Corruption in Government Must STOP -
Obey the Constitution
_________________________
Why is Obedience to the State and Federal Constitutions so Important?
Because Public Officers commit heinous criminal acts EVERY DAY
which they would NOT commit if they honored their oaths to obey the Constitutions
_______________
Public Officers swear an Oath, which they do not keep, to support the Constitutions.
Question: By what authority does a False swearing, perjuring Public Officer hold office?
Answer: NONE Whatsoever. There is no expiration date on their oath of office.
____________________
Attorneys commit crimes that are covered up other attorneys,
judges, and other corrupt public officers
Those who cover-up the crimes are more dishonest, corrupt, crooked, culpable, immoral, reprobate, decadent, degenerate, worthy of punishment, etc.,
than the original crime-committing attorney.
____________________
Serving in Public Office is a PRIVILEGE
WHY?
Because it is a privilege for a man to be deemed to be of the highest moral character, exhibiting such honesty, integrity, and good faith that other men would trust such a man to protect their life, liberty, and property. A man who is unfaithful and breaches such a sacred Trust is of such moral turpitude as to have descended below the level of a baby-raper, for such a one has figuratively raped the unborn as well as those who already have been born.
Public Officers that do not act with the highest fidelity to the Constitutions they are required to support exhibit contempt and disrespect for the high calling of public office.
Because it is a privilege for a man to be deemed to be of the highest moral character, exhibiting such honesty, integrity, and good faith that other men would trust such a man to protect their life, liberty, and property. A man who is unfaithful and breaches such a sacred Trust is of such moral turpitude as to have descended below the level of a baby-raper, for such a one has figuratively raped the unborn as well as those who already have been born.
Public Officers that do not act with the highest fidelity to the Constitutions they are required to support exhibit contempt and disrespect for the high calling of public office.
_________________________
Corrupt Judges, Corrupt District Attorneys, and Fellow Travelers
When judges and prosecutors, to whom the people naively look for "justice", DEFY the very Constitutions they are required to support, they are without excuse. They can't say, "the devil made me do it", because they themselves are the very embodiment of evil. Yes, evil is alive and well, and running rampant right now. And anyone who has had any dealings with the "Just-us" system, the "Good Old Boys" attorneys' guild, knows that is true. Just ask Gerry Spence, arguably the best lawyer in the history of America:
|
Gerry Spence -
An Honest Lawyer - on the American "justice" system |
|
|
Gerry Spence, born, reared and educated in Wyoming, is best known as an undefeated trial lawyer and a rugged individualist whose public pronouncements ring with the authority of common sense and moral vision. He graduated cum laude from the University of Wyoming Law School in 1952, and has spent his lifetime representing the poor, the injured, the forgotten and the damned against what he calls “the new slave master,” a combine of mammoth corporations and gargantuan government. Gerry never lost a criminal case, and he has not lost a civil case since 1969.
____________________
Introducing (drum roll): The Case AGAINST Adam Y. Gerol, district attorney (state prosecutor) and now lead protector of The Ozaukee County MOB and perverter of the law. Moral turpitude, squared.
|
.
It's not corruption when we do it - Gerol
|
One Paragraph Summary of Adam Y. Gerol's position:
You just saw and heard Gerry Spence say that over a period of 60 years he has "never been in a single case, ... that the government hasn’t violated the law or misused its power. Never one case. Not one.”
Well then, why should the Magritz case be the exception to the rule? We win. All the time. Because we lie, cheat, and steal. And misuse the police power (violent force) of the state. And get away with it, because “we’re the government”. And we’ve got the guns.
So, it’s perfectly fine for my buddy Dennis Kenealy, a fellow government attorney, to steal the Steve Magritz Answer to Dennis’ phony “foreclosure” against the Magritz property in order to get a phony "Default" judgment. After all, if he hadn’t stolen the Answer from the office files of the Clerk of Court, the phony “foreclosure” would have had to have been set for trial. We couldn't allow that:
Well then, why should the Magritz case be the exception to the rule? We win. All the time. Because we lie, cheat, and steal. And misuse the police power (violent force) of the state. And get away with it, because “we’re the government”. And we’ve got the guns.
