Anda di halaman 1dari 38

costs involved; we bought the necessary papers but did not file them.

Fees for a
restraining order would be waived in the event the plaintiff could not afford them shows he
is lying. In his other document, his story is different. Instead of buying the paperwork, he
called the court clerk. Proper procedure is to go in and fill out papers - not phone in a
complaint. If he called the clerk would have told him about a fee waiver which he obviously
got. Again, evidence Mr. McCarthy is lying under penalty of perjury. Not only did he lie
about finding out my gun by public record, he is lying that my gun is illegal. It is NOT!
Another perjurious statement meant to discredit me!
I have been actively working with Community Relations Officer Bill Titano who has been
slow in getting me the documents that I needed to attempt to get Mr. McCarthy evicted for
being a nuisance. I asked him what I could do about McCartys false police reports. He
said there was nothing I could do. I will ask Police Chief Bejarano when I sent him this
documentation about Mr. McCarthy to see if Officer Titano was telling me the truth or if he
was intentionally part of the problem in obstruction of justice. It should be against the law to
file false reports, and if it is I will request Mr. McCarthys arrest for this as well. This is the
FOURTH false action by Mr. McCarthy!
April 24, in a letter from Mr. McCarthys property manager, there is proof that I was dealing
with the situation in the appropriate manner. He is attempting to stop me from my right to
get him classifed as a criminal nuisance. Not only did I have a SDPD Community Service
Officer check to see what he could do, the property manager also was working to help me
go through the channels. (See attached letter.)
August 8, 2000, I filed a verbal complaint with the Police Chief naming both Kevin
McCarthy and the SDPD harassing me and surveilling. I filed a complaint with the FBI
when the harassment did not stop later in the day since I had written the Police Chief about
twenty letters about the harassment and had filed a request for a restraining order against
the helicopter pilots. I was denied a hearing because San Diego Police have been able to
establish a police state in San Diego which is why the city is under federal investigation.
On August 12, Mr. McCarthy battered me, and I made a Citizens arrest.
If Mr. McCarthy was so afraid of me, why did he come over to MY side of the street and
turn the hose on and drench me after I warned him not to turn it on? He was intentionally
provoking me, and I did not go after him. I retreated and called the police. I did not threaten
him. He even documents my statement to him: Thats a battery. Im calling the police.
This is not the behavior of someone who is threatening. This is the behavior of a law
abiding citizen which I always have been. I have not walked on public property in front of
his house since the April 14 intimidation.
Mr. McCarthy lied about the time of the August 12th event. My witness and my calls to
the police verify the time, and it was around 7:00 AM. Not 5:45. He lied about the time in
court again. I did not walk by the water on any other occasion. He turned the hose on after I
warned him not to. He was staring and smiling a sinister smile and rushed to turn on the
hose with the purpose of battering me. He intentionally drenched me. His smile afterward
and lack of an apology after I warned him not to turn on the water, confirm his criminal motive.
This false report is adding insult to injury.
On August 14 or 15, I called the Police Chief again about the battering since I had mailed
him information about Mr.McCarthy in the past on at least two occasions, and nothing had
been done. I also called Officer Titano. On August 16, I notified the neighbor whose hose
he used to drench me that he had a history of harassing me.
On August 18, in the morning, I posted information on the internet about the public
corruption. I consider the false complaint filed on the afternoon of August 18 by Mr.
McCarthy related to my exposing the crimes publicly. His complaint will eventually be
introduced as evidence in the conspiracy crime and will turn this documentation over to the
proper authorities as evidence.
I have been working with his property manager and called him on August 14, and 15. He
told me he would contact the Officer Cuddy and Titano to see if there was enough
evidence to have Mr. McCarthy evicted. (Documentation included)

I also feel that Mr. McCarthy should be evicted for being a criminal nuisance.
I declare under penalty of law the above to be true.
Valerie Summers
September 5, 2000
Dear District Attorney Paul Pfingst:
I am requesting Mr. McCarthys prosecution for perjury and obstruction of justice by
attempting to prevent me from obtaining evidence and protectiing myself from his slander.
See enclosed documents.
Also, please expect other complaints about SDPD with this office the City Council, state
and federal agencies. Myrights have been repeatedly violated and have not been
defended by those sworn to do so. If my allegations are dismissed as has been done in
the past, expect the complaint to be forwarded to the State Attorney General. Mr rights
have been violated too much by this office. It is time to address the situation. I am
requesting the district attorney gather the name of the four police officers who claim they told
him to obtain a restraining order. If he cannot produce them it is another example of perjury.
His court papers deny that he drenched me. His testimony supported my allegation that
he did. Another example of perjury.
Mr McCarthy revealed his intent to claim I violated a restraining order based on a
communication with my neighbor. I do not have a restraining order with her and any
allegation of a violation will be reported as a malicious prosecution. The District Attorney
had been anything but impartial with my claims. Enclosed is a letter to Superior Court
regarding Judge Strauss lack of impartiality, and I will be challenging this restraining order.
Sincerely,
Valerie Summers
4405 34th St.
San Diego, CA 92116
Valerie Summers
4405 34th St.
San Diego, CA 92116
October 4, 2000
City Attorney Casey Gwinn
1200 3rd Ave. Suite 700
San Diego, CA 92101
Dear City Attorney:
On August 12, 2000, around 7:00 AM I left my gate to walk my dogs. (See enclosed map.) At the same
time, Kevin McCarthy watched me leave my home as he did every day from his porch. When I turned left
onto Meade, Kevin McCarthy crossed Meade Ave., set up sprinkler at 3430 Meade, and stooped down to
adjust the directional focus of sprinkler. As I approached the sprinkler Kevin McCarthy watched me with a
malicious look in his eye, and waited to turn on the hose until I walked the span of two houses and until I
was in front of the sprinkler.. Kevin McCarthy moved towards the faucet nozzle and stopped, waiting for
me to approach the sidewalk in front of 3430 Meade at which time I told him not to turn on the hose.
McCarthy quickly rushed about three feet forward turned on the faucet and watched with a sinister smile as
he intentionally drenched me after lying -in-wait for me.
When Mr. McCarthy filed false charges against me in his request for a restraining order, I did receive a copy
of the ticket and saw that he was to be arraigned this morning. (Although SDPD never gave me a copy,
and your office never notified me about the case.) This morning I went down to the Misdemeanor
Arraignment room to find out when I would have a chance to testify since I had not received any
notification from either SDPD or the City Attorney. I discovered that Mr. McCarthys name was not on the
roster to appear in spite of his notice to appear on the ticket. I should not be surprised that Mr. McCarthy
was allowed to batter me, make false charges and then avoid any consequences, after all, embezzlement,
double homicide, conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism, abuse of power,
bribing judges, etc. are allowed to take place with impunity.
I will not tolerate having my rights violated with impunity, and am requesting a written explanation for this
and a court date in which Mr. McCarthy will have to answer for battering me. The restraining order he was
granted was granted based on perjury and judicial corruption and does not negate my rights.
Police statements and his testimony in court conflict his written statements on the restraining order. He
was able to commit perjury with impunity, so far.
Please communicate your response as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Valerie Summers
The culture of organized crime in this city has been cultivated by city
officials, and SDPD, who have actively used this method of getting city
business done. Judge McConnell, an judge who conveniently gets so many city
cases was another judge who denied me a right to be heard. I notice her
name is on the "Hall of Justice" building. This city rewards its insiders well
doesn't it? When I read the quotes inscribed on the walls in that building, the
hypocrisy makes me want to cry. I don't though since I don't have any tears
left to cry.
(While I am at it, why does Asst. DA A. Craig Rooten handle all police
department cases? Judge Strauss handle all restraining orders and
restraining orders all involve SDPD. This city has quite a system worked out.
It's too bad no one is paying attention.)

(Page A-18 )
Padres ballpark ruling
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge is hard to predict or put a label on
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philip J. LaVelle
STAFF WRITER
19-Jun-1999 Saturday
The judge poised to put the brakes on the Padres ballpark project until an
environmental review is completed is a veteran Superior Court jurist known
for her brains, drive and independence.
Judge Judith McConnell has presided over several environmental-review cases
in the past, with no discernible pattern to her rulings.
Nor is she predictably anti-City Hall.
Case in point: In April 1996 McConnell tossed out a lawsuit by three
Libertarian activists who challenged the city's plans to expand former San
Diego Jack Murphy Stadium by using bonds issued without voter approval.
One city attorney said McConnell had "hit the nail on the head," while
prominent plaintiff Richard Rider darkly suggested McConnell was bowing to
the Establishment.
Which is ridiculous, say those who know her well. This, after all, is a
judge whose controversial awarding of custody of a boy to the homosexual
lover of his dead father -- instead of his fundamentalist Christian mother
-- would cost her a spot on San Diego's federal bench in 1995.
