See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: Michigan Judge Karen Khalil sends man to jail for 30 days for remaining silent when seated in the courtroom - Retaliation?
Source:
http://www.lawlessamerica.com
URL Source: http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index ... =120%3Anews-reports&Itemid=222
Published: Jun 18, 2012
Author: William Michael Windsor
Post Date: 2012-06-18 11:55:45 by freepatriot32
Ping List: *Jack-Booted Thugs* Subscribe to *Jack-Booted Thugs*
Keywords: Michigan Judge, Karen Khalil, jail, jackbooted thugs
Views: 268
Comments: 20
Michigan Judge Karen Khalil sends man to jail for 30 days for remaining silent when seated in the courtroom. The man refused to give his name, but he is one of the "founders" of LawlessAmerica.com. Judge Karen Khalil is a corrupt judge who must be removed from office, indicted, arrested, convicted, imprisoned, disgraced, and impeached. On June 8, 2012 A Novi, Michigan man was ordered by Judge Karen Kahlil of Michigan's 17th District Court to spend up to 30 days in jail for refusing to disclose his name. While sitting quietly observing a friend’s property rights case, Judge Karen Kahlil demanded he stand and disclose his name. Other witnesses were shocked when the judge ordered him arrested for refusing to disclose his name. He was cited with contempt, handcuffed, and hauled off to the Redford Police jail and later transferred to a Midland County jail. He, along with four other court observers were ordered to stand and give their names, but only the Novi man was arrested and jailed. Prior to Friday’s arrest, the Novi man had a criminal complaint, judicial misconduct, malfeasance of office, and deprivation of rights charges filed against Judge Karen Kahlil, and it is suspected that she was using her authority in retaliation for his legal action against her. He has commenced a hunger strike. The courtwatchers witnessed the court officials assault the Novi man. When one of the courtwatchers attempted to leave the room, he was detained against his will. The court officers used threat and intimidation to hold the entire body of courtwatchers hostage. Judge Karen Kahlil, in an uncontrollable rage, began to call out, “We got a group of Moors in here!” She continued her comments toward the courtwatchers “Are you a part of that group? Who here is a part of that group the Moors group?” The actions of Judge Karen Khalil are worse than outrageous. She is a criminal who must be removed from office, idicted, convicted, and imprisoned for what she has done in this and other cases. Judge Karen Khalil is a corrupt judge. The victim in this matter will be part of the movie, LawlessAmerica.
Subscribe to *Jack-Booted Thugs*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All, *libertarians*, *Humor-Weird News* (#0)
ping
free and legal online poker site click here
When dealing with a corrupt system, whining will get you nowhere. Sometimes you gotta take the law into your own hands.
Gee, I wonder what tribe she belongs to? Sounds Arabic, not Jewish. I sense a disturbance in the farce. Much gnashing will ensue.
This "judge" like many judges need to learn an olde American axiom: "You can run, but you cannot hide forever".
Actually that was my first reaction too. However, she could be of Sephardic (Arab Jews) or Mizrahi (also Arab Jews) ancestry. I didn't find anything specific about her but on doing a search the last name Khalil popped up in a lot of Jewish contexts.
On further looking it appears to be a Jewish name originating in the region of Syria and Lebanon. So, she's of Mizrahi ancestry at least i.e., an Arab Jew like some of my distant ancestors.
Female judges are the worst. Biased, chip on the shoulder, effn beotches. Judges in general are the stupid ones who can't make it in private practice, this whole clusterf*ck called the USSA needs to be demolished.
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” —Samuel Adams America: Israel's Handmaiden
It has been stated when "all" the judges, lawyers, bankers, an police are in jail, all the real criminals will be locked up!
Flagrant and obvious retaliation by an obviously sick and sinister witch sitting on the bench. Couldn't she control herself for a couple of days and have one of the police chiefs in her District arrange to plant some drugs on 'em?
This is the judge, The Honorable Karen Khalil that presided over the Jack Kevorkian Redford Township assisted suicide case. Here's how she's depicted on the Seventeenth District Court web site,, "Her courtroom is widely recognized as a model of integrity and efficiency."
deleted
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one. "If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” —Samuel Adams America: Israel's Handmaiden
I don't see how it could be retaliation when she didn't know who he was. His refusal to identify himself was a contempt of court. For all that the judge knew, he could have been a witness who was supposed to be sequestered from the pending trial. By the way, her full name is Karen Khalil Bouzas. As this is Michigan, I suspect she is of Arabian ancestry.