So, it’s perfectly fine for my buddy Dennis Kenealy, a fellow government attorney, to steal the Steve Magritz Answer to Dennis’ phony “foreclosure” against the Magritz property in order to get a phony "Default" judgment. After all, if he hadn’t stolen the Answer from the office files of the Clerk of Court, the phony “foreclosure” would have had to have been set for trial. We couldn't allow that:
- since there was no “tax certificate” that existed to foreclose upon, and,
- since the rules of evidence for regular bank foreclosures had to be followed, in which case "we" would have lost, and,
- since Magritz had tendered payment (that Dennis also stole, heh, heh, heh), and,
- since that particular property was non-taxable Private Property protected by a Land Patent granted prior to 1848,
___________________
|
Since Magritz exposed Attorney General James E. Doyle, it is easy for people to understand why "Dirty Jim" retaliated to put Magritz "away" for life, but the motivation behind Gerol's vitriol is less obvious because it was not known to be personal, as was Doyle's. Magritz had exposed Doyle's misconduct in public office, thus Doyle had a personal axe to grind, a personal vendetta. Plus, Doyle could use, and did use, Magritz as a whipping boy to get into the Governor's office. Remember those "Doyle for Governor" ads spoken about by Investigative Reporter Gene Forte, propagandizing Magritz as a "paper terrorist". But why did "Evil Adam" trump up false charges against Magritz, a totally innocent man?
|
"Dirty Jim" Doyle
|
Protecting the "Good Old Boys" and dishonest Public Officers Gerol was Assistant District Attorney in Ozaukee County under Sandy A. Williams during the years that both Magritz and Investigative Reporter Gene Forte were futilely attempting to have Williams investigate the crimes of Kenealy against Magritz regarding the stealing of the Magritz Private Property. As DA Williams' "right hand man", ADA Gerol knew about Kenealy's crimes against Magritz. ADA Gerol knew about the concealment and cover-up of Kenealy's crimes by his "boss", DA Williams. And Gerol's being a "good team player" very likely resulted in his promotion to Assistant Attorney General under the new "Governor", James E. Doyle, as a stepping stone to promotion to district attorney to replace Williams when Williams was promoted to "judge".
|
.
|
|
Adam Y. Gerol's primary personal motivation in persecuting and prosecuting Magritz apparently is to cover-up and conceal crimes committed by Public Officers, especially fellow attorneys, members of the "Good Old Boys Club" like Shyster Dennis E. Kenealy, the now exposed and deposed Corporation Counsel of Ozaukee County, and Sandy A. Williams, currently a sitting "judge" in Ozaukee County. Gerol is also the chief protector of The Ozaukee County MOB consisting of fellow corrupt Public Officers. Gerol's secondary personal motivation may be to "Nifong" Magritz, a term coined after the now discredited, corrupt state prosecutor in North Carolina named Mike Nifong who attempted to advance his career by bringing false charges against the Duke University lacrosse players.
But the Main Objective of Gerol, Williams, and The Ozaukee County MOB likely is: To prevent the people from re-discovering the true nature of PRIVATE PROPERTY, that is, truly private property is NOT TAXABLE by government. See Exhibit N, paragraph 16, Gerol's crimes. |
Only mushrooms should be kept in the dark ...
|
What Gerol knows or should know, being an attorney highly trained in the law:
- Natural Law is the highest law.
- None of man's statutes can lawfully deny, defy, abrogate, repeal, or abolish any Natural Law.
- Stealing consists of taking that which belongs to another without his consent.
- Public Officers of Ozaukee County "took" the Private Property of Steve Magritz without his consent.
- Public Officers of Ozaukee County "took" the Private Property of Steve Magritz at gunpoint with a 24 man SWAT Team.
- Public Officers of Ozaukee County "took" the Private Property of Steve Magritz without paying him for it.
- Public Officers of Ozaukee County stole the Private Property of Steve Magritz under "color of law".
- Public Officers of Ozaukee County stole the Private Property of Steve Magritz.
- Steve Magritz holds lawful seisin to the 62.25 acres of land taken from him by force of arms under color of law.
- Ozaukee County does not have legal or lawful title to the Private Property stolen from Steve Magritz.
- Ozaukee County has mere naked possession of the Private Property stolen from Steve Magritz.
- Adam Y. Gerol is a Public Officer, as are all of the other men or women named in the Magritz "800 Lb. Gorilla" lawsuit.
- Those Public Officers owe the utmost fidelity to the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin and the Constitution of the United States.
- Both Constitutions prohibit government from taking Private Property for public use without just compensation.
- Both Constitutions prohibit government from impairing the obligation of contracts.