As for the broader body of her work, that no pattern emerges is the
pattern, say those who know her well.
"The pattern is that she's independent and she applies the law as best she
can, based on the facts as presented to her," said lawyer Judith Copeland,
a McConnell friend for 25 years.
"She and I don't always see eye to eye politically," said retired Judge
Kevin Midlam, appointed to the local Superior Court in 1988 by former
Republican Gov. George Deukmejian. Still, Midlam said McConnell, a 1980
appointee of former Gov. Jerry Brown, is an excellent judge.
"She's very fair, very efficient and very effective," he said.
A graduate of UC Berkeley's Boalt Hall School of Law, McConnell, 55, is a
Nebraska native. Her mother was a homemaker, her father a Pulitzer
Prize-winning newspaper editor.
McConnell is an ardent advocate of making the courts accessible to all
citizens, and is also a groundbreaking feminist.
One day in the early 1970s, she and several other women, including future
U.S. Rep. Lynn Schenk, ate lunch at the U.S. Grant Hotel's Grant Grill,
breaking the sex barrier at that once-males-only venue.
Her biggest share of publicity came in 1994 and 1995.
She had been recommended by U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., to President
Clinton for a slot on San Diego's federal court.
But by January 1995, McConnell withdrew her name after learning Clinton
would not fight the new Republican Congress on her behalf. She had run into
conservative opposition over her 1987 decision awarding custody of a
16-year-old boy to his late father's homosexual lover instead of his
mother, a Pentecostal Christian.
In a newspaper interview in 1995, McConnell defended her ruling and said
she looked forward to explaining her reasoning to Congress, an opportunity
that never came.
"You have to base your decisions on the law and the evidence you have
before you," she said in the interview. "I don't think you can be an
effective judge if you are looking over your shoulder all the time,
wondering how it's going to be played in the newspapers."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
Lynn Schnek is Russian? and knows Maruta ?

(Page A-4 )
Boxer slams GOP on judiciary process | Conservatives
blamed for judgeship delays
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerry Braun
STAFF WRITER
08-Apr-1998 Wednesday
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer yesterday said a bloc of conservative senators have
so "warped and distorted" the process by which judges are approved that the
federal judiciary is in a state of crisis.
The Democratic senator said many qualified nominees have been scared off by
the Republicans' tactics and withdrawn their names from consideration,
while others have seen their nominations languish for years without
reaching the Senate floor for a vote.
"They're being held up by the three I's -- intimidation, innuendo and
ideology -- and we cannot allow that to dominate," Boxer told the National
Association of Women Lawyers meeting at San Diego's U.S. Grant Hotel.
"We have a crisis when we have 90 openings and we're moving one judge a
week, maybe."
The notion of a federal judiciary in crisis has been taken up by others
before Boxer, including William Rehnquist, the chief justice of the U.S.
Supreme Court, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, the chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee. Both have contended the lack of new judges endangers
the system's integrity.
However, Boxer has first-hand experience combating conservatives over
judicial appointments.
In 1993, she recommended Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell of San Diego
to the federal bench, only to have McConnell withdraw her name from
consideration after Republicans launched a campaign against her and other
Clinton nominees. Republicans focused on a 1987 case in which McConnell
awarded custody of a 16-year-old boy to his deceased father's gay partner
instead of the boy's mother.
Other nominees that Boxer has recommended to the White House have come
before the Senate only after long delays.
More recently, Boxer was peppered with radio commercials in which
Republican challenger Darrell Issa claimed "some of Barbara Boxer's choices
for federal judge were so liberal even President Clinton rejected them."
Boxer, however, said Republican opposition to "judicial activists" is not
an attempt to weed out liberals so much as to weed out independent jurists.
"Who is a `judicial activist' anyway?" Boxer asked. "I think it's anyone
with a pulse and heartbeat. Are you supposed to be someone who's never done
anything in your life? Are you supposed to be someone who's never had an
opinion in your life? It's a frightening prospect.
"They oppose people for having a thought in their heads. They have warped
and distorted the nomination process."
Boxer said she has sought to nominate as many women as men to the bench,
and "worked very hard to make the American judiciary look more like
America."
She said the screening process she has created to review potential nominees
assesses them solely on their qualifications.
"I haven't known one of the people I recommended to President Clinton," she
said. "They have all made it on their own."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page A-1 )
Judge's step up in doubt | McConnell in line for federal
bench
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VALERIE ALVORD
Staff Writer | Copley News Service correspondent Derrick DePledge contributed to this report.
05-Dec-1994 Monday
San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell's nomination to the
federal bench could run aground on the conservative tide in Congress, say
legal and political experts in Washington.
McConnell's nomination was held up, apparently by a backlog in Congress.
In the meantime, a conservative newspaper's editorial blasting her for
awarding custody of a child to a gay parent's homosexual partner seven
years ago is said to have tipped off Republican senators, who now hold a
majority, that backing her could be politically embarrassing.
McConnell, who served two years as San Diego Superior Court's presiding
judge, was recommended for an open seat on the San Diego federal bench last
year by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and nominated by President Clinton in
August.
The next step was to be a confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary
Committee. But the committee did not act before the end of the session of
Congress, so McConnell must now be recommended and nominated again.
The good news for the San Diego judge, said one legal analyst in
Washington, is that in the recent past even conservative Republicans have
given the president's nominees the benefit of the doubt. And the
nominations that have run into serious trouble have generally involved
judges with more than one controversial ruling in their backgrounds.
The bad news, according to a second analyst, is that now that McConnell's
nomination has been singled out as problematic and Republicans have gained
a majority, Clinton may think twice before renominating her.
A White House spokesman said only that the president is reviewing judicial
vacancies and has not decided upon the nominees.
"The conventional wisdom is that there are a few judges who have attracted
controversy -- Judith McConnell is one of them -- and that in a (changed)
political climate the White House will take a different sort of
calculation," said Thomas Jipping, a legal affairs analyst for the
conservative lobbying group, Coalitions for America.
If she is renominated, senators will likely look at her entire record, not
just one decision, said Marianne Lombardi, another Coalitions analyst.
"Unless something else really controversial comes up, they'll approve her.
That's my opinion," Lombardi said.
On the other hand, nobody knows exactly what to expect from the new
Republican majority in Congress, she said. A decision to award a child to a
homosexual non-relative "is going to be controversial and there will be
groups who will oppose her on that one thing," Lombardi said.
Continued support
Conservative Washington lawyer Michael Farris went further, saying
McConnell's nomination could falter if politicians view it as a measure of
their commitment to "family values."
"There's such a mad scramble in Washington right now by both Republicans
and Democrats to get as far as possible from the counterculture values of
the Joycelyn Elderses and the Hillary Clintons that I doubt very seriously
if any senator of either party would step forward and support Judith
McConnell," predicted Farris, who was an unsuccessful Christian Coalition
candidate for Virginia's attorney general in November.
Elders, Clinton's surgeon general, has been a lightning rod for
controversy over her views on drugs and sex education. The counterculture
values Farris cited are generally considered to mean liberal attitudes
toward sex and morality that have been a favorite target of conservatives.
In San Diego, there is continued support for McConnell, even among
conservatives such as Peter Nunez, Ronald Reagan's U.S. attorney here.
"It would be a shame if one case were to keep her from becoming a federal
judge," Nunez said. "All judges make decisions that are controversial, and
unless there's a pattern, it seems unfair to single out one case."
The nation's roughly 500 federal trial judges are appointed for life to
handle both civil and criminal matters; they earn $133,600 a year.
Ideological opposition to nominees for the posts is relatively uncommon in
Washington, though there is occasionally opposition to federal appeals
court nominees. Appointments to the Supreme Court are often bitterly
challenged.
The decision troubling McConnell's nomination dates from 1987, when she
awarded custody of a 16-year-old boy to his deceased father's homosexual
partner instead of to his mother, a Pentecostal Christian.
The ruling shocked many in the legal profession who said the dominant
philosophy in such cases is to award a child's custody to blood relatives
unless it can be shown that the family members are unfit.
No such determination was made about the boy's mother, Betty Lou Batey.
But her son, Brian, who had lived in Palm Springs with his father for about
two years -- and who had weathered a long and bitter custody battle between
his parents -- had asked McConnell to let him remain in the same home with
his father's long-term partner. Betty Batey, who had previously kidnapped
her son, wanted the boy to return to San Diego to live with her.
"It's an anti-family assumption that Judge McConnell treated the mother
and the homosexual lover as equal players on the field," said Farris, who
came to San Diego in 1984 to defend Betty Batey on child-stealing charges
at the request of the conservative Christian group, Concerned Women for
America.
"I think that decision was way over the edge in most people's judgment,"
Farris said in a recent interview.
Strong pressures
McConnell refused to comment last week on the whispers surrounding her
nomination, directing calls to Boxer's office in San Francisco.
