed to grant relief that isn’t even requested.  This proves prejudice because TWT ignored his mandatory initial obligation, which was to rule that the Notice of Removal was defective.
  21. TWT issued this 01922 Protective Order without giving me the time for response mandated by the FRCP and Local Rules.  This proves prejudice because it is a simple matter to allow a party their legal right to respond to a motion.  This is absolutely improper, and it served the illegal needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.
  22. TWT purported to issue filing restrictions against me though there was no notice and no hearing as required by absolutely binding court precedents that a real judge would have to honor.  This proves prejudice because the binding precedents for the Eleventh Circuit and Supreme Court require both notice and a hearing.
  23. TWT also purportedly ordered me to post a cash bond or surety bond that I do not have the ability to post though there was no notice, no hearing, and no inquiry into ability to pay as required by absolutely binding court precedents that an impartial judge would have to honor.  TWT was made aware of the fact that I have essentially no money, have a negative net worth of approximately $900,000, and am unable to post a bond.  This proves prejudice because TWT issued the order knowing I could not comply.  This enabled him to deny my Constitutional rights and serve the illegal needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.
  24. On June 13, 2011, Ms. Yates and/or Mr. Huber filed a NOTICE OF REMOVAL in regard to 2011CV200971. 2011CV200971 became N.D.Ga Civil Action No. 1:11-CV-01923-TWT (“01923”), and was assigned to TWT. (01923 Docket #1.)  There is nothing in the record of any court to indicate that Ms. Yates and/or Mr. Huber represent any of the Defendants or had any authority to file anything in 01923.  The docket erroneously shows Mr. Huber to be the attorney for various Defendants, but this is bogus.
  25. On June 13, 2011, the U.S. Attorney filed a MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING OR MOTION. (01923 Docket #2.)
  26. On June 13, 2011, the U.S. Attorney filed a MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER. (01923 Docket #4.)
  27. On June 14, 2011, I filed a RESPONSE TO THE MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER. (01923 Docket #6.)
  28. On June 14, 2011, I filed a Motion to Deny Removal AND EMERGENCY MOTION FOR HEARING. (01923 Docket #7.)
  29. On June 15, 2011, I filed a Motion to DISQUALIFY Ms. yates, Mr. Huber, AND THE u.s. attorney’s office. (01923 Docket #27.)  This Motion explains their lack of authority and details conflicts galore.
  30. On June 15, 2011, I filed several other motions in 01923. (01923 Docket #13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25.)
  31. On June 17, 2011, I filed a RESPONSE TO THE FEDERAL DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING OR MOTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE. (01923 Docket #23.)
  32. At 10:00 am on June 17, 2011, three days after the U.S. Attorney filed its non-expedited, non-emergency motion, I received an order (the “01923 EXTENSION ORDER”) dated June 16, 2011 (01923 Docket #9) by mail. (Exhibit 18 is a true and correct copy of the June 16, 2011 01923 EXTENSION ORDER.) TWT demonstrated his prejudice and violated my rights under the FRCP and L.R. by issuing the EXTENSION ORDER before giving me the prescribed period of time to respond to the motion.  This served the illegal needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.
  33. On June 17, 2011 at 12:30 pm, I presented an EMERGENCY MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER (01923 DOCKET #9) GRANTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING OR MOTION and an EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND HEARING to Defendant White for filing.
  34. On June 17, 2011, TWT entered an order (“01923 PROTECTIVE ORDER”) (01923 Docket #33.) (Exhibit 23 is a true and correct copy of the June 17, 2011 01923 PROTECTIVE ORDER.)  TWT demonstrated his prejudice and violated my rights under the FRCP and L.R. by issuing the 01923 PROTECTIVE ORDER for the many reasons detailed in 01923 Docket #31. In addition,  TWT committed obstruction of justice, perjury and proves his criminal bias. TWT had no evidence before him of any type from any of the Defendants.  The only evidence before him was the sworn under penalty of perjury testimony from me, yet TWT said: “This is the latest in a series of frivolous, malicious and vexatious lawsuits filed by the Plaintiff.”  This is absolutely false, and it served the illegal needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.  TWT ignored all of my filings because he was acting as a racketeer rather than as a judge.