- A Land Patent issued by The United States of America (USofA) is an executed contract.
- No Public Officer may impair the obligations set forth in a Land Patent.
- The Land Patents from the USofA for the Magritz property granted immunity from taxation to the buyer.
- The Land Patents issued for the Magritz property were issued prior to Wisconsin entering the Union of states in 1848.
- Neither Wisconsin, nor any of its Corporation subunits, may impair the immunities granted in the aforesaid Land Patents.
- The aforesaid Land Patents were issued pursuant to the Act of Congress of April 24, 1820.
- The Act of Congress of April 24, 1820, was intended to make the American people FREEHOLDERS.
- The Public Officers of Ozaukee County imposed slavery or involuntary servitude upon Steve Magritz.
- The Public Officers of Ozaukee County are Trustees, or Fiduciaries, of the Public Trust.
- Public Officers must display good faith, honesty, and integrity to the beneficiaries of the Public Trust, such as Steve Magritz.
- The Public Officers of Ozaukee County violated both mandates and prohibitions of the state and federal Constitutions.
- The Public Officers of Ozaukee County acted contrary to their duty of utmost fidelity to the Constitutions.
- The Public Officers of Ozaukee County did not display honesty, integrity, or good faith towards Steve Magritz.
- The Public Officers of Ozaukee County breached their fiduciary duty to Steve Magritz.
- Corporation Counsel Dennis E. Kenealy brought a foreclosure action on an alleged "tax certificate" against the Magritz property.
- The alleged "tax certificate" was never filed with the court, thereby depriving the court of subject matter jurisdiction.
- The alleged "tax certificate" never existed. Magritz demanded a copy. Treasurer Makoutz admitted it didn't exist.
- No one ever evidenced an interest in the Magritz property despite Notice and demand to do so by Magritz back in the 1990's.
- Magritz repeatedly Noticed the Public Officers that his Private Property was immune from their taxation, but was ignored.
- Magritz tendered payment as extortion, but Kenealy stole the tendered payment, an undisputed fact of public record.
- Magritz answered the foreclosure Complaint setting forth both absolute defenses, an undisputed fact of public record.
- Magritz showed the court that, 1) he had tendered payment, and, 2) his property was not subject to taxation.
- The Statutes state the Court shall (not "may") set the matter for trial since Magritz had set forth both absolute defenses in his Answer.
- Kenealy, aided and abetted by Clerk Schmidt, removed and concealed (stole) the Magritz Answer from the court file.
- Now the pretend "judge", corrupt Joseph D. McCormack, does not have to hold a trial, and Magritz can not be heard, because there is NO ANSWER in the file. Why? It was STOLEN. McCormack had "plausible deniability" - there was no Answer in the court file.
- Kenealy's theft and concealment for over 6 months of the Magritz Answer is an undisputed fact of public record.
- "Judge" McCormack granted Ozaukee County a "default" judgment since Kenealy falsely claimed Magritz never filed an Answer.
- "Judge" McCormack had "plausible deniability" since Clerk Schmidt never recorded the Magritz Answer on the docket sheet when it was received.
- What a "Confirmation Deed" is, having instantaneous desktop access to Westlaw and/or other online legal research.
- That Gerol's "charges" against Magritz for filing a "Confirmation Deed" of Magritz's very own, 1990's deeds, were false.
- Gerol's false accusation was made without an injured party.
- Gerol's false accusation was NOT based upon an affidavit under penalty of perjury by an injured party.
- Gerol's false accusation against Magritz constituted malicious prosecution.
- Gerol's malicious prosecution evidences his corruption.
- Gerol's false accusation against Magritz constituted Breach of Fiduciary Duty of the Public Trust.
- Gerol's Breach of Fiduciary Duty of the Public Trust constitutes rebellion against the Constitution.
- Pursuant to the 14th Amendment, Breach of Fiduciary Duty of the Public Trust denies him any federal or state office.
____________________
If Gerol knows all of that, which he does, since he is highly trained in the law and is not stupid, WHY did he KNOWINGLY file a false Criminal Complaint against Magritz trying to put Magritz back in prison?
|
|
____________________
The extent to which Adam Y. Gerol went to cover-up crimes and commit new crimes
On July 13, 2011, for the "umpteenth time" the crimes of Shyster Kenealy were reported to DA Gerol and the Lawless Sheriff, "Mad Maury". The chronology of the reporting is set forth on the Sandy Williams page.