Sam Chapman, Boxer's chief of staff, said McConnell's name was forwarded
to the Judiciary Committee too late to be acted upon by the last Congress,
which was controlled by Democrats. The committee was headed by Sen. Joseph
Biden, a liberal Democratic from Delaware.
The new committee will have a Republican majority and a conservative
Republican chairman, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah. Washington insiders are
already speculating that as chairman of the influential committee, Hatch
will be thrust into an intense ideological conflict over how aggressively
Republicans should use their new congressional majority to shape areas like
the federal judiciary, civil rights policy and spending on law enforcement.
Biden has predicted that Hatch will face strong pressures from the GOP's
right wing.
Hatch's spokeswoman said the senator would not make any comments about how
he would vote on specific nominations.
A spokeswoman for Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., another conservative on the
committee, said she didn't think the committee would routinely block the
president's nominations, but added: "When Republicans have felt obliged to
fight, they have."
McConnell's nomination has already gotten more attention than usual,
having been singled out by The Washington Times, the capital's newspaper
of record for conservative views. The paper's editorial criticizing
McConnell "has made the rounds on Capitol Hill," said Farris, and prompted
speculation that McConnell's nomination could now quietly die.
But Chapman, Boxer's staff chief, said the senator intends to recommend
McConnell again and that he expects her to re-nominated by the president
and then confirmed by the Senate.
He pointed out that conservative California Supreme Court Chief Justice
Malcom Lucas has written a letter of support for McConnell.
Conservative anger
The court decision that has the conservatives up in arms has been
misrepresented, Chapman said. Many people, he said, are not aware that the
mother walked out of the final hearing, leaving McConnell to rule without
having heard from both sides.
And McConnell took over the case after a juvenile court judge had already
given custody of Brian Batey to his father, and after the mother had
kidnapped her son and lived in hiding for almost two years. When the mother
and the boy, who was then about 12, returned to San Diego, Brian Batey was
placed in foster care for two more years. Then McConnell returned custody
to his father at the boy's request.
The father died of AIDS when Brian was 16. Brian requested and was granted
the right to stay with his father's lover, Craig Corbett, in surroundings
that had become familiar to him.
What capped conservative anger at the time was McConnell's parting words
to the teen-ager. "You are fortunate to have a person like Craig Corbett, a
man who will provide you with a stable and wholesome environment," she told
the boy.
"It showed her religious bigotry and lack of sensitivity to a natural
parent," said Beverly LaHaye, president of Concerned Women.
LaHaye and other supporters of the mother said they thought McConnell
seemed to be implying that a Pentecostal Christian home was not a wholesome
environment.
But Chapman said McConnell's decision couldn't have been all that bad,
judging by the way the teen-ager's life turned out. He is now 23, married
and working as a deputy sheriff in a small Midwestern town, Chapman said.
McConnell became a San Diego Municipal Court judge in 1977 and was
appointed to the Superior Court in 1980. In 1982 she served as presiding
judge of the Juvenile Court. She served two terms as presiding judge of the
Superior Court in 1988 and 1990. In 1991 she was named Trial Judge of the
Year by the San Diego Trial Lawyers.
She has also held numerous positions on statewide judges' and lawyers'
panels.
It was McConnell's years of judicial and administrative experience that
made her the top choice of a committee formed to recommend a federal
judicial nominee to Boxer, said Sister Sally Furay, provost of the
University of San Diego, who headed the committee.
Furay said the Batey case never came up in the discussions.
"You're looking at a judicial career of 16 or 17 years," she said. "If we
had started analyzing every case we'd still be talking. We divided into
teams and called hundreds of lawyers and judges all over the state (for
background checks). Three candidates got our highest rating but it was the
view of the committee that Judith McConnell was the strongest of the
three."
Furay said she also thought it would be unfair if a single ruling blocked
McConnell's nomination, but added: "Unfortunately, her qualifications may
not make any difference if people don't have open minds."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

Page A-21 )
Battle over judges marked by politics | In an election year,
ideological leanings prompt hot debates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DORI MEINERT
Copley News Service
20-Apr-1996 Saturday
WASHINGTON -- When President Clinton appointed him to the bench two years
ago, New York federal judge Harold Baer couldn't have imagined that he
would be at the center of an election-year debate over the ideological
leanings of the federal judiciary.
But his January ruling banning evidence seized in a major drug case set off
a firestorm of political criticism.
Republican presidential hopeful Bob Dole said Baer should be impeached.
White House press secretary Michael McCurry, sensing which way the
political winds were blowing, hinted that Clinton might ask Baer to resign.
Baer apparently got the message and reversed his ruling, but said he was
not influenced by pressure. And his reversal ignited yet another debate
over politicians violating the independence of the judiciary. Also, the
incident has been seized by conservatives and the Dole campaign as proof
that Clinton's judicial choices are soft on crime.
In a series of speeches over the last few weeks, Senate Judiciary Committee
Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, has criticized several Clinton judges for
being too lenient toward criminals.
"There can be little doubt that judges appointed by Republican presidents
will be generally tougher on crime than Democratic appointees," said Hatch,
whose committee holds confirmation hearings on presidential nominees.
While conservatives complain that Clinton's choices are too liberal,
liberal groups say Clinton has been too willing to accommodate Republicans
who control the Senate and thus the confirmation process. And some
conservative groups also criticize Republicans for going along.
"The notion that the federal bench is dominated by liberal judges is just
ludicrous," said Nan Aron, president of the liberal Alliance for Justice,
as the group released its evaluation of Clinton's judicial selections in
February.
"In fact, by avoiding a number of progressive choices, the current
administration relinquished the opportunity to achieve more balance in the
courts," she said.
No GOP rejections
Since Republicans took over the Congress in 1995, the Senate has not
rejected a single Clinton judicial nominee. Even before the Republicans
took over, Clinton's strategy was to consult closely with Judiciary
Committee members of both parties to avoid the type of bloody confirmation
battles that marked the Reagan era.
Unlike Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, Clinton's criteria for
choosing judges have been less focused on ideology.
"Clinton has been generally aiming for well-qualified mainstream judges,"
said Sheldon Goldman, a political scientist at the University of
Massachusetts who studies the judicial selection process. "He doesn't want
to spend that kind of political capital. He sees nothing to be gained in
terms of public credibility."
For example, to avoid a showdown with Congress last year, Clinton backed
off his nominations of Los Angeles attorney R. Samuel Paz and San Diego
Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell as federal district judges for the
Central and Southern Districts of California respectively.
Republicans objected to Paz because he had filed misconduct complaints
against the Los Angeles Police Department, and to McConnell because she
once awarded custody of a 16-year-old boy to his deceased father's gay
partner rather than the boy's mother.
In keeping with his pledge to make the courts more reflective of society,
Clinton has appointed more African-Americans and women to the federal bench
than his Republican predecessors, Goldman said.
Also, Clinton's judges as a group have been rated as having higher
qualifications than any president's picks going back to Eisenhower, Goldman
said.
About 67 percent of Clinton's nominees have received the top rating of
"well-qualified" from the American Bar Association, compared to 59 percent
for Bush's judges, 55 percent for Reagan's and 56 percent for Carter's, he
said.
ABA questioned
Conservatives contend that the ABA is biased and not very thorough in its
background checks. So far, 183 of Clinton's nominees have been confirmed.
They include 29 appeals court judges and two Supreme Court justices. He's
whittled the number of judicial vacancies down from more than 100 left to
him by Bush to just 55.
But the Reagan and Bush judges still make up 56 percent of the federal
bench compared to Clinton's 22 percent. President Jimmy Carter's judges,
considered more liberal than Clinton's, make up another 11 percent.
Clinton's Supreme Court choices -- Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G.
Breyer -- were approved by an overwhelmingly majority of senators,
including Dole. With its conservative majority, which Ginsburg and Breyer
sometimes join, the high court has provided less of a target for
conservatives than in past years.
Clinton's lower court judges so far appear to be voting in "a moderate,
middle-of-the-road fashion," said Robert Carp, a political scientist at the
University of Houston who has studied federal court opinions for 26 years.
Clinton's District Court judges have made rulings considered liberal 46
percent of the time -- more than the 37 percent liberal rating for Bush
nominees and 36 percent for Reagan nominees, but less than the 53 percent
for Carter nominees, Carp said.
"The real key to Clinton's impact on the judiciary is whether he is
re-elected," Carp said. "Now, even if his judges were more liberal, they
couldn't do much because they'd be overruled" by Republican-nominated
judges on the appeals courts, where Clinton's nominees total just 16
percent.
If Clinton wins a second term, he is likely to have the opportunity to name
a majority of judges on the federal bench as well as additional Supreme
Court justices because of possible retirements there.
Clinton perplexed by complaints
Clinton recently said he was "perplexed" by the GOP complaints of his
choices of judges because Senate Republicans had voted for all but three of
his appeals court nominees.
