Exhibit 1 the Law v3 Final 1

7/31/2019 Exhibit 1 the Law v3 Final 1

1/34

1

1) DUE PROCESS - The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth

Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life,liberty or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment,

ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to

describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central

promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate

within the law ("legality") and provide fair procedures. When a government

harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a

due-process violation, which offends against the rule of law. If you are denied

due process in any way the judge's order is VOID!

2) Supreme Court Rule 17.1-105(B) provides:

If all the judges of any court of record are so situated in respect to any case, civilor criminal, pending in their court as to render it improper, in their opinion, forthem to preside at the trial, unless the cause or proceeding is removed, asprovided by law, they shall enter the fact of record and the clerk of the court shallat once certify the same to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who shalldesignate a judge of some other court of record or a retired judge of any suchcourt to preside at the trial of such case.

3) Oath of Office Attorneys who practice in the State of Virginia

Pledge this Oath - Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will support the

Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia,

and that you will faithfully, honestly, professionally, and courteously demean yourself in

the practice of law and execute your office of attorney at law to the best of your ability,

so help youGod? This is the oath of a lawyer.

OATH OF OFFICE Pledged by the JUDGES in the State of Virginia

I do solemnly swear (or affirm ) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and

the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartiallydischarge all of the duties incumbent on me as:

Judge of the Judicial Circuit

According to the best of my ability: (so help me God).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenthttp://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenthttp://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_lawhttp://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.amendmentxiv.htmlhttp://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendmenthttp://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html#amendment


2/34

2

4) Conspiracy -An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime oraccomplish a legal purpose through illegal action. Defraud others of their legal rights, orto gain an unfair advantage

5) Collusion - a secret agreement between opponents at law in order to obtain ajudicial decision for some wrongful or improper purpose

6) Fraud on the Court

In the United States, when an officer of the court is found to have fraudulently presentedfacts to court so that the court is impaired in the impartial performance of its legal task,

the act, known as "fraud upon the court", is a crime deemed so severe and

fundamentally opposed to the operation of justice that it is not subject to any statute of

limitation.

Officers of the court include: lawyers, judges, referees, and those appointed; guardian

ad litem, parenting time expeditors, mediators, rule 114 neutrals, evaluators,

administrators, special appointees, and any others whose influence are part of the

judicial mechanism.

"Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to

"embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a

fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform

in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented foradjudication". Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d

ed., p. 512, 60.23

In Bullock v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985), the court stated"Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itselfand is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements orperjury. ... It is where the court or a member is corrupted or influenced orinfluence is attempted or where the judge has not performed his judicial function--- thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted."

7) Miscarriage of Justice -Also, the term travesty of justice is sometimes used for agross, deliberate miscarriage of justice but in the sense of lack of regard to the actuallegal procedure and fairness, due to their character, often lead to such travesties Type I

errorfor falsely identifying culpability, an error of impunity would be a Type II erroroffailing to find a culpable person guilty.

8) Appearance of Justice - Due process requires that the trial judge conduct a fair,orderly, and impartial trial. Due process requires the absence of actual bias by the trial

judge. But not only are trial judges required to be fair and impartial, they mustalso'satisfy the appearance of justice. The trial judge's 'appearance,' or conduct
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officer_of_the_courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_ad_litemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_ad_litemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_Circuit_Court_of_Appealshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_errorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_errorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_of_impunityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_II_errorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_II_errorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Error_of_impunityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_errorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_errorhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7th_Circuit_Court_of_Appealshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_ad_litemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guardian_ad_litemhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officer_of_the_court


3/34

3

and behavior, appearance of bias alone is grounds for reversal even if the trialjudge is, in fact, completely impartial.

9) Kangaroo Court - orKangaroo Trial is a colloquial term for a sham legalproceeding orcourt. The outcome of a trial by kangaroo court is essentially determined

in advance, usually for the purpose of ensuring conviction, either by going through themotions of manipulated procedure or by allowing no defense at all.

A kangaroo court's proceedings deny due processrights in the name of expediency. Akangaroo court may be a court that has had its integrity compromised; for example, ifthe judge is not impartial and refuses to be recused. It may also be an elaboratelyscripted event intended to appear fair while having the outcome predetermined from thestart. Also considered Mock Justice.

10) Conflicts of Interest - related to the Practice of Law

Judicial disqualification, also referred to as recusal, refers to the act of abstaining fromparticipation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interestof the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons ofethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing thatthe judge or presiding officer must be free from disabling conflicts of interest makes thefairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned.

In the legal profession, the duty of loyalty owed to a client prohibits an attorney (or a lawfirm) from representing any other party with interests adverse to those of a currentclient. The few exceptions to this rule require informed written consent from all affectedclients. In some circumstances, a conflict of interest can never be waived by a client. Inperhaps the most common example encountered by the general public, the same firm

should not represent both parties in a divorce or child custody case.

A prohibited or undisclosed representation involving a conflict of interest can subject anattorney to disciplinary hearings, the denial or disgorgement of legal fees, or in somecases (such as the failure to make mandatory disclosure), criminal proceedings. Inthe United States, a law firm usually cannot represent a client if its interests conflict withthose of another client, even if they have separate lawyers within the firm, unless (insome jurisdictions) the lawyer is segregated from the rest of the firm for the duration ofthe conflict. Law firms often employ software in conjunction with their case managementand accounting systems in order to meet their duties to monitor their conflict of interestexposure and to assist in obtaining waivers.

11) Conflict of Interest Recusal

Those with a conflict of interest are expected to recuse themselves from (i.e., abstainfrom) decisions where such a conflict exists. The imperative for recusal variesdepending upon the circumstance and profession, either as common sense ethics,codified ethics, or by statute. For example, if the governing board of a governmentagency is considering hiring a consulting firm for some task, and one firm being
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Courthttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Due+processhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Due+processhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Judgehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Recusalhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Judgehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Practice+of+lawhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Law+firmhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Law+firmhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/United+Stateshttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Statutehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Statutehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/United+Stateshttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Law+firmhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Law+firmhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Practice+of+lawhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Judgehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Recusalhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Judgehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Due+processhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Court


4/34

4

considered has, as a partner, a close relative of one of the board's members, then thatboard member should not vote on which firm is to be selected. In fact, to minimize anyconflict, the board member should not participate in any way in the decision, includingdiscussions.

Judges are supposed to recuse themselves from cases when personal conflictsof interest may arise. For example, if a judge has participated in a case previously insome other judicial role he/she is not allowed to try that case. Recusal is also expectedwhen one of the lawyers in a case might be a close personal friend, or when theoutcome of the case might affect the judge directly, such as whether a car maker isobliged to recall a model that a judge drives. This is required by law underContinental civil law systems and by the Rome Statute, organic law of the InternationalCriminal Court.