"Prior to Friday’s arrest, the Novi man had a criminal complaint, judicial misconduct, malfeasance of office, and deprivation of rights charges filed against Judge Karen Kahlil, and it is suspected that she was using her authority in retaliation for his legal action against her." Just because she asked him his name doesn't mean she didn't know who he was. It's likely she recognized him if he has charges filed against her, don't you think? silence is not contempt. the shrew's imaginings about the observer, whatever they may have been, do not override the person's right to remain silent. people can not be compelled to speak. and, the 30 day sentence reveals an out-of-control power-mad person. "Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you". Sirach 4:28
With your indulgence I'd like to offer a layman's opinion on this action by the judge. A judge does not have 24 hour walking enclave jurisdiction over any other citizen. In other words, a courtroom observer is not under the jurisdiction of the court, and if a judge asks for a name and a person remains mute, the judge may expel that person from the courtroom. Now a judge may punish any act committed in her/his presence, but that would be limited to an affirmative act, not acts of omission. What if for instance, the person is literally mute, slightly retarded or suffers from a rare, "judiciophobia"? That judge committed a willful tort and may be sued for that arrest and confinement. And, remember, that victim can find a clinical psychologist AFTER THE FACT to diagnose his "rare phobia". (wink wink) The mere suspicion that an observer is an interested party in the matter before the court does not convey jurisdiction to the court. One does not "walk through the looking glass of jurisdiction" by simply entering a courtroom and showing interest in the matter before the court. And a judge's (or RED QUEEN'S) feelings of paranoia (I'm surrounded by people who hate me and who are waiting for mee to make a mistake! OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!") is an issue for the judicial conduct board! The judge's stress level and mental health can be called into question and are subject to peer review! Okay so far? Now we "filthy ol' tax rebs" in CA found that these issues had to be handled from Jump Street and appealed by attorneys pro se because finding a bar blessed liar (lawyer) who was willing to tell a judge that she or he isn't Yahweh or other equally omnipotent worshiped deity was very difficult if not impossible. Of course lots of lawyers would say, "You don't have to suffer this abuse, gimme two thousand dollars and I'll get started on your appeal right away!" The suckers who were foolish enough to pay later learned that the lawyer filed a flawed motion, i.e., writ of mandamus that was easily dismissed, that was no threat to the rogue judge and that was later sustained on appeal. So, the solution is to file the case yourself, (If you are arrested and jailed, and only after submitting an oral writ of habeas corpus (remember this-you politely ask if the judge will entertain an oral writ over the phone!) using your phone call to contact the federal magistrate on call for instance, pleading for relief for denial of your constitutional rights and due process and the incapacity to act in your own best interest because you've been kidnapped by armed agents with no jurisdiction over you! (The jailer will call the rogue judge and you may be released pronto once he knows you ain't stupid. The rogue will not want to suffer the humiliation of being ordered by a federal magistrate to "bring your body before the court forthwith" and the rogue having to offer evidence to support a contempt citation against a free citizen who has granted no jurisdiction to the offending court) If a state or lower court judge dismisses your suit against a rogue judge (remember he has no jurisdiction if you have not entered a plea or you are not appearing in response to a subpoena or summons and you've committed no overt act of contempt in the court's presence, so you can sue that bastard for your arrest and confinement) AND THAT is when an attorney pro se has power! You simply add those judges to the lawsuit while appealing to an even higher court for a reversal, something no bar rat would ever do. (career suicide) The only rights we have left are those we actively assert and defend. And lawyers are not taught that judges are no better than you or I if we meet them in a grocery store. If you reach for the last jar of Ovaltine and the judge also wants it, he (the term is gender inclusive) cannot whip out a gavel and say, "I'm holding you in contempt and ordering your arrest!" Now there are laws against harassing judicial officers and they are afforded protection against affirmative acts such as violence, intimidation or threats of same. But if you refuse to move your car because the judge has a fave parking spot where birds don't dookey on his classic 12 cyl. XKE, that is not a crime of omission and no contempt citation may lawfully be ensue. Likewise a courtroom is a public place and you may enter there if you are quiet and dignified and are not smeared with feces or displaying a tee shirt pic of his wife in her bathing suit with her ass looking like 50 lbs of cottage cheese. And if a judge attempts to pull you into the matter before the court, the proper response is to state that if you wish to