In 1994, when Republicans were in the minority in the Senate, they attacked
appeals court nominees Rosemary Barkett and H. Lee Sarokin for allegedly
being soft on crime. Dole voted against both. They were confirmed.
The third, James Dennis, was confirmed last fall by voice vote. However,
Dole joined an earlier unsuccessful attempt to kill the nomination.
Overall, Republicans had few gripes with Clinton nominees before the
presidential campaign season opened.
Judge Baer and North Carolina Judge James Beaty, the two federal district
judges currently receiving the most heat, were approved by a unanimous
voice vote by the then Democratic-controlled Senate.
Neither Dole nor Hatch "raised one peep," complained Thomas Jipping, who
monitors judicial selections for the conservative Free Congress Foundation.
"Clinton judges as a group are decidedly more activist than
Republican-appointed judges and there are many examples of that," Jipping
said, referring to those who use a broad interpretation of the
Constitution.
Senate Republicans haven't done enough to block Clinton's nominations, he
said. Jipping blames the Senate's reluctance in large part on the tradition
of senatorial courtesy. It's a polite dance of White House reliance on
senators to recommend judges from their states with the deference that
senators then give the president's nominations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
Gary told me Bersin was up for federal judgeship and Clinton withdrew his papers....was this ever
made public? How did Gary know?

(Page B-2 )
Lynne Lasry proposed to president as federal judge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VALERIE ALVORD
Staff Writer
11-Aug-1995 Friday
Lynne Lasry, a former federal prosecutor now in private practice, is
expected to be the next nominee for a position on San Diego's federal
bench.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., has asked President Clinton to nominate Lasry
to a seat that will become open when San Diego federal Judge John S.
Rhoades Sr. retires from active status in November.
Lasry would be the second nominee pending for the U.S. District Court bench
here. Last month, at Boxer's request, Clinton nominated federal Magistrate
Barry Ted Moskowitz to a vacant position.
Moskowitz was named after Boxer's first choice, Superior Court Judge
Judith McConnell, ran into opposition from conservatives angry about a
decision she made, which they considered anti-family.
Neither Moskowitz nor Lasry -- both former federal prosecutors -- is
expected to attract controversy, although some conservatives in San
Diego's legal circles have branded them both as liberals.
"She will be a good judge," said Tom Ferraro, a federal prosecutor who
worked with Lasry at the U.S. Attorney's Office. "I don't think you'll
find that there will be any resistance to her. She is not controversial."
Ferraro said that when Lasry left the U.S. Attorney's Office she was
handling complex fraud cases.
A graduate of the University of San Diego Law School, Lasry is now a
partner in the San Diego law firm of Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves and
Savitch.
Boxer said in a prepared statement yesterday that Lasry was chosen by an
advisory committee headed by retired San Diego federal Judge Lawrence
Irving.
Lasry, who has represented the county's Citizens Law Enforcement Review
Board, got high marks from a former adversary, defense lawyer Mario Conte.
Conte, who now heads San Diego's federal indigent defense program, said he
and Lasry opposed each other on a criminal case in the mid-1980s.
"She was touch and tenacious," Conte said. "She is a wonderful choice for
federal judge. She will be fair. She won't be putting her fingers on any
scales. She'll simply call them the way she sees them."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page B-2 )
AROUND THE COUNTY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate gets judge nomination
------------------------------------------------------------------------
01-Jul-1995 Saturday
San Diego -- Federal Magistrate Barry Ted Moskowitz came one step closer to
becoming a U.S. District Court judge yesterday when President Clinton
nominated him for an open seat on San Diego's federal bench.
Moskowitz had already been nominated by Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who
forwarded his name to Clinton. The next and final step would be
confirmation by the Senate, which is generally considered routine.
However, Boxer's last nominee for the position, San Diego Superior Court
Judge Judith McConnell, was forced to withdraw her name after conservatives
in Washington objected to her nomination. McConnell was perceived as
anti-family because she had awarded custody of a teen-age boy to his
deceased father's homosexual lover instead of to his mother, who had
previously kidnapped him.
Moskowitz, a former assistant U.S. attorney, has been a federal magistrate
about six years and has not been known to generate controversy.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page B-4:7,8,1,6; B-3:2,3,4,5 )
Moskowitz backed for U.S. judgeship
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VALERIE ALVORD
Staff Writer
29-Mar-1995 Wednesday
Federal Magistrate Barry Ted Moskowitz may be San Diego's next federal
judge.
U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer said yesterday that she would ask President Clinton
to nominate Moskowitz, a former federal prosecutor who has been a
magistrate in San Diego since 1986. Clinton could then forward Moskowitz's
name to the Senate for confirmation.
Moskowitz, 44, attended Rutgers University and Rutgers University Law
School in New Jersey. He is married and lives in Rancho Penasquitos with
his wife and two teen-agers.
As a magistrate, Moskowitz handles misdemeanor criminal trials and the
early stages of civil litigation in federal court at an annual salary of
about $123,000. As a federal judge his salary would jump to about $133,000
and he would be one of roughly 500 U.S. District judges serving lifetime
appointments.
Lawyers in San Diego's federal court jokingly refer to Moskowitz's
courtroom as "night court," saying he is so meticulous and attentive to
details that his sessions often go well into the evening hours.
But he is also considered an even-handed judge, said defense lawyer Martha
Hall, who said former prosecutors often make the fairest judges.
Moskowitz is Boxer's second choice for the seat on the federal bench here.
Last year, she asked Clinton to nominate San Diego Superior Court Judge
Judith McConnell.
McConnell's nomination was stalled by work backlogs and failed to make it
to the Senate before Republicans gained a majority in the November
election. Conservative Republicans then vowed to block the nomination of
any judges viewed as too liberal. Because of a 1987 decision by McConnell
to award custody of a teen-ager to his dead father's homosexual lover,
many politicians viewed her as too controversial, so she withdrew her name.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page E-1 )
Bench mark | JUDGE WON'T LET CAREER SETBACK
SLOW HER DOWN ANY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CLARK BROOKS
Staff Writer
16-Mar-1995 Thursday
Judge Judith McConnell
Judith McConnell grew up during a time when women were called "the weaker
sex" and girls aspired to be Della Street, not Perry Mason.
She was one of 24 women in her 1969 law-school class at Berkeley's Boalt
Hall. The men numbered 254.
"There was a certain amount of hostility toward women law students," she
says, "because our fellow students and faculty felt we were taking up space
and would never use the degrees."
McConnell has made excellent use of hers. She became a lawyer, then a judge
and was the first woman to preside over the San Diego County Superior
Court.
And it appeared she was going to get another promotion last August when
President Clinton nominated her to be a U.S. District Court judge. All that
stood between McConnell and a job on the federal bench in San Diego was a
U.S. Senate confirmation.
Six weeks after her nomination, however, a Washington Times editorial
blasted McConnell for a 1987 decision awarding custody of 16-year-old Brian
Batey to the gay companion of his late father.
Clinton, previously burned for trying to open military enlistment to gays,
withdrew support of McConnell in January when Republicans took control of
the Senate. McConnell never got the chance to explain the ruling that
apparently has worked out well for Batey, now happily married and a police
officer.
She suffered a rare professional setback. But the big loser is the federal
court, says Bill Vickery, director of the administrative office of
California's state courts.
"Very selfishly, I'm relieved that she is still part of the state court
system," he says. "She is a very bright jurist and someone who emerges as a
leader in any setting. She would have served the country very well in
federal court, but she will continue to serve our state well."
McConnell was a victim of politics, pure and simple, says Howard
Turrentine, a San Diego senior U.S. District Court judge.
"She has a fine reputation among the Superior Court judges," Turrentine
says. "She was a good presiding judge and would have been a welcome
addition to our court."
McConnell is disappointed. But she smiles and says, "I have a wonderful job
and lots of things still to do." Which is typical of the poise and
resilience that have taken her this far.
Anything she chose
She was born in Nebraska in 1944, the second of four children. The family
moved to California in 1956, settling in La Canada, near Glendale.
Her mother, Maren McConnell, a career homemaker, and father, Pulitzer
Prize-winning newspaper editor Raymond McConnell, raised her to believe she
could be anything she chose.
She chose to become an attorney, she says, because "I saw lawyers as people
who could be public servants, who could help society."
McConnell graduated Phi Beta Kappa from UC Berkeley in 1966. She earned her
law degree in the spring of 1969, passed her bar exam on the first try and
went looking for work.
"I sent resumes to a number of firms," she says, "but it was very hard for
women lawyers to get a job. I actually got a letter from one firm that said
they were going to `stick with the boys.' "
She took a job in October 1969 with the state Department of Transportation
in San Diego, the only woman among five staff attorneys. She left in 1976
to open her own practice, sharing office expenses with two women
colleagues.
McConnell was active in the local bar association and founded the Lawyers
Club of San Diego, a group made up of feminists of either gender.
Jerry Brown, California's governor at the time, appointed her to the San
Diego County Municipal Court in 1977 and promoted her to the Superior Court
three years later.
She was presiding judge of Juvenile Court in 1986 and 1987 and Superior
Court in 1990 and 1991, while raising two children who are now in college.
She has been married 26 years.
Rights advocate
McConnell volunteers for countless judicial committees, extra work that
helps satisfy her compulsion to improve the court system.
She has a suitcase full of achievement awards, including one from the
National Association of Counties in 1991 for streamlining courtroom
procedures.
McConnell also has been a champion for courthouse upgrading and expansion.
She was involved in preliminary negotiations for the new hall of justice
being built downtown.
She speaks out for women's rights, trying to help those coming along
behind her. She is a member of the state Judicial Council's Advisory
Committee on Gender Bias, which seeks equal treatment in the legal system,
from courtroom demeanor to family-law cases.
As one who does not hesitate to present her views, McConnell takes after
her late father. Raymond McConnell won his 1949 Pulitzer Prize for a series
of stories on why Nebraska should have a presidential primary.
While stumping against sexism, McConnell has had experiences that might be
funny if they were not so frustrating. For example, before a scheduled
speech on gender bias at a judicial conference in 1990, a male colleague
introduced her as "the attractive Ms. Judith McConnell."
McConnell would rather be called simply "Judge," her hard-earned and
rightful title. She appreciates appropriate compliments about her
appearance, but she prefers to be recognized for her professional
achievements.
Those, certainly, were what prompted Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., to
recommend McConnell for a seat on the federal bench and Clinton to nominate
her.
The Batey case
McConnell says she had looked forward to explaining the Batey case to the
Senate. It was complicated and controversial, shrouded in confidential
issues surrounding Brian's mother, Betty Batey, a fundamentalist Christian
who wanted custody of her son.
Those issues, McConnell says, influenced her decision to place Brian with
Craig Corbett, the man who lived with the boy's father for 12 years. She
still cannot discuss the case publicly, but could have revealed more
information in a closed Senate hearing.
Betty Batey had custody of Brian after she divorced her husband, Frank, in
1975. But she refused to let the boy's father visit, in violation of a
court order, and custody was awarded to Frank.
Brian lived with his father and Corbett for two years before Betty Batey
kidnapped him in 1982. She kept him on the run and out of school until the
FBI caught up with her 19 months later. She was charged with felony child
stealing, but the case was dismissed.
The boy said in a newspaper interview that he used drugs while moving about
with his mother.
Brian asked the court if he could live with Corbett in Palm Springs rather
than with his mother in San Diego. McConnell presided over the custody
hearing, which ended in November 1987, five months after Frank Batey died
of AIDS.
Today, Brian Batey, 23, lives in a small Midwestern town. Wanting privacy,
he declined to be interviewed. Corbett says he has never seen Batey
happier.
"He loves his work, and he adores this absolutely wonderful girl he
married," Corbett says. "They own their own home, and they are planning to
have a family next year. I couldn't be more proud of him."
Corbett, 56, says the custody fight consumed nearly all the money he had
set aside for retirement, but he has no regrets.
"I've known Brian since he was a baby, and his dad was my better half," he
says. "Brian is like my own kid. I talk to him at least once a week."
McConnell has no regrets, either. She stands by the Batey decision and is
pleased things have worked out well for Brian.
"You have to base your decisions on the law and the evidence you have
before you," she says. "I don't think you can be an effective judge if you
are looking over your shoulder all the time, wondering how it's going to
be played in the newspapers."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page B-3 )
U.S. court nominee sought after McConnell pulls out
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNION-TRIBUNE
CORRECTION | A story Monday on a search for new candidates for federal judge incorrectly
stated the wishes of a boy whose custody was at the center of a controversial ruling that scuttled
San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell's nomination. The boy asked McConnell
to let him live with his deceased father's homosexual lover rather than with his mother. The
San Diego Union-Tribune regrets the error. (950202, B-2)
30-Jan-1995 Monday
Sen. Barbara Boxer is seeking a new federal court judge nominee to
recommend to President Clinton now that San Diego Superior Court Judge
Judith McConnell has pulled out of the running.
McConnell was chosen last year after a selection committee in San Diego
forwarded her name and two others to Boxer for consideration. But McConnell
withdrew her name from consideration after learning the White House didn't
want to fight the new Republican Congress on her behalf.
McConnell said in a letter to Boxer last week that she was withdrawing
because of controversy over her 1987 ruling giving custody of a 16-year-old
boy to his late father's homosexual lover instead of to his mother, as the
boy requested. In the letter, McConnell said her ruling was based on
confidential information that she has never been able to reveal publicly.
Boxer, D-Calif., announced last week that those reviewed previously could
re-apply but said she also was seeking new applicants to be reviewed by a
new committee. She said former federal Judge J. Lawrence Irving would head
the committee and that prospective applicants should contact her office by
Feb. 9.
Federal trial judges, called U.S. District judges, are appointed by the
president for life and must be confirmed by the Senate.
Boxer had nominated McConnell and Samuel Paz of Los Angeles, a former
president of the American Civil Liberties Union in Southern California. But
she told them earlier this month that the Clinton administration didn't
want to keep pushing for their confirmation by the GOP-controlled Senate.
Boxer also said her discussions with top Republicans persuaded her that
both nominations were doomed.
Boxer then appointed a federal magistrate to the federal bench in Los
Angeles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page B-1 )
McConnell quits bid for federal judgeship
------------------------------------------------------------------------
UNION-TRIBUNE and ASSOCIATED PRESS
22-Jan-1995 Sunday
San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell has withdrawn her name from
consideration for a seat on the San Diego federal bench after learning the
White House didn't want to fight the new Republican Congress on her
behalf.
McConnell, 50, had run into opposition from conservatives over a 1987
decision in which she awarded custody of a 16-year-old boy to his late
father's homosexual lover instead of his mother, a Pentecostal Christian.
On Friday, McConnell asked Sen. Barbara Boxer to remove her name from
consideration.
Boxer, D-Calif., had nominated McConnell and Samuel Paz, of Los Angeles,
for federal judgeships last year. But she informed them both last week that
the Clinton administration didn't want to keep pushing for confirmation by
the GOP-controlled Senate.
Paz, 51, is a former president of the American Civil Liberties Union in
Southern California.
In the statement, Boxer said she talked to top Republicans and realized
both nominations were doomed.
McConnell could not be reached for comment.
In Washington, White House Deputy Press Secretary Arthur Jones said last
night that he was unaware the nominations had been withdrawn and that he
didn't think anyone in President Clinton's administration had sent the
message that they were in peril.
U.S. Attorney Alan Bersin in San Diego, a longtime Clinton friend and
strong McConnell supporter, said he also had not heard the news and said he
found it disappointing.
"If she's withdrawn her name, I regret that decision," Bersin said. "She
would have been a good addition to the federal court bench, and I think
that's a sense that's shared by a large majority of lawyers and judges in
the community."
The news that McConnell won't fight for the U.S. District Court seat ends
months of speculation that she would have a tough time in nomination
hearings before a Senate Judiciary Committee controlled by Republican Sen.
Orrin Hatch of Utah and Sen. Strom Thurmond of South Carolina.
Conservative legal analysts in Washington, however, said in interviews last
month that she still had a good chance of confirmation if Clinton placed
her name before the committee.
The main hurdle, analysts said, was getting her name into nomination by the
president.
McConnell has been a judge in San Diego since 1977. She has been on the
Superior Court since 1980.
The decision that put her at odds with conservatives involved a long and
bitter custody battle between a San Diego woman, Betty Lou Batey, and her
homosexual ex-husband. Both wanted custody of their son, Brian.
After the mother kidnapped the boy and lived underground for several years,
the father was given custody. But when he died of AIDS the mother tried to
regain custody. McConnell, at Brian's request, awarded the teen-ager to
the father's homosexual lover.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

(Page B-2 )
Clinton taps McConnell for federal court judge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
07-Aug-1994 Sunday
Judith McConnell
President Clinton has nominated San Diego Superior Court Judge Judith
McConnell to be a U.S. District judge in San Diego.
He made the nomination on the recommendation of Sen. Barbara Boxer,
D-Calif., who suggested McConnell for the lifetime appointment to the
federal bench in November.
McConnell was appointed a San Diego Municipal Court judge in 1977 and
became a Superior Court judge in 1980. She was the first female presiding
judge of the San Diego County Superior Court in 1990 and served as chief
judge of the county's Juvenile Court from 1984 to 1987.
The nomination by Clinton is the second step in the process for McConnell,
whose selection still must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
In recommending McConnell last year, Boxer cited the judge's "deep
commitment to fairness and equality."
McConnell has presided over high-publicity cases, including the nationally
noted case in 1987 in which she gave custody of teen-ager Brian Batey to
the homosexual lover of Brian's late father. The decision resulted in
hundreds of letters of opposition.
McConnell holds a law degree from Boalt Hall at the UC Berkeley and began
her legal career in civil litigation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.
Valerie Summers
4405 34th St.
San Diego, CA 92116
(619) 528-9834
October 14, 2000
Senator Charles Grassley, Chairman
FBI Oversight Subcommittee
135 Hart Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
James M. Inhofe, Senator
Armed Services Committee
453 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
Richard C. Shelby, Chairman
Senate Select Committee On Intelligence
SH-211 Hart Bldg.
Washington, D.C. 20510
Chairman Dan Burton
Government Reform Committee
2185 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Honorable Gentlemen:
For a year and a half my computers have been illegally accessed. Someone continues to
break in my home and wire my computers so that they can be accessed remotely. When I
am online, someone boots me off and steals my files. I have complained to SDPD, the
D.A., the FBI, San Diego FBI, Los Angeles, FBI, Washington, to Congress and to Steve
Case from AOL. To this day, nothing has been done to stop this illegal activity. I even
bought a new computer, and someone illegally entered my home again and wired that one
as well. As I have told you, my life is, and has been in danger because of our maniac
President and his murderous ways. I no longer work because I found out my employer
was involved in the contract on my life and not one person would help me - including
members of Congress or Governor Davis. So far no one has seemed to care whatsoever
that I, a citizen of this supposedly free country, live as though I am a Jew living in Nazi
Germany. Even the people whose very lives I saved seem to feel they have no
obligation to assist me. My city government, state government and national government
have failed me. Recently I was framed by a neighbor who moved here from Hillary
Clintons home state whom I believe is an agent provocateur. I was framed after he
assaulted me, and he got a restraining order against me granted by just another crooked
judge in San Diego after the batterer declared I was a threat to the community based on
lies. He, in fact, is the threat to the community, but we all know how the Clintons work with
smear and character assassinations.
He did this because I filed another complaint with the FBI about the constant and continual
harassment by the police. I believe my brother- a mind control experiment - was
murdered by prescription drugs in retaliation for this.
Enclosed is a rough draft of research I was compiling that was illegally downloaded. It is in
very rough draft form. I was in the process of gathering research and then was going to
pare it down to explain my theory that Clinton has turned this country into regions run by
corporations in an organized crime model of government.
Here is a summary of my theory based on actual events:
Multimillionaire John Moores, San Diego Padres owner, CEO, UCSD Chair, is using his
philanthropy as a front for mind control slavery organization, and this is a pattern being
used across the nation. Gores reinventing America, in fact privatized the government, and
the corporate heads are using CIA mind control secrets provided by former CIA Director
John Deutch to gain control of local governments schools and medical systems.
One of our Council members was diagnosed with cancer a few years back. According to
the Union-Tribune, When Stallings was diagnosed with cancer, Moores visited her
frequently in the hospital. She and Moores became close friends. And Stallings has always
been a strong supporter of the ballpark project.
Was she mind controlled in the hospital? Was Moores her handler?
Stallings suspected of leaking city secrets | Sources say Moores
also a focus of ballpark probe
Philip J. LaVelle
STAFF WRITER
11-Aug-2000 Friday
http://www.uniontribune.com/news/utarchives/cgi/idoc.cgi?588805
+uni x++www. uni ont r i b. com. . 80+Uni on- Tr i bune+Uni on-
Tribune+Library+Library++%28Stallings
Both council members told investigators about one incident, rumored for
months at City Hall, in which Stallings was suspected of tipping off Moores
by telephone in the midst of a closed-session meeting. Neither official
could pin down precisely when the alleged event occurred, other than to say
it took place during the period in which the city was in talks with the
Padres, most likely in the summer of 1998.
According to accounts provided by several sources, Stallings got up at one
point during the private meeting and placed a call from a telephone located
on the periphery of the room, dominated by a large conference table and
located on the 12th floor of City Hall next to the council's open chambers.
One council member became suspicious and alerted Golding, who reportedly
got up, walked over to Stallings and directed her to hang up.
Golding was out of town and could not be reached for comment.
According to records obtained by The San Diego Union-Tribune under the
California Public Records Act, Stallings used city phones to place 16 calls
to Moores between 1998 and this year. Four of these came in the two
months
before her initial purchase of Neon stock, including two calls to Neon
Systems headquarters Feb. 23, 1999, and one to Neon Systems on March
1,
1999, four days before she bought the stock.
Is this why the DoD diverted military funds? For non-lethal weaponry?
Non-defense items
clog Defense budget:
Breast cancer research, marijuana eradication,
black college aid, Native American health care
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Jon E. Dougherty
2000 WorldNetDaily.com
An "incestuous relationship" between the administration and civilians
appointed to "key positions throughout the Pentagon" has enabled the
Clinton-Gore White House to quietly shift hundreds of millions of dollars of the
defense budget to fund favorite non-military social, health and research
programs -- one of the biggest such line items being $175 million for breast-
cancer research -- according to a high-ranking Pentagon official.
By tracing Moores donations and activities I can verify the possibility of my theory being
true; that the country has been taken over by corporate mob bosses using mind control as
Hillary Clintons Marxist health care plan has being implemented step by step in spite of
the fact that Americans rejected it.
The following article is just one that indicates there is such a plan to mind control the world for
the wealthy:
Mind Control Slavery and the New World Order
According to this extremely disturbing report, Monarch
Program mind-control survivors claim to have been
used as high-tech slaves by certain intelligence
agencies and top-ranking politicians.
From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com
by Uri Dowbenko 1998
E-mail: u.dowbenko@mailcity.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
High-tech slavery is alive and well on planet Earth. Ever since
World War II when the United States Government's Project
Paperclip sponsored the resettlement of about 2,000 high-level
Nazis in the United States, the technology of mind-control
programming has advanced rapidly.
"The Germans under the Nazi government began to do serious
scientific research into trauma-based mind control," write Fritz
Springmeier and Cisco Wheeler in their book, The Illuminati
Formula used to create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled
Slave. "Under the auspices of the Kaiser Wilhelm Medical
Institute in Berlin, Josef Mengele conducted mind-control
research on thousands of twins and thousands of other hapless
victims."
Mengele, known as "the Angel of Death", was one of the
approximately 900 military scientists and medical researchers
secretly exfiltrated into the United States, where he continued his
'research' and trained others in the black arts of mind control.
This work in behaviour manipulation was later incorporated into
the CIA's projects Bluebird and Artichoke which, in 1953,
became the notorious MKULTRA. The CIA claims that these
programs were discontinued, but there is no credible evidence
that "The Search for the Manchurian Candidate" (the title of the
definitive book by John Marks) ever ceased.
In fact, Captain John McCarthy, US Army Special Forces (Ret.),
who ran CIA assassination teams out of Saigon during the
Vietnam War, told his friend, LAPD whistleblower Mike Ruppert,
that "MKULTRA is a CIA acronym that officially stands for
'Manufacturing Killers Utilizing Lethal Tradecraft Requiring
Assassinations'". Thus the CIA's official obsession with
producing programmed killers through the MKULTRA contained
more than 149 sub-programs in fields ranging from biology,
pharmacology, psychology to laser physics and ESP.
More recently, new evidence points to the continuous use of so-
called trauma-based programming techniques to accomplish the
same goal. This includes the deliberate induction of Multiple
Personality Disorder (MPD) in involuntary human subjects - in
essence, human guinea pigs.
This rough draft file I am sending you has been stolen and further endangers my life. I will
complete this theory and eliminate excess verbiage and mail a finished copy to you, but I
do not know if I will live long enough to do this. I am, therefore, sending it to you now.
By the way, since no one helped me I lost everything I ever worked for. This should
embarrass and shame all people whom I asked for help, but I have found out that humans
are not very human these days.
I found out today one of my former History students was killed on the U.S.S. Cole. I regret
teaching her to be a patriot. I now know that what I taught her about America was lies.
Sincerely,
Valerie Summers
Key members from the Jason Scholars, Secret Society
The "Wise Men" were key members of the Council on Foreign
Relations. The membership totalled twelve which included six
individuals from governmental positions thus the name, Majority
Twelve. This group was made up over the years of the top officers
and directors of the Council on Foreign Relations and later on
from the Trilateral Commission. Notable names as Gordon Dean,
George Bush, and Zbigniew Brzezinski were among them. The most
important and influential of the "Wise Men" who served on MJ-12
were John McCloy, Robert Lovett, Averell Harriman, Charles
Bohlen, George Kennan, and Dean Acheson. It is significant to
recall that President Eisenhower as well as the first six MJ-12
members from government state departments were also members of
the Council on Foreign Relations.