12) Code of Ethics

Generally, codes of ethics forbid conflicts of interests. Codes of ethics help to minimizeproblems with conflicts of interests because they can spell out the extent to which suchconflicts should be avoided, and what the parties should do where such conflicts arepermitted by a code of ethics (disclosure, recusal, etc.). Thus, professionals cannotclaim that they were unaware that their improper behavior was unethical. Asimportantly, the threat ofdisciplinary action (for example, a lawyerbeing disbarred)should help to minimize unacceptable conflicts or improper acts when a conflict isunavoidable.

13) Government - We insist on honesty in government and protection of our

fundamental rights, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. Judicial corruption and government

corruption are intolerable.

1. Government officials should be honest in everything that they say and do while in any

position with any government authority in the U.S..

2. Government officials should always tell the truth while performing their duties.

3. Government officials must honor and defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights at all

times and in all situations.

4. Judicial corruption and government corruption must never be tolerated

14) Liability - Legal responsibility for one's acts or omissions. Failure of a person orentity to meet that responsibility leaves him/her/it open to a lawsuit for any resultingdamages or a court order to perform (as in a breach of contract orviolation of statute).Will be responsible for his/her acts which constitute a crime, thus making him/hersubject to conviction and punishment.
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Judgehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Civil+law+(legal+system)http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/International+Criminal+Courthttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/International+Criminal+Courthttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Ethical+codehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/w/index.php?title=Disciplinary_action&action=edit&redlink=1http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Lawyerhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Lawyerhttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/w/index.php?title=Disciplinary_action&action=edit&redlink=1http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Ethical+codehttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/International+Criminal+Courthttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/International+Criminal+Courthttp://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Civil+law+(legal+system)http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Judge


5/34

5

15) Government Liability - When official represent the ultimate repository of lawenforcement power in the country makes deliberate decision to abuse that power to thedetriment of its citizens, there is city liability. When a policymaker abuses the powersvested in his position to the detriment of a citizen, that abuse can be the basis forsuit being brought under section 1983.

Section 1983 Hold a City Liable for unconstitutional acts for its employees, that thedeprivation of constitutional rights.

16) Judicial Immunity When a judge acts outside his jurisdiction he has noimmunity. A judge who either delegates decisions or acts like a clerk by taking directionfrom others, instead of making decisions, is action outside of his job description is losesJudicial Immunity. A judge without authorization, makes group decisions with other

judges, instead of making individual decisions, is acting outside the scope of the judicial

function and loses Judicial Immunity. A judge who does not have jurisdiction, has nojudicial immunity. Judicial immunity is not to protect judges acting outside of their jobdescription.

Judicial immunity is overcome in only two sets of circumstances: First, a judge is notimmune from liability for nonjudicial actions, i.e., actions not taken in the judges judicialcapacity. Second, a judge is not immune for actions, through judicial in nature, taken inthe complete absence of all jurisdiction. Mireles v. Waco502 US 9, 116L ED 2d 9, 14,112 S Ct 286 (US 1991)

If a judge doesnt have Jurisdiction to make an order the order is VOID . The issue

whether the judge had authority to do what was done, even if doing so was erroneousor even despicable. If he does not have jurisdiction to act he loses judicial Immunity.Stump v. Sparkman 435 US 349, 55 L Ed 2d 331, 98 S Ct 1099 (1978)

If a judge participates in a conspiracy the acts which do not have judicial immunity aresubject to suit and judgment against the judge

The true test in a judicial proceeding is whether the judge is acting within thejurisdiction. With absence of jurisdiction there is no judicial immunity. When a judgepresides over a case which he has no authority to preside the acts are void and heloses judicial immunity.

If appointed judge purports to preside under the original appointment, is an order void ifthe judge has no authority or jurisdiction over the new matter.

The three legged stool upon which the judge is standing when the judge engages in thejudicial act which gives rise to the claim. All three legs of the jurisdictional stool mustbe present. All must be sturdy. If any leg fails, neither the judge, nor the judges judicialimmunity defense, can stand.


6/34

6

1. TheCourtmust have subject matter jurisdiction. This element or leg is aboutthe power of the court as an institution, not the power of the individual whopresides as judge. Subject matter jurisdiction allows the act to be done by thecourtin that kind of case.

2. Thecourtmust havejurisdiction over the particular case or matter.Generally this means that a case must be pending. That generally requires thata pleading was filed to activate the courts jurisdiction. This element or leg isalso about the power of the court as an institution, not the power of the individualwho presides as judge.

3. Thejudgemust have authority to act as the judge. The judge must havejurisdiction over that court in that particular case. This element is sometimesmentioned in passing. It is generally not in doubt. It is required. This elementmay be loosely stated as, the judge must be a judge and the judge must be

the judge of the particular court with power over the particular case.

When only one leg is challenged, a court which examines a different leg has

engaged in judicial malpractice. The consequence of a judge acting without

authority or jurisdiction over a case or court, he loses judicial immunity. He

had no authority, He had no power, His only duty was to not act.

17) Treason ~ whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act,

the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. V.Will, 449 U. S. 200, 216, 101

S. Ct, 471 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohen v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 wheat) 264,404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)

18) The Old Boys Network The Old Boys Network lives in a world of its own in the

State of Virginia. The difference is this Network in Virginia is a Gentlemens network.

The truth is they hurt people, and they protect their own. They believe they are above

the law and to be in the Network you agree to protect those in the Network. Due

process has no place in the Virginia Judicial Network. The Judicial system of Virginia

is corrupted by the Network. In the Gentlemens Network ofVirginia, women and

children are who they persecute.

19) United States Constitution If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution,

then his orders are void. In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without

jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in acts of Treason. See also number 1 Due

Process.


7/34

7

Constitution of Virginia

20) Article I - Bill of Rights

Section 11. Due process of law; obligation of contracts; taking of privateproperty; prohibited discrimination; jury trial in civil cases.

That no person shall be deprived of his life, liberty, or property without dueprocess of law; that the General Assembly shall not pass any law impairing theobligation of contracts, nor any law whereby private property shall be taken ordamaged for public uses, without just compensation, the term "public uses" to bedefined by the General Assembly; and that the right to be free from anygovernmental discrimination upon the basis of religious conviction, race, color,sex, or national origin shall not be abridged, except that the mere separation ofthe sexes shall not be considered discrimination.

That in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man,

trial by jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred. The GeneralAssembly may limit the number of jurors for civil cases in courts of record to notless than five.

21) Civil Rights

The Civil Rights Act of 1964(Pub.L. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241, enacted July 2, 1964) was a

landmark piece of legislation in the United States[1]

that outlawed major forms of discrimination

against African Americans and women, including racial segregation. It ended unequal application

of voter registration requirements and racial segregation in schools, at the workplace and by

facilities that served the general public ("public accommodations").

Powers given to enforce the act were initially weak, but were supplemented during later years.Congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States

Constitution, principally its power to regulate interstate commerce underArticle One (section 8), its

duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment and its

duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment. The Act was signed

into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson, who would later sign the landmark Voting Rights Act into

law.