join the suit or involve yourself you will do so at a time that is beneficial to you. And, further you cannot be forced to be a witness against yourself, regardless of whether even giving your name otherwise carries no legal consequences. You cannot be forced to speak at all. For instance: "What is your name?" "Your Honor, you are a govt agent and I don't give information to govt agents." "YOU GET OUT OF MY COURTROOM!" will be a likely response, and you'd better go because you cannot win an argument on appeal when you DON'T HAVE A MATTER BEFORE THE COURT. So, the man remaining mute could have handled it better because a judge can say that a bailiff or other court officer was suspicious and that the man resembled the BOLO for some wanted spree killer. If the man had responded either with his name or a refusal to do so for the reasons given, he could have been ejected but not arrested. Now the article is confusing because it read that he remained silent and then it read that he refused to give his name. Well, he couldn't do both. And if he spoke up and said, "I stand mute" then he really could have handled it better because he gave no reason for doing so. A mute does not speak then refuse to speak further unless taunting the judge. And that is, I'm sorry to say, arguably contemptible behavior committed in the judge's presence. Personally, I'd anticipate the ejection and say, "I"m sorry Your Honor, my name is HOUNDDAWG Q. (Quetzalcoatl) SCHWARTZ." (and optional) "My *driver's license number is 369, GDW (Goose Drank Wine) 666-1776. And, beyond identifying myself as a courtesy I do not wish to give evidence in the matter before this court at this or any other time. I'm uncertain of the final disposition of this proceeding, but of this I am certain: THIS COURT WILL NEVER HEAR ANY MATTER TO WHICH I AM A PARTY! GOODBYE" Remember even if you're on trial, civil or crim, you can toss the first judge off the bench (before entering a plea-very important) because you don't like his looks. After that you have to show cause or have compelling reasons to remove others. BUT, the next judge will likely proceed with caution when dealing with a knowledgeable and gutsy defendant, plaintiff, or respondent. And often you'll get a younger and less crusty judge whose rep isn't a mountain of granite with matching pleated ego. In a courtroom knowledge is power. And we don't need a license to steal (law license) to defend our own claims, property or freedom in court. Comments anyone? ______________________________________ * Los Federales use your social security number, my state, a driver's license number.
The creeps have a sense of dark humor that borders on psychotic. "The few who understand the [FEDERAL RESERVE] system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863.
Comments noone ! Excellent post. The truth is that none of these judges are anything other than ministerial agents by legislative fiat. Many times, like in California, they have commisioners that are mere county employees appointed simply to address the backlog of cases. I had one (commissioner) trying to drag me into her court [Family Court] by threatening to withhold $10,000.00 of my and my ex-wife's cash until "I" appeared (no mention of my ex-wife's mandatory appearance)in her court. I threatened to sue the bitch and charge her with the commission of conversion. I rejected her bullshit about forcing me to appear in order to get back my own money and told her to get screwed. I demanded my cash within 24 hours - and got it ! "The few who understand the [FEDERAL RESERVE] system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests." The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863.
If he filed any papers against her, then maybe the file clerk had seen his face and connected it with a name (maybe not even that, the person who brought the papers in could just as easily have been some disinterested messenger), but the judge herself probably had not seen him before nor connected his face with his name or with his filings. And, yes, refusing to answer questions is a contempt. So far we have one and only one version of these events. A fuller account may be very helpful.
#2. To: freepatriot32 (#0)
#3. To: freepatriot32 (#0)
Judge Karen Khalil
#4. To: Original_Intent (#3)
Khalil
#5. To: Turtle (#4)
#6. To: Turtle (#4)
#7. To: Turtle (#4)
#8. To: freepatriot32 (#0)
#9. To: Cynicom (#5)
#10. To: Eric Stratton (#9)
I still say that the day is coming when people will not want to admit that they are a lawyer, judge, big banker, fuzz, or CEO of any large company
#11. To: freepatriot32 (#0)
Retaliation?
#12. To: Lysander_Spooner (#8)
Female judges are the worst.
#13. To: ambi (#10)
#14. To: sizzlerguy (#11)
#15. To: Shoonra (#14)
I don't see how it could be retaliation when she didn't know who he was.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.” ~ Patrick Henry
#16. To: Shoonra, wudidiz (#14)
#17. To: freepatriot32. christine, James Deffenbach, Jethro Tull, Stephen Lendman, All (#0)
(Edited)
#18. To: sizzlerguy (#12)
"Her courtroom is widely recognized as a model of integrity and efficiency."
#19. To: HOUNDDAWG (#17)
Comments anyone?
#20. To: wudidiz (#15)
(Edited)
Just because she asked him his name doesn't mean she didn't know who he was. It's likely she recognized him if he has charges filed against her, don't you think?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest