The United States legal system has basically become a criminal enterprise with no competition. But the widespread corruption found in this form of organized crime extends beyond merely our system. Look at any country or industry where there is money, power, or both, and you will find corruption.
However, in America some states outshine others with respect to redefining it. Massachusetts is one such state. Of the five courts in that state in which I have been involved in litigation or filed briefs, all have exhibited corruption to some degree. The Taunton District Court is easily the worst of the five in my experience.
The average person is normally not always aware of corruption because oftentimes the judge's or other court official’s actions are taken as Gospel. A person must know the court rules of procedure and laws in order to know when court officials are breaking them. Many people, however, do not. Arming oneself with knowledge is the first step in fighting corruption.
Some classic examples of corruption I have personally witnessed in Massachusetts courts include judges violating state civil and criminal laws, federal criminal laws, court rules of procedure, and the U.S. Constitution—all at different stages of several cases. Sometimes only one or two rules or laws have been broken. At other times, it has been the entire litany just mentioned as exemplified in a civil case in which I am involved in the aforementioned Taunton District Court.
When fighting corruption, you have to make a decision about whether you want to have a red bull’s eye painted on your back. If you fight an entire court and all its cronies as I have, you will not make any friends in the legal system nor likely find anyone within it who will lift a toxic finger to assist you in eradicating the corruption.
Remedial entities, such as judicial and attorney oversight boards, and even state supreme courts almost universally turn a blind eye to litigant complaints from people lacking political connections, but will certainly be more inclined to do so once someone has made the choice to fight corruption. However, without anyone stepping up to the plate, it becomes much easier for the court system to commit these transgressions. If enough people were willing to have targets placed on their backs, the system would run out of bullets, effectively speaking, and have to start following its own rules and laws.
Underscoring how outrageous some of the rule-breaking can be, rules of civil procedure in Massachusetts declare that a defendant must file an answer and any counterclaim to a complaint within twenty days. The defendant in my civil case in the Taunton District Court filed both nearly nine years late! Instead of reprimanding the defendant’s attorney, the court allowed the answer and permissive counterclaim, both of which were fraudulent, and vacated, or removed, the default judgment it had rightfully given me weeks earlier. The court vacated the judgment despite there being no court rules allowing for it.
Two months ago, the lying defendant’s attorney, Joseph L. Michaud, stated in open court that I had “called the court many times recently to find out the status of the case,” which was not true. He is also a liar—a pathological one, actually. Since this alleged information is not part of the court record, Mr. Michaud basically admitted to the fact that he was part of a larger conspiracy to fix the outcome in his client’s favor. Conspirators in this same court also doctored the court record in an attempt to cover their tracks regarding their many other illegal activities. Litigants who are naïve to court shenanigans would completely miss most, if not all, of this.
It just so happens that Mr. Michaud had run for district attorney in Bristol County, Massachusetts. He also ran for state senate. Thankfully, for the people of that state, he was defeated on both fronts. This bottom feeder also has at least two known lawsuits against him; one can still be found in this download. Obviously, he has political connections that explain why he has been able to commit several criminal acts yet has faced no repercussions within the court system. These connections also explain why the appellate division of the district court dismissed my appeal on grounds that completely disregarded the facts I had presented. Their ruling would have been laughable if it was part of the script for the sitcom Night Court. Essentially, with respect to their decision, the glorified, unelected lawyers in black gowns expected me to believe that 2 + 2 = 5.
In another court in the same state in a small claims case in which I was the defendant, I’ve witnessed a judge-criminal decide the matter in direct opposition to the facts the evidence supported. This was done for financial reasons since the plaintiff was bringing many small claims cases to that court each month—and paying a filing fee for each one. On that single day alone, the plaintiff had approximately twenty-five to thirty cases on the docket. It would not have been good business for that court to lose that particular “customer” by ruling against it no matter what facts the evidence supported.
In yet another court in Massachusetts, I have first-hand experience seeing more than one judge-criminal break state criminal laws in a case against me. These judge-criminals also violated the selective enforcement clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the requirement of an indictment by a grand jury as provided in the Fifth Amendment, and several rules of procedure in the process.
The bottom line is that knowledge is power to the average litigant. It is also the greatest threat to the current operation of the American (in)justice system itself. People must become more aware of the criminal activity and other misdeeds committed each day by our public servants at all levels in every court across the nation. Make no mistake; what I have written about most likely will happen to you someday within the Satan-infested places we call courts unless we all do our part to cure this endemic disease.