It is a crime for one or more persons acting under color of law willfully to deprive orconspire to deprive another person of any right protected by the Constitution or laws ofthe United States..

"Color of law" simply means that the person doing the act is using power given to him orher by a governmental agency (local, state or federal).

Criminal acts under color of law include acts not only done by local, state, or federalofficials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done beyondthe bounds of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may also be covered under colorof law, if the perpetrator asserted their official status in some manner.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_law_(United_States)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Largehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_commercehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_U.S._Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnsonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_U.S._Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protectionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_commercehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitutionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segregationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Largehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_law_(United_States)


8/34

8

Color of law may include public officials who are not law enforcement officers, forexample, judges and prosecutors, as well as, in some circumstances, non governmentalemployees who are asserting state authority, such as private security guards.

22) Breach of Fiduciary Duties

At the heart of courts interpretations of the fiduciary relationship is a concern thatpersons who with discretionary power over the interests of others might abusetheir position.

Blacks defines a fiduciary as:

[a] person holding the character of a trustee, or a character analogous to that of atrustee, in respect to the trust and confidence involved in it and the scrupulous goodfaith and candor which it requires [a] person having [a] duty, created by hisundertaking, to act primarily for anothers benefit in matters connected with suchundertakinga person having duties involving good faith, trust, special confidence,and candor towards another.

When one person does agree to act for another in a fiduciary relationship, the law

forbids the fiduciary from acting in any manner adverse or contrary to the interests ofthe client, or from acting for his own benefit in relation to the subject matter. The client isentitled to the best efforts of the fiduciary on his behalf and the fiduciary must exerciseall of the skill, care and diligence at his disposal when acting on behalf of the client. Aperson acting in a fiduciary capacity is held to a high standard of honesty and fulldisclosure in regard to the client and must not obtain a personal benefit at the expenseof the client.

23 ) JusticeDelayed is Justice Denied

"Justice delayed is justice denied" is a legal maxim meaning that iflegal redress isavailable for a party that has suffered some injury, but is not forthcoming in a timely

fashion, it is effectively the same as having no redress at all. This principle is the basisfor the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legalsystem, because it is unfair for the injured party to have to sustain the injury with littlehope for resolution. The phrase has become a rallying cry for legal reformers whoview courts orgovernments as acting too slowly in resolving legal issues either becausethe existing system is too complex or overburdened, or because the issue or party inquestion lacks political favor.

As Chief Justice Warren E. Burgernoted: "A sense of confidence in the courts isessential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people and three things coulddestroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to

believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value; thatpeople who have long been exploited in the smaller transactions of daily life come tobelieve that courts cannot vindicate their legal rights from fraud and over-reaching; thatpeople come to believe the law - in the larger sense - cannot fulfill its primary function toprotect them and their families in their homes, at their work, and on the public streets."

24) Under the color of the law The appearance of a legal right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_maximhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_remedyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_trialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_reformhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_E._Burgerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_E._Burgerhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governmenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_reformhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_trialhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_remedyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_maxim


9/34

9

The act of a state officer, regardless of whether or not the act is within the limits of his orher authority, is considered an act under color of law if the officer purports to beconducting himself or herself in the course of official duties.

Under the CIVIL RIGHTS ACT of 1871 (42 U.S.C.A. Section 1983), color of law is

synonymous with State Action, which is conduct by an officer that bears a sufficientlyclose nexus to a state so that the action is treated as though it is by the state.

color of law n. the appearance of an act being performed based upon legal right orenforcement of statute, when in reality no such right exists. An outstanding example isfound in the civil rights acts which penalize law enforcement officers for violating civilrights by making arrests "under color of law" of peaceful protestors or to disrupt voterregistration. It could apply to phony traffic arrests in order to raise revenue from fines orextort payoffs to forget the ticket. Or Judges who dont have jurisdiction deciding cases.

Preventing abuse of this authority, however, is equally necessary to the health of our

nations democracy. Thats why its a federal crime for anyone acting undercolorof law willfully to deprive or conspire to deprive a person of a rightprotected by the Constitution or U.S. law. Colorof law simply means that theperson is using authority given to him or her by a local, state, or federalgovernment agency.The FBI is the lead federal agency for investigating color of law abuses , whichinclude acts carried out by government officials operating both within and beyond thelimits of their lawful authority. Off-duty conduct may be covered if the perpetratorasserted his or her official status in some way.

25) Title 18 United States Code 241

241. Conspiracy against rights

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate anyinhabitant of any State, Territory, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of anyright or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, orbecause of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another,with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege

so secured -

They shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, orboth; and if death results, they shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of yearsor for life.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Section+1983http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/State+Actionhttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/State+Actionhttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Section+1983


10/34

10

26) Title 18 United States code 242

242. Deprivation of rights under color of law

Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom,

willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to thedeprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by theConstitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, orpenalties, on account of such inhabitant being an alien, or by reason of hiscolor, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be finednot more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and ifbodily injury results shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more thanten years, or both; and if death results shall be subject to imprisonment for anyterm of years or for life.

27) Code of Virginia 19.2-191(2)

19.2-191. Functions of a grand jury.

The functions of a grand jury are twofold:

(1) To consider bills of indictment prepared by the attorney for the Commonwealth andto determine whether as to each such bill there is sufficient probable cause to returnsuch indictment "a true bill."

(2) To investigate and report on any condition that involves or tends to promote criminalactivity, either in the community or by any governmental authority, agency or officialthereof. These functions may be exercised by either a special grand jury or a regulargrand jury as hereinafter provided.

28) Title 42 U.S. code 1983

42 U.S.C. 1983, commonly referred to as "section 1983" provides:

Every person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation,custom, or

usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, orcauses to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other personwithin the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, orimmunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to theparty injured in an action at law, Suit in equity, or other proper proceedingfor redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for


11/34

11

an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive reliefshall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated ordeclaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any

Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall beconsidered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

29) Sovereign Immunity

As of 2003, most states had waived their immunity in various degrees at both thestate and local government levels. Generally, state supreme courts first abolishedimmunity via judicial decisions; later, legislative measures were enacted at the state andlocal level to accept liability for torts committed by civil servants in the performance ofgovernment functions. The law varied by state and locality, however.

In the United States, the federal government has sovereign immunity and may not besued unless it has waived its immunity or consented to suit. The United States haswaived sovereign immunity to a limited extent, mainly through the Federal Tort Claims

Act, which waives the immunity if a tortious act of a federal employee causes damage,and the Tucker Act, which waives the immunity over claims arising out of contracts towhich the federal government is a party.

30) The Federal Tort Claims Act or"FTCA", (June 25, 1948, ch. 646, TitleIV, 62 Stat. 982, "28 U.S.C. Pt.VI Ch.171" and 28 U.S.C. 1346(b)), is a statute

enacted by the United States Congress in 1948. "Federal Tort Claims Act"wasalso previously the official short title passed by the Seventy-ninth Congress on

August 2, 1946 as Title IV of the Legislative Reorganization Act, 60 Stat. 842,which was classified principally to chapter 20 ( 921, 922, 931934, 941946)offormerTitle 28, Judicial Code and Judiciary.