Gerol failed to respond to the July 13, 2011, which was not unexpected since he and his former "boss", dishonest DA Sandy A. Williams had refused to respond to both Magritz and Investigative Reporter Gene Forte numerous times over the years. Magritz then filed his Verified Motion For A Determination of Probable Cause. On about August 20th the notary public handed Magritz a response from DA Gerol which concluded: "For all these reasons I am not taking any action with regard to this filing."
Gerol failed to respond to the July 13, 2011, which was not unexpected since he and his former "boss", dishonest DA Sandy A. Williams had refused to respond to both Magritz and Investigative Reporter Gene Forte numerous times over the years. Magritz then filed his Verified Motion For A Determination of Probable Cause. On about August 20th the notary public handed Magritz a response from DA Gerol which concluded: "For all these reasons I am not taking any action with regard to this filing."
Nowhere in Gerol's excuses did Gerol deny that Kenealy had committed crimes. Nowhere did Gerol state that Kenealy had NOT committed crimes. Just a lot of dishonest attorney "Meadow Muffins" and "Road Apples". However two of Gerol's paragraphs are worth reciting in their entirety to expose Gerol's duplicity.
Gerol wrote:
"First, the general time limit for prosecutions is contained in Wis. Stat. sec. 939.74. This provides that prosecution for a felony must be commenced within six years after the commission of the act. There are some exceptions to the general rule, however none of those would apply to the allegations made in this complaint. Accordingly, as Mr. Magritz recites violations which he contends occurred in 2001, the statute of limitations for prosecuting any of these acts, even if true, would have ended in 2007 — more than four years ago. As such, all of these claims are barred by the statute of limitations."
Commentary: Magritz dealt with this in his reply to Gerol set forth below.
"First, the general time limit for prosecutions is contained in Wis. Stat. sec. 939.74. This provides that prosecution for a felony must be commenced within six years after the commission of the act. There are some exceptions to the general rule, however none of those would apply to the allegations made in this complaint. Accordingly, as Mr. Magritz recites violations which he contends occurred in 2001, the statute of limitations for prosecuting any of these acts, even if true, would have ended in 2007 — more than four years ago. As such, all of these claims are barred by the statute of limitations."
Commentary: Magritz dealt with this in his reply to Gerol set forth below.
Gerol also wrote:
"Third, to the extent that this document is in the nature of a police report some additional observations must be made. While this document carries a notary seal, the jurat is carefully crafted in such a way that the notary is not averring that the document was made under oath. Rather the attestation simply states that Mr. Magritz "affix[ed] his signature to this Report." This is noteworthy. When a person makes a statement under oath, or in person to a law enforcement official in their official capacity, the possibility for criminal prosecution for making a false statement enhances the weight of what that person reports. Here, it appears as though the statement is actually crafted in such a way as to provide plausible denial if ultimately scrutinized."
Commentary: Accusatory evil Adam. The wording of Magritz' actual oath appeared in the first paragraph, so there was no reason to use the nebulous, undefined word "oath" in the jurat. But state's attorneys usually get away with the deception. A subsequent criminal report by Magritz was made under penalty of perjury, something you will never see in anything prepared by the DA's office. Never. Corrupt attorney Adam Y. Gerol's above duplicitous statements will be exposed below along with his evil intent.
"Third, to the extent that this document is in the nature of a police report some additional observations must be made. While this document carries a notary seal, the jurat is carefully crafted in such a way that the notary is not averring that the document was made under oath. Rather the attestation simply states that Mr. Magritz "affix[ed] his signature to this Report." This is noteworthy. When a person makes a statement under oath, or in person to a law enforcement official in their official capacity, the possibility for criminal prosecution for making a false statement enhances the weight of what that person reports. Here, it appears as though the statement is actually crafted in such a way as to provide plausible denial if ultimately scrutinized."
Commentary: Accusatory evil Adam. The wording of Magritz' actual oath appeared in the first paragraph, so there was no reason to use the nebulous, undefined word "oath" in the jurat. But state's attorneys usually get away with the deception. A subsequent criminal report by Magritz was made under penalty of perjury, something you will never see in anything prepared by the DA's office. Never. Corrupt attorney Adam Y. Gerol's above duplicitous statements will be exposed below along with his evil intent.