Thorough researchers will soon discover that not all the "Wise
Men" attended Harvard or Yale and not all of them were chosen
from "Skull and Bones" or "Scroll and Key" memberships during
their college years. You will be able to quickly clear up this
mystery by obtaining the book The Wise Men by Walter Isaacson and
Evan Thomas, Simon and Schuster, New York. Under illustration #9
in the center of the book you will find the caption "Lovett with
the Yale Unit, above far right, and on the beach: His initiation
into Skull and Bones came at an airbase near Dunkirk". I have
found that members were chosen on an ongoing basis by invitation
based upon merit post college and was not confined to only
Harvard or Yale Grads.
A chosen few were later initiated into the Jason Society. They
are all members of the Council on Foreign Relations and at that
time were known as the "Eastern Establishment". This should give
you a clue to the far reaching and serious nature of these very
secret college societies. The Jason Society is alive and well
today, and now includes members within the Trilateral Commission
as well. The Trilateralists existed secretly several years before
1973. The name of the Trilateral Commission as you remember was
taken from the alien's flag insignia known as the "Trilateral
Insignia".
MJ-12 Known Under Many Names
Majority Twelve was to survive right up to the present day.
However, under Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy it was
erroneously called the "5412 Committee"; more correctly, it was
called the "Special Group". In the Johnson administration it
became known as the "303 Committee" because the name 5412 had
been compromised in the book The Secret Government. Actually
NSC5412/1 was leaked to the author to hide the existence of NSC
5410. While under Nixon, Ford, and Carter the Special Group was
called the "40 Committee". And under Reagan, it became the "PI40
Committee". Over all those years its purpose remained the same,
only the name changed.
http://www.rcbbs.com/secretgov.htm

(Page B-1 )
After 2 years as DA, Pfingst revels in his job | Criticized by
some as too political, he says he works for the people
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anne Krueger
STAFF WRITER
06-Jan-1997 Monday
Paul Pfingst
Paul Pfingst ran for district attorney on the slogan "A prosecutor, not a
politician."
Now, two years after taking office, he is accused of being more of a
politician than a prosecutor.
But Pfingst makes no apologies for the way he's done his job. He revels in
the work of the county's top law enforcement officer.
"I enjoy what I do tremendously," he said with characteristic enthusiasm.
"I love coming to work each day."
Pfingst, 45, was a political novice when he was sworn in as district
attorney Jan. 3, 1995. Since then, he has established a name for himself in
San Diego County and around the state.
His office is recognized as the toughest in California in its enforcement
of the three-strikes law aimed at punishing career criminals. He's been
aggressive in prosecuting juveniles -- who commit particularly heinous
crimes -- as adults. He's beefed up collection of child support from
wayward parents.
Pfingst, talkative and well-versed on a variety of subjects, has endeared
himself to the media as a master of the "sound bite," the pithy quote that
is a mainstay of television news.
The red-haired, bespectacled former New Yorker doesn't hesitate to let
reporters know when he feels they have treated him unfairly, but he acts
just as quickly to remain in the media's good graces.
Pfingst's critics say they believe he reacts too much to the pulse of the
public and the spotlight of the television cameras in determining
prosecution policies.
"Paul is a politician," said Carol Hopkins, an activist who was one of
Pfingst's biggest supporters during his campaign. "Sometimes he takes
positions because they are politically popular as opposed to being
appropriate for a prosecutor."
Pfingst said he believes it's his job to listen and act.
"I don't believe it's the role of an elected official to negate the will of
the people," Pfingst said. "The public is my boss. I work for them."
A former prosecutor and civil defense lawyer, Pfingst won election as
district attorney in 1994 after coming out on top of a five-man race that
included Edwin Miller Jr., who was increasingly criticized near the end of
his 24 years in office for some management and prosecution decisions.
As a rule, Miller made few public appearances and seemed more comfortable
with his fellow attorneys than in making speeches before community groups.
He rarely talked to reporters and let his public relations staff field
inquiries.
Pfingst, in contrast, makes a point of speaking to community groups. He
walks through the courthouse to watch his prosecutors in action or chat
with judges or courthouse reporters.
In unusual moves, he argued a case in Superior Court and appeared before a
state appeals court in favor of a new law allowing 14-year-olds to stand
trial as adults for serious crimes. He argued before the state Supreme
Court but was unsuccessful in convincing the justices that judges should
not be given discretion in enforcing the three-strikes law.
"I think he has a political agenda," said defense lawyer Elisabeth Semel.
"In that respect, he is a very different district attorney than Ed Miller
was. There are those who would say that is a good thing, and some who would
say that was not."
Pfingst's second-in-command, Greg Thompson, worked under two other
California district attorneys before Pfingst asked him to come to San Diego
in 1995. He discounted claims that Pfingst is too political.
"When people talk about being a politician, they misinterpret Paul,"
Thompson said. "There's an accountability to the public. They've made him a
steward of the office and he has an obligation to report back to them."
Three strikes
Defense lawyers critical of Pfingst most often cite his stand on the three
strikes law -- a position that Pfingst mentions with pride.
"We've been the state of California poster child for going after three
strikes cases," Pfingst said.
Under the law, criminals with two previous convictions for serious or
violent felonies face a prison sentence of 25 years to life for any third
felony offense. Defense lawyers and many judges have complained that people
whose third offense is relatively minor are being warehoused in prison.
The criticism of Pfingst for his stance on three strikes is grounded in his
campaign for office.
At the time, he -- along with all the state's elected district attorneys --
supported a version of the three-strikes bill that called for life terms
only if the third strike was a serious or violent offense such as robbery.
That version was defeated in favor of the harsher one now in effect.
Several defense lawyers say they are disappointed that Pfingst enforces
three strikes so stringently after opposing it on the campaign trail.
"Sending someone to state prison for stealing food or for a single rock of
cocaine is a certain betrayal not only of the public trust, but what he led
the public to expect," Deputy Public Defender Kate Coyne said.
"His public had a right to believe that since he was personally opposed to
it, they could give him the tool of three strikes and he could use his
inherent power to do right, to do justice."
But Pfingst said he always promised to enforce whatever version of the
three-strikes law was passed.
"I don't think complying with the three-strikes statute is a political
decision. Perhaps not complying with it is a political decision," Pfingst
said.
He credits the law with helping to cut the county's crime rate 20 percent.
"Three strikes has exceeded my expectations in terms of crime reduction,"
Pfingst said. "Some people would rather attribute the decrease in crime to
a lunar eclipse than to three strikes."
A new teamwork
Pfingst has received universal praise for his efforts to forge cooperation
among local, state and federal law enforcement agencies.
He and other county law enforcement officials meet regularly to talk about
common concerns, such as establishing a countywide policy for handling
shootings by a police officer. Pfingst and U.S. Attorney Alan Bersin have
worked together in drug prosecutions and in pursuit of deadbeat parents who
cross state lines.
"He's been willing to listen and come up with ideas," said San Diego Police
Chief Jerry Sanders. "We interact fairly frequently at a lot of different
levels and that's been excellent."
County Supervisor Dianne Jacob said she's seen a change in the way law
enforcement officials work together.
"In the last two years, for the first time in decades in this county, we
have had a team, with Paul Pfingst as district attorney and Bill Kolender
as sheriff," she said.
Defense lawyers said Pfingst has been more willing to talk over cases with
them than Miller or his top deputies were.
"He's certainly willing to take a good look into cases more carefully,"
lawyer Bill Nimmo said. "I didn't feel nearly as comfortable approaching
the top guys before."
Hopkins, who heads a group that examines criminal cases around the country
that it feels were wrongly prosecuted, said Pfingst is always willing to
hear her opinion.
"No matter how much we disagree on issues, the door is always open,"
Hopkins said. "He's very responsive to criticism. He's met with many people
I think his predecessor never would have met with."
Some judges were ruffled when Pfingst took the unusual step of having his
prosecutors boycott the Vista courtroom of Superior Court Judge Herbert
Hoffman last year. Pfingst declined to specify why he boycotted Hoffman,
but some defense lawyers accused him of trying to punish an
independent-minded judge.
It is well known that some rulings by the judge have upset prosecutors. In
one case, for example, Hoffman reduced a second-degree murder verdict to
voluntary manslaughter. In a second case involving a nursing assistant who
was charged with groping patients, Hoffman sentenced the man to probation
after the assistant entered no-contest pleas to six misdemeanor charges.
Prosecutors under Miller also boycotted Hoffman, from 1990 to 1993. Hoffman
recently transferred to the downtown San Diego courthouse, where he hears
civil cases.
"We did it in as low-key a style as possible," Pfingst said. "Generally,
our relationship with judges has been good."
Miller was criticized during his tenure for almost never prosecuting police
officers involved in shootings. But when Pfingst's office filed charges
against Christopher Chaney, the first officer in the city of San Diego to
be charged with a crime for using his gun while on duty, some critics said
Pfingst chose the wrong cop to prosecute.
After just 10 minutes of deliberation in May, jurors acquitted Chaney of
shooting motorist Antonio Bogarin in the arm after a high-speed chase in
South San Diego. Bogarin admitted that he rammed Chaney's police cruiser
twice before fleeing.