That Title IV of the Legislative Reorganization Actact of August 2, 1946 wassubstantially repealed and reenacted as sections 1346 (b) and 2671 et seq. of this title

by act June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 982, the first section of which enacted this title

(Tort Claims Procedure).[1]

The FTCA permits private parties to sue the United States in a federal court formost torts committed by persons acting on behalf of the United States. The FTCA

constitutes a limited waiver ofsovereign immunity.

31) Retaliatory Actions - of or relating to or having the nature of retribution;

"retributive justice demands an eye for an eye" make an attack or assault inreturn for a similar attack "Reprisal or retaliatory action" is illegal

32) Retribution - a harmful action against a person or group in response to agrievance

33) Bribery is an act of implying money or gift giving that alters the behavior of therecipient. Bribery constitutes a crime and is defined byBlack's Law Dictionaryas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Largehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_28_of_the_United_States_Codehttp://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1346(b).htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congresshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Act#cite_note-LIIshortTitle-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Act#cite_note-LIIshortTitle-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Act#cite_note-LIIshortTitle-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_courtshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%27s_Law_Dictionaryhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunityhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_courtshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Act#cite_note-LIIshortTitle-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congresshttp://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1346(b).htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_28_of_the_United_States_Codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Largehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tucker_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Acthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_government_of_the_United_Stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States


12/34

12

the offering, giving, receiving, orsoliciting of any item of value to influence the

actions of an official or other person in charge of a public or legal duty.

The bribe is the gift bestowed to influence the recipient's conduct. It may be

any money, good, right in action, property, preferment, privilege, emolument, object

of value, advantage, or merely a promise or undertaking to induce or influence the

action, vote, or influence of a person in an official or public capacity.

34) Treason

However, as explained in United States v. Lee, 106 U.S. 196, 220 (1882),[n]o man in this country is so high that he is above the law. No officer of the law may setthat law at defiance with impunity. All the officers of the government, from thehighest to the lowest, are creatures of the law and are bound to obey it. It is the onlysupreme power in our system of government, and every man who by acceptingoffice participates in its functions is only the more strongly bound to submit to thatsupremacy, and to observe the limitations which it imposes upon the exercise

of the authority which it gives. (Emphasis added).

35.) Judges as Criminals

CIRCUIT COURT A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Circuit Court of Cook County is acriminal enterprise. U.S. v. Murphy, 768 F.2d 1518, 1531 (7th Cir. 1985).

The United States Supreme Court recently acknowledged the judicial corruption in Cook

County, when it stated that Judge "Maloney was one of many dishonest judges exposedand convicted through 'Operation Greylord', a labyrinthine federal investigation ofjudicial corruption in Chicago". Bracey v. Gramley, 519 U.S. 1074, 117 S.Ct. 726(1997).

There has been no finding that the Circuit Court of Cook County is no longer a criminalenterprise, nor that judicial corruption no longer exists in Chicago.

Since judges who do not report the criminal activities of other judges become principalsin the criminal activity, 18 U.S.C. Section 2, 3 & 4, and since no judges have reportedthe criminal activity of the judges who have been convicted, the other judges are asguilty as the convicted judges.

The criminal activities that the Federal Courts found in the Circuit Court of Cook Countystill exist, and are today under the care, custody and control of Judge Greylord III ( ChiefJudge Timothy C. Evans). The Circuit Court of Cook County remains a criminalenterprise.

JUDICIAL IMMUNITY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offer_and_acceptancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gifthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offer_and_acceptancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solicitationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_(accounting)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chose_(English_law)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion_(rank)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilegehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remunerationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remunerationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilegehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion_(rank)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propertyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chose_(English_law)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_(accounting)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moneyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solicitationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offer_and_acceptancehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gifthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offer_and_acceptance


13/34

13

Judges have given themselves judicial immunity for their judicial functions. Judges haveno judicial immunity for criminal acts, aiding, assisting, or conniving with others whoperform a criminal act, or for their administrative/ministerial duties. When a judge has a duty to act, he does not have discretion - he isthen not performing a judicial act, he is performing a ministerial act.

Judicial immunity does not exist for judges who engage in criminal activity, for judgeswho connive with, aid and abet the criminal activity of another judge, or to a judge fordamages sustained by a person who has been harmed by the judge's connivance with,aiding and abeting, another judge's criminal activity.

TRESPASSERS OF THE LAW

The Illinois Supreme Court has held that "if the magistrate has not such jurisdiction,then he and those who advise and act with him, or execute his process, aretrespassers." Von Kettler et.al. v. Johnson, 57 Ill. 109 (1870)

Under Federal law which is applicable to all states, the U.S. Supreme Court stated thatif a court is "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. Theyare not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to areversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all personsconcerned in executing such judgments or sentences, are considered, in law, astrespassers." Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828)

The Illinois Supreme Court held that if a court "could not hear the matter upon thejurisdictional paper presented, its finding that it had the power can add nothing to itsauthority, - it had no authority to make that finding." The People v. Brewer, 128 Ill. 472,

483 (1928). The judges listed below had no legal authority (jurisdiction) to hear or ruleon certain matters before them. They acted without any jurisdiction.

When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order(an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of thelaw,and are engaged in treason (see below).

The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F.Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill.1962) held that "not every action by a judge is in exercise of his judicial function. ... it isnot a judicial function for a judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tortoccurs in the courthouse."

When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law, when a judge does not follow the law, thejudge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges orders are void, of no legal forceor effect.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687(1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative ofthe Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that


14/34

14

Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative characterand is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The Statehas no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authorityof the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].

By law, a judge is a state officer.

The judge then acts not as a judge, but as a private individual (in his person).

VIOLATION OF OATH OF OFFICE

In Illinois, 705 ILCS 205/4 states "Every person admitted to practice as an attorney andcounselor at law shall, before his name is entered upon the roll to be kept as hereinafterprovided, take and subscribe an oath, substantially in the following form:

'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be), that I will support the constitution

of the United States and the constitution of the state of Illinois, and that I will faithfullydischarge the duties of the office of attorney and counselor at law to the best of myability.'"

In Illinois, a judge must take a second oath of office. Under 705 ILCS 35/2 states, inpart, that "The several judges of the circuit courts of this State, before entering upon theduties of their office, shall take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation, whichshall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State:

'I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the constitution ofthe United States, and the constitution of the State of Illinois, and that I will faithfully

discharge the duties of judge of ______ court, according to the best of my ability.'"

Further, if the judge had enlisted in the U.S. military, then he has taken a third oath.Under Title 10 U.S.C. Section 502 the judge had subscribed to a lifetime oath, inpertinent part, as follows: "I, __________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I willsupport and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign ordomestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; ...".

The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "No state legislator or executive or judicialofficer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to supportit.". Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).

Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United Stateswars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the Supreme Law ofthe Land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason.

Having taken at least two, if not three, oaths of office to support the Constitution of theUnited States, and the Constitution of the State of Illinois, any judge who has acted inviolation of the Constitution is engaged in an act or acts of treason (see below).


15/34

15

If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In reSawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged inan act or acts of treason.

TREASON

Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge isengaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257(1821)

36) Virginia State Bar - DUTIES TO COURT, CLIENT,OTHER ATTORNEYS AND THIRD PARTIES

II. ATTORNEY'S ROLE AS OFFICER OF THE COURT

B. Duties of an Officer of the Court

1. Attorneys have a duty at all times to assist tribunals in the operation of the court system andadministration of justice. Attorneys are officers of the court and owe a signal duty to its smoothoperations. An attorney's oath requires him or her to be absolutely honest with the court, even though theclient's interests may seem to require a contrary result. Some of the most difficult ethics issues concernthe obligations of attorneys to make disclosures consistent with their duty of honesty to the court, yetseemingly inconsistent with the attorneys' duty to maintain client confidences.

2. Duty extends to all contacts with the Court - not just presentations at a formal hearing. Includes allpleadings.

3. Duty to obey and enforce the Virginia Rules of Professional Conduct

4. Local Rule 83.1(I) of the U.S. District Court Rules (E.D. Va.) requires practitioners to comply withVirginia Rules of Professional Conduct rather than the ABA Rules.


16/34


17/34

17

The Canons are designed to provide guidance to judges and candidates for judicial office and to provide a

structure for regulating conduct through the Judicial Inquiry and Review Commission. It is not designedor intended as a basis for civil liability or criminal prosecution. Furthermore, the purpose of the Canons

would be subverted if the Canons were invoked by lawyers for mere tactical advantage in a proceeding.

The text of the Canons and Sections is intended to govern conduct of judges and to be binding upon

them. It is not intended, however, that every transgression will result in disciplinary action. Whetherdisciplinary action is appropriate, and the degree of discipline to be imposed, should be determined

through a reasonable and reasoned application of the text and should depend on such factors as theseriousness of the transgression, whether there is a pattern of improper activity and the effect of theimproper activity on others or on the judicial system.

These Canons apply to (1) all active Justices of the Supreme Court of Virginia, and Judges of the Court ofAppeals of Virginia, Circuit Courts, General District Courts, Juvenile and Domestic Relations DistrictCourts, Members of the State Corporation Commission and the Virginia Workers' CompensationCommission; (2) retired Judges and Members eligible for recall to judicial service; (3) substitute Judges

and Special Justices; and (4) Judges pro tempore while acting as a Judge pro tempore. Magistrates arenot bound by these Canons. However, Canons of Conduct for Virginia Magistrates were adopted by the

Committee on District Courts effective January 1, 1980.

CANON 1.

A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY.

A. An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A

judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards ofconduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity andindependence of the judiciary will be preserved. The provisions of these Canons are

to be construed and applied to further that objective.

Commentary:

Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity andindependence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depends in turn upon their actingwithout fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law, including

the provisions of these Canons. Public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by theadherence of each judge to this responsibility. Conversely, violation of this Canon diminishes publicconfidence in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under law.

CANON 2.

A JUDGE SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL OFTHE JUDGE'S ACTIVITIES.

A. A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a mannerthat promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

Commentary:

Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge mustavoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant


18/34

18

public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on the judge's conduct that might be viewed

as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly.

The prohibition against behaving with impropriety or the appearance of impropriety applies to both theprofessional and personal conduct of a judge. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, theproscription is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although

not specifically mentioned in the Canons. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations oflaw, court rules or other specific provisions of these Canons. The test for appearance of impropriety is

whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry outjudicial responsibilities with integrity and impartiality is impaired.

See also Commentary under Section 2C.

A judge may vote in a primary election conducted by the State Board of Elections that is open to allregistered voters qualified to vote pursuant to Code 24.2-530. Voting in such a primary election does

not constitute an act of partiality by a judge as prohibited by subdivision A. The act of a judge voting in aprimary election is the discharge of an honorable civic duty, an obligation of responsible citizenship, anddoes not give the "appearance of impropriety."

The statutory requirements for voting in a primary election reflect voting in a primary election by a judge

as an act of "impartiality" as used in subdivision A(1) (c) because there is no registration by politicalaffiliation, no loyalty or political party oath required to vote, and no pledge of support for any person orpolitical group. It is the impartial nature of such a primary election that enables judges to avoid an

"appearance of impropriety."

See also Commentary under Canon 5A.

B. A judge shall not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the

judge's judicial conduct or judgment. A judge shall not lend the prestige of judicialoffice to advance the private interests of the judge or others; nor shall a judge convey

or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position toinfluence the judge. A judge shall not testify as a character witness.

Commentary:

Maintaining the prestige of judicial office is essential to a system of government in which the judiciaryfunctions independently of the executive and legislative branches. Respect for the judicial office facilitatesthe orderly conduct of legitimate judicial functions. Judges should distinguish between proper and

improper use of the prestige of office in all of their activities. For example, it would be improper for ajudge to allude to his or her judgeship to gain a personal advantage such as deferential treatment when

stopped by a police officer for a traffic offense. Similarly, judicial letterhead must not be used forconducting a judge's personal business.

A judge must avoid lending the prestige of judicial office for the advancement of the private interests ofothers. For example, a judge must not use the judge's judicial position to gain advantage in a civil suitinvolving a member of the judge's family. As to the acceptance of awards, see Section 4D(5)(a) andCommentary.

In a criminal case, a judge may not approve a plea agreement or disposition that requires or permits thedefendant to make a charitable contribution or donation, or any other monetary payment other than astatutorily authorized fine or restitution or payment in satisfaction of an injury pursuant to Code 19.2-151, as a condition of a suspended sentence or the reduction or dismissal of charges.
http://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#commentarycanon2Chttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon5Ahttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon4D5ahttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon4D5ahttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon4D5ahttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon4D5ahttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon5Ahttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#commentarycanon2C


19/34

19

Although a judge should be sensitive to possible abuse of the prestige of office, a judge may, based on

the judge's personal knowledge, serve as a reference or provide a letter of recommendation. When usingcourt stationery for letters of reference an indication should be made that the opinion expressed is

personal and not an opinion of the court. However, a judge must not initiate the communication ofinformation to a sentencing judge or a probation or corrections officer but may provide to such personinformation for the record in response to a formal request.

Judges may participate in the process of judicial selection by cooperating with appointing authorities and

screening committees seeking names for consideration, and by responding to official inquiries concerninga person being considered for a judgeship

C. A judge shall not hold membership in any organization that practices invidiousdiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion or national origin.

Commentary:

Membership of a judge in an organization that practices invidious discrimination gives rise to perceptionsthat the judge's impartiality is impaired. Section 2C refers to the current practices of the organization.