____________________
Magritz responded to DA Gerol's dolus on August 22.
|
| ||
____________________
Did Dishonest District Attorney Adam Y. Gerol respond to the Magritz letter above? No. Just more obfuscation and "Meadow Muffins", with a side order of "Road Apples".
And of course, Gerol AGAIN refused to state that Kenealy had not committed crimes.
One has to have a strong stomach to read and appreciate how barnyard excrement, word twisting, outright lying, and despicable dishonesty, is the stock in trade of many attorneys, such as Adam Y. Gerol. Of the many broadcasts by Investigative Reporter Gene Forte exposing dishonesty and corruption of attorneys across the country, the April 20, 2003 broadcast on the "Summaries" page is "must listening".
Gerol's "response" dated August 30, 2011:
I will not respond to your claims (sic) point by point but will expand on what you appear to be asking about the Statute of Limitations. ... You appear to be asking about the possibility of a "Discovery Rule" in this case. [This is followed by THREE PAGES of off-point barnyard excrement.]
Commentary: Got your barf bags strapped on? "Appear" to be asking? Gerol is not an imbecile, a moron, or an idiot. He just acts like one in order to evade responding to Magritz. Evil, evil, evil. Typical corrupt attorney. By not addressing the questions, what this dishonest DA is saying is this: We attorneys will protect ALL CRIMINAL ACTS OF FELLOW ATTORNEYS until the statute of limitations runs out on their crimes, and you can't do a damn thing about it.
We DA's in Wisconsin are MORE CORRUPT than in any other state in the Union, where the statute of limitations doesn't START until the public officer is OUT OF OFFICE. Well, this commentator doesn't believe you can't prosecute the Accused attorney Dennis E. Kenealy. But it is believable that YOU are more CORRUPT, Evil Adam Y. Gerol. "Esquire". For example, the statute in a sister state reads as follows:
If the period of limitation provided in division (A)(1) or (3) of this section has expired, prosecution shall be commenced for the following offenses during the following specified periods of time:
(a) For an offense involving misconduct in office by a public servant, at any time while the accused remains a public servant, or within two years thereafter.
So, Evil Adam, it "APPEARS" that you are saying you attorneys are MUCH MORE CORRUPT in Wisconsin than in other states.
I will not respond to your claims (sic) point by point but will expand on what you appear to be asking about the Statute of Limitations. ... You appear to be asking about the possibility of a "Discovery Rule" in this case. [This is followed by THREE PAGES of off-point barnyard excrement.]
Commentary: Got your barf bags strapped on? "Appear" to be asking? Gerol is not an imbecile, a moron, or an idiot. He just acts like one in order to evade responding to Magritz. Evil, evil, evil. Typical corrupt attorney. By not addressing the questions, what this dishonest DA is saying is this: We attorneys will protect ALL CRIMINAL ACTS OF FELLOW ATTORNEYS until the statute of limitations runs out on their crimes, and you can't do a damn thing about it.
We DA's in Wisconsin are MORE CORRUPT than in any other state in the Union, where the statute of limitations doesn't START until the public officer is OUT OF OFFICE. Well, this commentator doesn't believe you can't prosecute the Accused attorney Dennis E. Kenealy. But it is believable that YOU are more CORRUPT, Evil Adam Y. Gerol. "Esquire". For example, the statute in a sister state reads as follows:
If the period of limitation provided in division (A)(1) or (3) of this section has expired, prosecution shall be commenced for the following offenses during the following specified periods of time:
(a) For an offense involving misconduct in office by a public servant, at any time while the accused remains a public servant, or within two years thereafter.
So, Evil Adam, it "APPEARS" that you are saying you attorneys are MUCH MORE CORRUPT in Wisconsin than in other states.
____________________
How did Magritz reply this time? Just call a spade a spade.
|
.
| ||||
____________________
Do you think Evil Adam Gerol wants Revenge now that Magritz called him out?
Of course Evil Adam Gerol does! Evil men do evil things, don't they?
Gerol and Kenealy conspire to permanently put Magritz away to shut him up. Two "Career Criminals", two "Professional Liars", two corrupt attorneys, use the "legal system" to conspire against one Midwest farm boy. Two against one. Fair enough odds.
On December 1, 2011, Shyster Kenealy and DA Adam Y. Gerol did a "tag-team" on Magritz to shut Magritz up. Corporation Counsel, Shyster Dennis E. Kenealy, as "complaining party" for Ozaukee County, and his dishonest assistant Rhonda K. Gorden, acting as the attorney for Ozaukee County, filed "civil" injunction complaints against both Magritz and the attesting Notary Public for Magritz. This is called "abuse of legal process".
|
On the very same day, December 1, just by coincidence, no conspiracy, mind you, dishonest DA Adam Y. Gerol filed a false "criminal" complaint against "MAGRITZ", and mailed a copy of it to relative of Magritz. This is called malicious prosecution. Magritz then added Gerol to his Criminal Report dated December 9, 2011, for Retaliation against a Victim of Crime (downloadable at linked page).
|
| ||
Then Gerol went to corrupt "judge" Sandy A. Williams and got Williams to sign an arrest warrant for "MAGRITZ". Submit or die, Magritz. "WE" are the gods around here, and we're going to sic "Mad Maury" on you.
Hey, Evil Adam, - Here are some new words to add to your limited vocabulary: good faith, honesty, integrity. You will find them in the first half of the dictionary under g, h, and i, respectively. By the way, those attributes are REQUIRED OF YOU as a Public Officer, so it might be a good idea for you to develop them before the people learn how to enforce the 14th Amendment and run you out of office covered with tar and feathers.
Hey, Evil Adam, - Here are some new words to add to your limited vocabulary: good faith, honesty, integrity. You will find them in the first half of the dictionary under g, h, and i, respectively. By the way, those attributes are REQUIRED OF YOU as a Public Officer, so it might be a good idea for you to develop them before the people learn how to enforce the 14th Amendment and run you out of office covered with tar and feathers.
_______________
Let's scrutinize this "Meadow Muffin" that Evil Adam is using against Magritz
Then we'll know why Magritz sued Evil Adam with the rest of The Ozaukee County MOB
Malicious Prosecution + Simulating Legal Process = Evil Adam Y. Gerol
The question of whose signature is on this tripe is addressed in the next section below
Evil Adam Gerol, as his part of the conspiracy with Shyster Dennis E. Kenealy, tried to shut Magritz up by putting him in prison based upon the false charges, scandalous accusations, and malicious prosecution shown below.
- First, compare the 2 documents, the Confirmation Deed and the land description below, with Exhibit A of the Magritz Complaint. Magritz recorded and filed at least seven (7) pages, but Gerol shows only two (2) of those seven pages. So right out of the gate Evil Adam deceives by omission, which is lying, by omitting the rest of the documents so that even someone less learned in the law, and certainly with more honesty and integrity than Gerol, can plainly see what Magritz did.
- Steven Alan Magritz recorded the Confirmation (Correction) Deed, not Steven A. Magritz or STEVEN A MAGRITZ ("legal" person).
- The slander of title statute Evil Adam misuses relates to title to property. Magritz has title to the property that was stolen from him at gunpoint and for which he was never paid. Gerol knows that no one can get title to stolen property. Does Gerol claim that a carjacker gets title to the car that he steals? Gerol is not stupid. Just evil. Gerol knows stealing property under color of law does not confer title.
- Gerol never claims in his phony "complaint" that Ozaukee County has title to the Magritz property, because the County does NOT have title.
- Gerol writes in his Complaint (that he gets some poor, ignorant sheriff's deputy to sign), that "There is no such thing as a Confirmation Deed." Bring it on, Evil Adam, bring it on. A four man law firm will pay $1,000 per month for a mediocre online subscription to Westlaw. How many hundreds of thousands of dollars per year does "The State of Wisconsin" pay so that the 249 or so judges, plus the roughly 600 persons under the Attorney General's command such as Evil Adam, can have instant access to legal research. It would take Evil Adam less than one minute, less than 60 seconds, at his keyboard, on his desktop, to tap into Westlaw to determine what a "Confirmation Deed" is. Did Gerol do his research, his due diligence, before filing the Complaint to put Magritz in prison? If not, then he is incompetent. However, more likely than not he did due diligence, which would just confirm his evil intent, his mens rea, and his mala in se.
- The "Complainant" Jeff Taylor, a sheriff's deputy of Lt. grade, signed the purported Complaint. But this poor "copper" is giving hearsay, based upon alleged opinion. It is "he said, she said" worthless verbiage. And since when is this "copper" authorized to file a complaint for the Corporation named Ozaukee County? Is he the President, or the Vice President, or the Chairman of the Board of this Corporation and authorized to file a complaint for it? Of course not. Poor Taylor is neither an injured party, nor a witness with first hand personal knowledge, nor an authorized agent of the Corporation, the alleged injured party. The poor guy is being used by corrupt, dishonest attorneys and probably doesn't have a clue. Pity him.