Bill Braniff, a former U.S. attorney who represented Chaney for free, said
prosecutors shouldn't have taken the case to trial.
"I think that the District Attorney's Office should have taken more
responsibility for that case and looked at it harder rather than pass it on
to the jury and let them make the decision," he said.
Pfingst said Chaney's case needed to be decided by a jury.
"The jury has spoken on that -- and that's it," Pfingst said. "No matter
what you decide on these cases, one side or the other will accuse you of
making a political decision rather than one on the merits."
Child support priority
One of Pfingst's campaign promises was to beef up the district attorney's
family support division, which is responsible for collecting child support.
He's doubled the number of employees working in the division, to 500.
Collections have increased 40 percent, to $62.5 million this year, earning
San Diego County an award for most improved family support division from
the California Family Support Council.
Collections have improved so much that the District Attorney's Office has
been deemed in full compliance with state and federal guidelines and can
keep 14 percent of the money. Previously, the office was considered out of
compliance and could keep only about 8 percent of child support
collections.
Critics say child support collections under Miller were so abysmal that the
figures could only go up. And some mothers still trying to collect support
from long-lost fathers complain that they don't get enough help.
Pfingst said he wants to hire more employees and improve equipment to track
down tough cases.
Some of Pfingst's toughest challenges have come within his own office.
Miller's staunchest supporters were the prosecutors who worked for him. He
was supported by the Deputy District Attorneys Association and dozens of
prosecutors contributed to his campaign.
Pfingst disheartened many of his 260 prosecutors when he announced at a
staff meeting last year that few promotions are available. Currently, 84
attorneys in the office have applied for a handful -- the exact number has
not yet been announced -- of high-level vacancies.
Several prosecutors said they'll be studying closely to see whether
Pfingst's choices for the jobs are influenced by politics, such as whether
contributors to his 1994 campaign get the promotions. Pfingst said he has
attempted to eliminate any suggestion of politics by carefully structuring
the promotion process so that he is removed from the first round of
selections.
Many lawyers and judges who've watched Pfingst say they're still undecided
about his effectiveness as district attorney. After Miller's legacy of more
than two decades, they're hesitant to draw conclusions about Pfingst after
only two years.
"I think in a lot of respects, the jury is still out on Paul Pfingst," one
judge said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.

We began planning our third and much larger bombing action. This one grew out of a mishmash of old ideas and
discarded suggestions. The target this time was the Marin County Civic Center, an unusual Frank Lloyd Wright
futuristic building, all pink with a bright blue roof, which housed the county courthouse, sheriff's department,
county offices, a law library, and a public library. Marin County was the land of the rich and bourgeois, a worthy
target for revolutionaries; besides, we were familiar with it. Jim Kilgore and his parents had lived in Marin County
and some of the others had gone to the Civic Center to get birth certificates which we used for our false identities.
After scouting the building, Josephine returned to tell us that she had wandered into the sheriff's office without being
stopped, and if she had had a bomb with her, she could easily have planted it. She and Emily went back to the
sheriff's office for another visit, but this time they were stopped and challenged. "We're looking for the law library,"
Emily told a deputy and he directed the SLA general and her foot soldier to the proper doorway.
As a result of that encounter, Emily came up with a plan to set off two bombs rather than one at the Civic Center -
one beneath a car in the lower parking lot and the other beneath a police vehicle parked in front of the sheriff's office.
Her idea was to time the explosions very carefully so that the bomb in the parking lot would explode first and then,
when the deputies rushed out of the sheriff's office in response to that explosion, the second bomb would explode in
their faces. Teko was delighted.
Wendy hated the idea. She pointed out that the sheriff's office and the law library were adjacent and that the explosion
would draw law students as well as sheriff's deputies out to the scene. They could be killed as well as the deputies.
Yolanda tried to convince Wendy that innocent bystanders sometimes become victims in the revolution. When that
did not work, she told Wendy, "Those law students are studying to be lawyers and they'll go to work for some big,
piggy corporation, and so they are pigs too."
Wendy tried to reason with her, saying, "But they could be radicals who are trying to change the system too, or they
might want to be public defenders and to help people. You don't know who you might kill." But the Harrises were
unmoved. We would go ahead with the action according to their dictates, but Wendy refused to have anything to do
with us during this operation.
In the excitement, the scheme was augmented with the idea of a simultaneous bombing action in Los Angeles. In
that way, we would persuade the world that the Jonathan Jackson/Sam Melville Unit of the New World
Liberation Front was no ordinary group, but that we were strong enough to carry out actions in northern and
southern California simultaneously.
Patty Hearst Every Secret thing pg 350?
http://www.lektrik.com/feature/pipebomb.htm

(Page A-1 )
Slayer's plot to kill local judge foiled | Lifer gave orders
from prison; prosecutor, detective also targeted
------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Harry Jones
STAFF WRITER
06-Jun-2000 Tuesday
A plot hatched by a murderer in prison to kill a Superior Court judge, a
prosecutor and a sheriff's detective involved in his conviction has been
thwarted with the arrest of two San Diego men, authorities say.
The plan was orchestrated by the killer, serving a term of life without the
possibility of parole for the 1998 murder of a La Mesa liquor store clerk
in one of a string of robberies across the county, officials said.
The details were confirmed yesterday by high-ranking law enforcement
officials who asked not to be identified while a quickly organized
multiagency investigation continues.
Authorities said they were so concerned about the threat that the
prosecutor was moved out of his home and 24-hour security was arranged for
the judge.
Officials said there also apparently was an attempt to kill an informant in
the case while he was testifying at the trial in which the murderer,
Marquell Smith, a Skyline-area gang member, was convicted.
At that time, fellow gang members managed to smuggle weapons past a metal
detector at the San Diego County Courthouse before they were scared off by
a District Attorney's investigator who became suspicious and summoned help,
authorities said. The authorities said the plot was revealed to detectives
last Thursday by another informant, who provided detailed information about
plans to kill Deputy District Attorney Michael Groch, Judge John Thompson
and former sheriff's Detective Jim Piscitelli. Piscitelli was recently
promoted to the rank of sergeant.
Smith, 24, was sentenced April 4 by Thompson to life without the
possibility of parole, plus an additional 206 years, for a series of
robberies and the murder of 19-year-old Adrian Garmo, a college student who
was killed during a holdup of his family's liquor store.
Groch, who authorities said was the primary target of the murder plot, was
the prosecutor in the case and Piscitelli was the lead investigator.
The informant told detectives that Smith had ordered the murders of all
three men, according to authorities, and said that several members of the
Skyline-area street gang recently gathered in a motel and watched a
videotape of Groch to familiarize themselves with what he looked like.
Where they got the tape is under investigation.
While they watched the tape, the informant told detectives, Smith was on a
speaker phone calling from Donovan State Prison explaining how the judge,
prosecutor and detective were to be killed.
Search warrants served on Friday and over the weekend at various
unidentified locations netted evidence corroborating the informant's
information, officials said.
The informant also told detectives that one of the men involved in the plot
killed Lashana Latrice Newman, 18, a transient with a record of
prostitution convictions. Her body was found dumped near Dictionary Hill in
Spring Valley on April 11 in what sheriff's deputies have listed as an
unsolved homicide.
On Saturday night, San Diego police arrested Aswad Walker, 23, in the case.
Because he is being held without bail on a parole violation, authorities
said they do not have to immediately file charges in a case they said is
still under investigation.
On Sunday afternoon, Toney Barton, 37, was taken into custody on a drug
charge. His bail was set at $1 million.
Assistant District Attorney Greg Thompson said yesterday he could not
comment on the investigation other than to say, "It is extraordinarily
serious and the DA is taking it that way."
Officials confirmed that the investigation is still under way and that
other gang members may be involved.
The informant also told authorities about the earlier plan to silence the
key witness against Smith.
The informant said that during Smith's trial, a group of gang members went
to the San Diego courthouse to kill the informant, and were able to sneak
weapons past the main security checkpoint and then walk, armed, to
Thompson's courtroom.
However, a District Attorney's investigator noticed the gang members
milling about in the hallway and called sheriff's deputies, who contacted
some of the men. Some of the gang members were arrested on outstanding
warrants, but others escaped.
The informant told detectives the plan was for some of the men to create a
diversion in the hallway while two others went into the courtroom and
killed the witness.
"This is a disturbing reminder of the type of people we're working to keep
off the streets," Groch said last night. "This seems like a clear-cut
conspiracy to commit murder.
Groch said he has no immediate plans to return to his home.
"I will be out of the house for the foreseeable future," he said.
Groch said he feels safe talking about what has happened "because of the
amazing response of the Police Department, my office, and the Sheriff's
Department. Because of that I really do feel comfortable and in good
hands."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright Union-Tribune Publishing Co.


-