Whether an organization practices invidious discrimination is often a complex question to which judgesshould be sensitive. The answer cannot be determined from a mere examination of an organization's

current membership rolls but rather depends on how the organization selects members and otherrelevant factors, such as that the organization is dedicated to the preservation of religious, ethnic orcultural values of legitimate common interest to its members, or that it is in fact and effect an intimate,

purely private organization whose membership limitations could not be constitutionally prohibited. Absentsuch factors, an organization is generally said to discriminate invidiously if it arbitrarily excludes frommembership on the basis of race, religion, sex or national origin persons who would otherwise be

admitted to membership.

Although Section 2C relates only to membership in organizations that invidiously discriminate on the basisof race, sex, religion or national origin, a judge's membership in an organization that engages in anydiscriminatory membership practices prohibited by the law of the jurisdiction also violates Canon 2 and

Section 2A and gives the appearance of impropriety. In addition, it would be a violation of Canon 2 andSection 2A for a judge to arrange a meeting at a club that the judge knows practices invidious

discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion or national origin in its membership or other policies, orfor the judge to regularly use such a club. Moreover, public manifestation by a judge of the judge'sknowing approval of invidious discrimination on any basis gives the appearance of impropriety underCanon 2 and diminishes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, in violation ofSection 2A.

CANON 3.

A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY ANDDILIGENTLY.

A. Judicial Duties in General. The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the

judge's other activities. The judge's judicial duties include all the duties of the judge'soffice prescribed by law. In the performance of these duties, the following standardsapply..

B. Adjudicative Responsibilities.1. A judge shall hear and decide promptly matters assigned to the judge except

those in which disqualification is required.


20/34

20

2. A judge shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it.

A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear ofcriticism.

3. A judge shall require order, decorum, and civility in proceedings before thejudge.

Commentary:

"Require." The rules prescribing that a judge "require" certain conduct of others are, like all of the rulesin these Canons, rules of reason. The use of the term "require" in that context means a judge is toexercise reasonable direction and control over the conduct of those persons subject to the judge's

direction and control.

4. A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses,lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and shall

require similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials and otherssubject to the judge's direction and control.

Commentary:

The duty to hear all proceedings fairly and with patience is not inconsistent with the duty to disposepromptly of the business of the court. Judges can be efficient and businesslike while being patient anddeliberate.

5. A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shallnot, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest biasor prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race,sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or

socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials and otherssubject to the judge's direction and control to do so. This Section 3B(5) does

not preclude proper judicial consideration when race, sex, religion, nationalorigin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, or similarfactors, are issues in the proceeding.

Commentary:

A judge must refrain from speech, gestures or other conduct that could reasonably be perceived assexual harassment and must require the same standard of conduct of others subject to the judge's

direction and control.

A judge must perform judicial duties impartially and fairly. A judge who manifests bias on any basis in aproceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary into disrepute. Facialexpression and body language, in addition to oral communication, can give to parties or lawyers in the

proceeding, jurors, the media and others an appearance of judicial bias. A judge must be alert to avoidbehavior that may be perceived as prejudicial.

6. A judge shall require all persons appearing in proceedings before the judge torefrain from manifesting, by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based uponrace, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation orsocioeconomic status, against parties, witnesses, counsel or others. ThisSection 3B(6) does not preclude legitimate advocacy when race, sex, religion,


21/34

21

national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, or

other similar factors, are issues in the proceeding.7. A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding,

or that person's lawyer, the right to be heard according to law. A judge shallnot initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications, or consider othercommunications made to the judge outside the presence of the parties

concerning a pending or impending proceeding except that:a. Where circumstances require, ex parte communications for scheduling,

administrative purposes or emergencies that do not deal withsubstantive matters or issues on the merits are authorized; provided:

i. The judge reasonably believes that no party will gain aprocedural or tactical advantage as a result of the ex partecommunication, and

ii. The judge makes provision promptly to notify all other partiesof the substance of the ex parte communication and allows anopportunity to respond.

b. A judge may obtain the advice of a disinterested expert on the lawapplicable to a proceeding before the judge if the judge gives notice tothe parties of the person consulted and the substance of the advice,

and affords the parties reasonable opportunity to respond.c. A judge may consult with law clerks whose function is to aid the judge

in carrying out the judge's adjudicative responsibilities or with other

judges.d. A judge may, with the consent of the parties, confer separately with

the parties and their lawyers in an effort to settle matters pending

before the judge.e. A judge may initiate or consider any ex parte communications when

expressly authorized by law to do so.

Commentary:

The proscription against communications concerning a proceeding includes communications fromlawyers, law teachers, and other persons who are not participants in the proceeding, except to thelimited extent permitted.

To the extent reasonably possible, all parties or their lawyers shall be included in communications with ajudge. A judge should always be cautious with regard to the possibility of prejudice or the appearance of

such when communicating with a probation officer or a similarly situated person without the involvementof all parties.

Whenever presence of a party or notice to a party is required by Section 3B(7), it is the party's lawyer orif the party is unrepresented, the party who is to be present or to whom notice is to be given.

An appropriate and often desirable procedure for a court to obtain the advice of a disinterested expert onlegal issues is to invite the expert to file a brief amicus curiae.

Certain ex parte communication is approved by Section 3B(7) to facilitate scheduling and otheradministrative purposes and to accommodate emergencies. In general, however, a judge mustdiscourage ex parte communication and allow it only if all the criteria stated in Section 3B(7) are clearlymet. A judge must disclose to all parties all ex parte communications described in Sections 3B(7)(a) and3B(7)(b) regarding a proceeding pending or impending before the judge.


22/34

22

A judge must not independently investigate facts in a case and must consider only the evidence

presented.

A judge may request a party to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, so long as theother parties are apprised of the request and are given an opportunity to respond to the proposedfindings and conclusions.

A judge must make reasonable efforts, including the provision of appropriate supervision, to ensure that

Section 3B(7) is not violated through law clerks or other personnel on the judge's staff.

A judge may consult with the Legal Research Assistance Project of the Supreme Court of Virginia for aidin carrying out the judge's adjudicative responsibilities.

If communication between the trial judge and the appellate court with respect to a proceeding ispermitted, a copy of any written communication or the substance of any oral communication should beprovided to all parties.

Judges have historically played an important role in providing instruction, advice and mentoring to

lawyers as they begin and continue to develop their practice skills. Judges should insure that theinstruction and advice they provide will not result in unfair advantage to the recipient or prejudice toother parties in a pending proceeding.

8. A judge shall dispose promptly of the business of the court.

Commentary:

In disposing of matters promptly, a judge must demonstrate due regard for the rights of the parties to beheard and to have issues resolved without unnecessary cost or delay.

Containing costs while preserving fundamental rights of parties also protects the interests of witnesses

and the general public.

Prompt disposition of the court's business requires a judge to devote adequate time to judicial duties, tobe punctual in attending court and expeditious in determining matters under submission, and to insist

that court officials, litigants and their lawyers cooperate with the judge to that end.