  35. In the 01923 PROTECTIVE ORDER, TWT (who no longer has jurisdiction in 01923 due to his illegal acts) purported to quash discovery, though there was not even a motion before the court seeking to have discovery quashed.  This proves prejudice because a judge is not supposed to grant relief that isn’t even requested.  This proves prejudice because TWT ignored his mandatory initial obligation, which was to rule that the Notice of Removal was defective.
  36. TWT issued this 01923 Protective Order without giving me the time for response mandated by the FRCP and Local Rules.  This proves prejudice because it is a simple matter to allow a party their legal right to respond to a motion.  This is absolutely improper, and it served the illegal needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.
  37. TWT purported to issue filing restrictions against me though there was no notice and no hearing as required by absolutely binding court precedents that a real judge would have to honor.  This proves prejudice because the binding precedents for the Eleventh Circuit and Supreme Court require both notice and a hearing.
  38. TWT also purportedly ordered me to post a cash bond or surety bond that I do not have the ability to post though there was no notice, no hearing, and no inquiry into ability to pay as required by absolutely binding court precedents that an impartial judge would have to honor. TWT was made aware of the fact that I have essentially no money, have a negative net worth of approximately $900,000, and am unable to post a bond.  This proves prejudice because TWT issued the order knowing I could not comply.  This enabled him to deny my Constitutional rights and serve the illegal needs of the racketeering enterprise in a most significant way.
  39. On June 21, 2011, I filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Thomas Woodrow Thrash.
  40. Failure to follow proper procedure is a violation of my civil rights where TWT is acting in the absence of all jurisdiction.  TWT has issued orders that are invalid, and he no longer has jurisdiction in this Civil Action.
  41. An objective observer, lay observer, and/or disinterested observer must entertain significant doubt of the impartiality of TWT.
  42. Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges tells judges to “avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities, on the bench and off.”  TWT has demonstrated his prejudice by violating this Canon.
  43. The bias of TWT stems from extra-judicial sources.  He has demonstrated a bias against pro se parties and against anyone who would have the audacity to sue a federal judge.  He has demonstrated a particular deep-seated antagonism toward me.
  44. This Affidavit of Prejudice states very clearly the facts and reasons for the belief that bias and prejudice exists.  Dates, times, places, circumstances, and statements are itemized.
  45. I submit that this is a case of pervasive bias.  This civil action is only a few days old, but the bias has been present throughout.  The bias existed before this civil action began.
  46. TWT established a clearly fixed view about substantive pending trial matters, so this must raise concerns about the “appearance of impropriety,” a standard that must be safeguarded under applicable recusal law.
  47. TWT has established a position in this proceeding that I am wrong and that my case does not matter. This proves prejudice.
  48. TWT has violated my civil and constitutional rights under color of law.
  49. I have just cause to believe that he cannot been given a fair trial.   TWT has told everyone that I will not be given a fair trial in his orders.
  50. TWT has effectively denied my rights of the equal protection under the law under Article VI of the Constitution.
  51. TWT’s actions prove that he has exercised his power in this civil action for his own personal purposes rather than the will of the law.
  52. The orders issued by TWT in Civil Actions 01922 and 01923 suggest animosity towards me, and the June 17, 2011 protective orders deprive me of rights to which I am entitled under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the United States Code.
  53. TWT’s June 17, 2011 protective orders obliterate my legal and Constitutional rights.
  54. TWT has effectively denied my rights of the equal protection under the law.
  55. There is not a chance in the world that I will get a fair and impartial trial with TWT.  He is hopelessly biased against me because he is a damn criminal.  TWT doesn’t even pretend to hide his bias; it is plain to see.
  56. TWT is obviously friends with the Defendants.  I hoped that TWT’s commitment to his oath as a judge would be more important to him than his friendship with the Defendants, but it is clear to me that his prejudice for the Defendants is overwhelming to him.  All I want is to have someone fair and impartial with an open mind to listen to the facts and review as much of the evidence as is needed to prove each of my claims.  It is obvious to me that TWT doesn’t care about the facts and doesn’t want to consider the facts.
  57. There is not a single piece of evidence and not a single affidavit from anyone with any defendant.  They have filed nothing.