9. A judge shall abstain from public comment about a pending or impendingproceeding in any court, and should direct similar abstention on the part ofcourt personnel subject to his direction and control. This subsection does not

prohibit judges or court personnel from speaking on the legal system or theadministration of justice or from explaining for public information the

procedures of the court. This Section does not apply to proceedings in which

the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity.

Commentary:

The requirement that judges abstain from public comment regarding a pending or impending proceedingcontinues during any appellate process and until final disposition. This Section does not prohibit a judgefrom commenting on proceedings in which the judge is a litigant in a personal capacity, but in cases such

as a writ of mandamus where the judge is a litigant in an official capacity, the judge must not commentpublicly.


23/34

23

See also Commentary under Canon 6C.

10.A judge shall not commend or criticize jurors for their verdict other than in a

court order or opinion in a proceeding, but may express appreciation to jurorsfor their service to the judicial system and the community.

Commentary:

Commending or criticizing jurors for their verdict may imply a judicial expectation in future cases and mayimpair a juror's ability to be fair and impartial in a subsequent case.

11.A judge shall not disclose or use, for any purpose unrelated to judicial duties,nonpublic information acquired in a judicial capacity.

C. Administrative Responsibilities.1. A judge shall diligently discharge the judge's administrative responsibilities

without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in judicialadministration, and shall cooperate with other judges and court officials in the

administration of court business.2. A judge shall require staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's

direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence thatapply to the judge and to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice in theperformance of their official duties.

3. The chief judge shall take reasonable measures to assure the promptdisposition of matters before the court.

4. A judge shall not make unnecessary appointments. A judge shall exercise thepower of appointment impartially and on the basis of merit. A judge shallavoid nepotism and favoritism. A judge shall not approve compensation of

appointees beyond the fair value of services rendered.

Commentary:

Appointees of a judge include assigned counsel, officials such as commissioners, receivers and guardiansand personnel such as clerks, and secretaries. Consent by the parties to an appointment or an award ofcompensation does not relieve the judge of the obligation prescribed by Section 3C(4).

D. Disciplinary Responsibilities.1. A judge who receives reliable information indicating a substantial likelihood

that another judge has committed a violation of these Canons should takeappropriate action. A judge having knowledge that another judge has

committed a violation of these Canons that raises a substantial question as tothe other judge's fitness for office should inform the Judicial Inquiry andReview Commission.

2. A judge who receives reliable information indicating a substantial likelihoodthat a lawyer has committed a violation of the Code of Professional

Responsibility should take appropriate action. A judge having knowledge thata lawyer has committed a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibilitythat raises a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness

or fitness as a lawyer in other respects should inform the Virginia State Bar.3. A judge shall have absolute immunity from civil action with respect to the

discharge of disciplinary responsibilities required or permitted by Sections

3D(1) and 3D(2).
http://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon6Chttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon6C


24/34

24

Commentary: Appropriate action may include direct communication with the judge or lawyer who has

committed the violation, other direct action if available, and reporting the violation to the appropriateauthority or other agency or body.

E. Disqualification.1. A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge's

impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited toinstances where:

Commentary:

Under this rule, a judge is disqualified whenever the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,regardless whether any of the specific rules in Section 3E(1) apply.

A judge should disclose information that the judge believes the parties or their lawyers might considerrelevant to the question of disqualification, even if the judge believes there is no real basis fordisqualification.

By decisional law, the rule of necessity may override the rule of disqualification. For example, a judgemight be required to participate in judicial review of a judicial salary statute, or might be the only judgeavailable in a matter requiring immediate judicial action, such as a hearing on probable cause or atemporary restraining order. In the latter case, the judge must disclose the basis for possibledisqualification and use reasonable efforts to transfer the matter to another judge as soon as practicable.

a. The judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or aparty's lawyer, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary factsconcerning the proceeding;

b. The judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer

with whom the judge previously practiced law served during suchassociation as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge has been a

material witness concerning it;

Commentary:

A lawyer in a government agency does not ordinarily have an association with other lawyers employed bythat agency within the meaning of Section 3E(1)(b); a judge formerly employed by a governmentagency, however, should disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding if the judge's impartiality mightreasonably be questioned because of such association.

c. The judge knows that he or she, individually or as a fiduciary, or thejudge's spouse, parent, or child wherever residing, or any othermember of the judge's family residing in the judge's household, has aneconomic interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to

the proceeding or has more than a de minimis interest that could besubstantially affected by the proceeding;

d. The judge or the judge's spouse, or a person within the third degree ofrelationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

Commentary:


25/34

25

"Third degree of relationship." The following persons are relatives within the third degree of relationship:

great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle, aunt, brother, sister, child, grandchild, great-grandchild,nephew or niece.

i. is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director or trustee ofa party;

ii. is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;iii. is known by the judge to have a more than de minimis interest

that could be substantially affected by the proceeding;iv. is to the judge's knowledge likely to be a material witness in the

proceeding.

Commentary:

The fact that a lawyer in a proceeding is affiliated with a law firm or governmental agency with which a

relative of the judge is affiliated does not of itself disqualify the judge. Under appropriate circumstances,the fact that "the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned" under Section 3E(1), or that therelative is known by the judge to have an interest in the law firm or governmental agency that could be

"substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding" under Section 3E(1)(d)(iii) may require thejudge's disqualification.

2. A judge shall keep informed about the judge's personal and fiduciaryeconomic interests, and make a reasonable effort to keep informed about the

personal economic interests of the judge's spouse and minor children residingin the judge's household.

Commentary:

"Economic interest" denotes ownership of a more than de minimis legal or equitable interest, or arelationship as officer, director, advisor or other active participant in the affairs of a party, except that:

i. ownership of an interest in a mutual or common investment fund that holds securities is not aneconomic interest in such securities unless the judge participates in the management of the fundor a proceeding pending or impending before the judge could substantially affect the value of theinterest;

ii. service by a judge as an officer, director, advisor or other active participant in an educational,religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization, or service by a judge's spouse, parent or childas an officer, director, advisor or other active participant in any organization does not create an

economic interest in securities held by that organization.iii. a deposit in a financial institution, the proprietary interest of a policy holder in a mutual insurance

company, of a depositor in a mutual savings association or of a member in a credit union, or a

similar proprietary interest, is not an economic interest in the organization unless a proceedingpending or impending before the judge could substantially affect the value of the interest;

iv. ownership of government securities is not an economic interest in the issuer unless a proceedingpending or impending before the judge could substantially affect the value of the securities.

"Member of the judge's family residing in the judge's household" denotes any relative of a judge by bloodor marriage, or a person treated by a judge as a member of the judge's family, who resides in the judge's

household.

F. Remittal of Disqualification. A judge who may be disqualified by the terms of Section3E may ask, or have the clerk of court ask, the parties and their lawyers to consider,


26/34

26

out of the presence of the judge, whether to waive disqualification. If following

disclosure of any basis for disqualification other than personal bias or prejudiceconcerning a party, the parties and lawyers, without participation by the judge, all

agree that the judge should not be disqualified, and the judge is then willing toparticipate, the judge may participate in the proceeding. Written evidence of theagreement shall be incorporated in the record of the proceeding.

Commentary:

A remittal procedure provides the parties an opportunity to proceed without delay if they wish to waivethe contemplated disqualification. To assure that consideration of the question of remittal is made

independently of the judge, a judge may ask, or have the clerk of court ask, the parties and their lawyersto consider, out of the presence of the judge, whether to waive disqualification.

CANON 4.

A JUDGE MAY ENGAGE IN EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE LAW,THE LEGAL SYSTEM, AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, AND SHALL CONDUCT ANY

SUCH EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES IN A MANNER THAT MINIMIZES THE RISK OF CONFLICTWITH JUDICIAL OBLIGATIONS.

A. Extra Judicial Activities in General. A judge shall conduct all of the judge's extrajudicial activities so that they do not:

1. cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge;2. demean the judicial office; or

3. interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties.

Commentary:

Complete separation of a judge from extra judicial activities is neither possible nor wise; a judge should

not become isolated from the community in which the judge lives.

Expressions of bias or prejudice by a judge, even outside the judge's judicial activities, may castreasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge. Expressions which may do soinclude jokes or other remarks demeaning individuals on the basis of their race, sex, religion, nationalorigin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status. See Section 2C and accompanyingCommentary.

See Section 2C and accompanying Commentary.

B. Avocational Activities. A judge may speak, write, lecture, teach and participate inother extra judicial activities concerning the law, the legal system, the administrationof justice and non-legal subjects, subject to the requirements of these Canons.

Commentary:

As a judicial officer and person specially learned in the law, a judge is in a unique position to contribute

to the improvement of the law, the legal system, and the administration of justice. To the extent thattime permits, a judge is encouraged to do so, either independently or through a bar association, judicial

conference or other organization dedicated to the improvement of the law. Judges may participate in
http://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon2Chttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon2C


27/34

27

efforts to promote the fair administration of justice, the independence of the judiciary and the integrity of

the legal profession.

C. Governmental, Civic or Charitable Activities.1. A judge shall not appear at a public hearing before, or otherwise consult with,

an executive or legislative body or official except on matters concerning the

law, the legal system or the administration of justice or except when actingpro se in a matter involving the judge or the judge's interests.

Commentary:

See Section 2B regarding the obligation to avoid improper influence.

2. A judge shall not accept appointment to a governmental committee orcommission or other governmental position that is concerned with issues offact or policy on matters other than the improvement of the law, the legalsystem or the administration of justice. A judge may, however, represent acountry, state or locality on ceremonial occasions or in connection with

historical, educational or cultural activities.3. A judge may serve as an officer, director, trustee or non legal advisor of an

organization or governmental agency devoted to the improvement of the law,the legal system or the administration of justice or of an educational,religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization not conducted for profit,

subject to the following limitations and the other requirements of this Code.a. A judge shall not serve as an officer, director, trustee or non legal

advisor of a governmental, civic, or charitable organization if it is likely

that the organization:i. will be engaged in proceedings that would ordinarily come

before the judge, orii. will be engaged frequently in adversary proceedings in the

court of which the judge is a member or in any court subject to

the appellate jurisdiction of the court of which the judge is amember.

Commentary:

Nothing contained in these Canons shall be deemed to prohibit a judge from serving in a nonvotingcapacity on the Board of Directors of Lawyers Helping Lawyers, or any committees of Lawyers Helping

Lawyers.

b. A judge as an officer, director, trustee or non legal advisor, or as a

member or otherwise:i. may assist such an organization in planning fund raising and

may participate in the management and investment of theorganization's funds, but shall not personally participate in thesolicitation of funds, except that a judge may solicit funds from

other judges over whom the judge does not exercisesupervisory or appellate authority;

ii. may make recommendations to public and private fund grantingorganizations on projects and programs concerning the law, thelegal system or the administration of justice so long as oneorganization is not favored over another;
http://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon2Bhttp://www.courts.state.va.us/agencies/jirc/canons_112398.html#canon2B


28/34

28

iii. shall not personally participate in membership solicitation if the

solicitation might reasonably be perceived as coercive or,except as permitted in Section 4C(3)(b)(i), if the membership

solicitation is essentially a fund raising mechanism;iv. shall not use or permit the use of the prestige of judicial office

for fund raising or membership solicitation; and

v. shall not be a speaker or guest of honor at an organization'sfund raising events, but may attend such events.

Commentary:

A judge may solicit membership or endorse or encourage membership efforts for an organization devotedto the improvement of the law, the legal system or the administration of justice or a nonprofiteducational, religious, charitable, fraternal or civic organization as long as the solicitation cannotreasonably be perceived as coercive and is not essentially a fund raising mechanism. Solicitation of fundsfor an organization and solicitation of memberships similarly involve the danger that the person solicited

will feel obligated to respond favorably to the solicitor if the solicitor is in a position of influence orcontrol. A judge must not engage in direct, individual solicitation of funds or memberships in person, in

writing or by telephone except in the following cases: 1) a judge may solicit funds or memberships fromother judges over whom the judge does not exercise supervisory or appellate authority, 2) a judge maysolicit other persons for membership in the organizations described above if neither those persons norpersons with whom they are affiliated are likely ever to appear before the court on which the judgeserves and 3) a judge who is an officer of such an organization may send a general membershipsolicitation mailing over the judge's signature.

This Canon is not intended to prohibit judges from participating in all charitable events. Judges areencouraged to be involved in community activities so long as the judge does not participate in thesolicitation of funds and the prestige of the office is not used for fund raising.

Use of an organization letterhead for fund raising or membership solicitation does not violate Section4C(3)(b) provided the letterhead lists only the judge's name and office or other position in the

organization, and, if comparable designations are listed for other persons, the judge's judicialdesignation. In addition, a judge must also make reasonable efforts to ensure that the judge's staff, courtofficials and others subject to the judge's direction and control do not solicit funds on the judge's behalffor any purpose, charitable or otherwise.

D. Financial Activities.1. A judge shall not engage in financial and business dealings that:

a. may reasonably be perceived to exploit the judge's judicial position, orb. involve the judge in frequent transactions or continuing business

relationships with those lawyers or other persons likely to come beforethe court on which the judge serves.

Commentary:

A judge must avoid financial and business dealings that involve the judge in frequent transactions or

continuing business relationships with persons likely to come either before the judge personally or beforeother judges on the judge's court. In addition, a judge should discourage members of the judge's familyfrom engaging in dealings that would reasonably appear to exploit the judge's judicial position. This ruleis necessary to avoid creating an appearance of exploitation of office or favoritism and to minimize thepotential for disqualification.


29/34

29

2. A judge may, subject to the requirements of this Canon, hold and manage

investments of the judge and members of the judge's family, including realestate.

Commentary:

This Section provi

Documents

Exhibit 1 the Law v3 Final 1