  58. TWT was told under oath by me that this is the case of a massive fraud upon the courts and a RICO action in which I have already proven hundreds of predicate acts.  TWT doesn’t seem to care about the facts because he has his own criminal agenda.
  59. The United States Constitution guarantees an unbiased judge who will always provide litigants with full protection of ALL RIGHTS.   TWT is terminally biased for Defendants and terminally biased against me.
  60. TWT has a preconceived idea of this civil action from information that has come from outside the case. TWT wrote: “This is the latest in a series of frivolous, malicious and vexatious lawsuits filed by the Plaintiff” when the only evidence before TWT was the sworn Verified Complaint in this Civil Action and sworn affidavits from me.  A reasonable person would say that branding someone as “frivolous, malicious and vexatious” with no evidence or basis, four days after receiving a case, provides a textbook example of “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
  61. TWT has labeled me “frivolous, malicious and vexatious” after reading facts in affidavits presented by me.  There was no affidavit from anyone but me before TWT when he defamed me in his court order and made his void of impartiality part of the public record.  This proves extra-judicial bias against me because TWT ignored the facts and invented his own facts.
  62. TWT has an unfavorable opinion about me that is wrongful and inappropriate.  It is undeserved, and it rests upon knowledge that TWT ought not to possess.  It is excessive in degree.
  63. I have not been treated fairly by TWT.  TWT has demonstrated pervasive bias throughout this short proceeding.  TWT has demonstrated a personal bias and prejudice against me.   TWT has not demonstrated the impartiality required of a judge.   The Orders issued by TWT show this.
  64. TWT entered this civil action with a closed mind and complete and total bias against me. All I want are my Constitutional rights.  I will not get them with TWT.
  65. In my filings in 01922 and 01923, I stated emphatically under oath under penalty of perjury before a notary that the Defendants committed all types of illegal, criminal conduct against me.  TWT had no basis whatsoever to discount anything that I swore, but he obviously ignored it all.  This proves prejudice because no fair, impartial “judge” could read the sworn statements of fact based upon my personal knowledge and not be legally obligated to accept that everything I said was true.  There is nothing in the judicial oath of office, Code of Judicial Conduct, or Rules that permit a judge to ignore the facts, so prejudice is absolutely established.
  66. On June 20, 2011, I filed a civil action (2011CV202263) against TWT in the Fulton County Superior Court with RICO charges of racketeering, corruption, and conspiracy.  I am also seeking a TRO against TWT.  I have also sent charges to the U.S. Attorney’s Office and the Fulton County District Attorney asking that TWT be indicted, convicted, and sent to prison.  I am filing a judicial misconduct complaint against TWT, and I am filing a request for hearings and impeachment with the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate.
  67. When a jury hears what happened in this case, I will prevail at trial.
  68. This motion, affidavit, certificate of good faith, and memorandum of authorities meet the requirements for a 28 U.S.C. 144 motion.
  69. This Affidavit of Prejudice states the facts and the reasons for the belief that bias and prejudice exist.  The reasons for the belief are material and stated with particularity.
  70. This affidavit meets the time requirement of 28 U.S.C. 144. Section 144 says that a motion for recusal “shall be filed not less than ten days before the beginning of the term [session] at which the proceeding is to be heard.”  With the abolition of terms of court in 1963, I have read that this specific provision no longer applies. I am filing this EMERGENCY MOTION within a week after this Civil Action appeared.
  71. This affidavit is accompanied by a “certificate of counsel of record.”  As I am the only person of record and I am a pro se Plaintiff, the certificate is from me, and it is made in good faith.
  72. The bias and antagonism of TWT unfairly prejudice me in this civil action.

The federal judges in Atlanta Georgia are the scum of the earth.  Only four-letter words would do these creeps “justice.”  They make the average murderers look like choirboys.  These are serial criminals who commit tens of thousands of crimes because thery have the power.

Well, I am unleashing a whole new attack on these slimeballs, so stay tuned for the news on my latest lawsuit.  I am suing every cotton pickin’ one of them — 56 criminals who masquerade as employees of the U.S. government and judiciary in Atlanta, Georgia.  I will pursue every single one of these crooks until the day I die.

Sadly, the federal judges in your area are undoubtedly just as corrupt.

William M. Windsor

 

{jcomments on}

Leave a Reply