- IF Register of Deeds Ron Voigt is actually that ignorant of his j-o-b, job, that he doesn't know what a "Confirmation Deed" is, then he is incompetent, and should be removed from his "j-o-b" as an incompetent Fiduciary of the Public Trust.
- If Ron Voigt says that "There is no such thing as a Confirmation Deed" and that the Magritz Deed was a false or frivolous document: Great! Sweet! Wonderful! Then get Voigt to sign an accusation against Magritz under penalty of perjury under his full commercial liability so that Magritz can "own" him and everything Voigt thinks he owns. And that goes double for that poor, ignorant "copper" who is a boot-licker for Evil Adam.
- The JURAT. Remember in the section above where Evil Adam wrote, regarding the first Criminal Report by Magritz in 2011: "Third, to the extent that this document is in the nature of a police report some additional observations must be made. While this document carries a notary seal, the jurat is carefully crafted in such a way that the notary is not averring that the document was made under oath. Rather the attestation simply states that Mr. Magritz "affix[ed] his signature to this Report." This is noteworthy. When a person makes a statement under oath, or in person to a law enforcement official in their official capacity, the possibility for criminal prosecution for making a false statement enhances the weight of what that person reports. Here, it appears as though the statement is actually crafted in such a way as to provide plausible denial if ultimately scrutinized." Well, guess what class? In Evil Adam's phony baloney "Complaint" there is no affidavit, there is no mention of an "oath", and the "jurat" merely states "subscribed and sworn". That means absolutely nothing. Sworn to what? It is not defined. Sworn to lie like a rug? Sworn that I like ice cream? Sworn that I didn't spit on the sidewalk this morning? "I swear that I like ice cream." "I swear that I'm a good guy." It doesn't even say "duly sworn upon oath", which also means nothing unless the terms of the oath are specifically stated. WHAT is the operative clause of the "sworn to" or "oath", Gerol, holding the accuser liable for his accusations? There is none. "Meadow Muffins", Gerol, and "Road Apples".
- DA's like Gerol NEVER state what that oath is. There is supposed to be an affidavit made under penalty of perjury so that if the person is falsely accusing someone, and that someone is injured by the false swearer, that false swearer is going to lose his shirt. The person falsely accused is going to "own" the perjurer. THAT is why none of the complaints filed by corrupt attorneys like Evil Adam Gerol are made under penalty of perjury. Isn't that right, Evil Adam?
- Finally, the poor "copper" Jeff Taylor signs his name under the statement, "Based on the foregoing, the complainant believes this complaint to be true and correct." Now get this straight, Jeff Taylor. You may be just some poor, ignorant slob being used by Evil Adam to put an innocent man in prison, but ignorance of the law is no excuse, Bubba. What you are doing is unconscionable.
- Repent! And next time you sign a complaint against someone you make damn sure it is on personal, first hand knowledge, you are either the injured party or are an authorized agent such as the Chairman of the Board, and it is under penalty of perjury under your full commercial liability, otherwise you will be as guilty as Evil Adam because you will have acted with scienter. YOU have been publicly Noticed!
_______________
____________________
The Signature of the Notary witnessing the signature of Taylor, 3rd page of "Complaint"
First, Notice that the purported Summons is NOT SIGNED. It merely has the typed name: Adam Y. Gerol.
Second, look at the notarial attestation, the area of the "Criminal Complaint" just below the signature of Jeff Taylor. See the illegible scribbling? Whose scribbling is that? It certainly is not the "signature" of Gerol. See Gerol's "signature" below.
And where is the typed or printed name of the notary? Since when doesn't the DA have to follow the statutory requirement?
And where is the notarial seal? Since when doesn't the DA have to follow the statutory requirement?
What is the name of this alleged notary? And why is he, she, or "it" concealing their name?
Third, notice the three Bar Association numbers below the "My Commission is Permanent", indicating an attorney. The first bar number is assigned to Gerol, the second to Jeffrey A. Sisley, and the third to Patti L. Wabitsch. They didn't all three notarize that phony "Criminal Complaint". Is this more obfuscation and "plausible deniability" Gerol? But the buck stops with you, Gerol, even though apparently no one in your office wants the blame for filing such a blatantly phony "Criminal Complaint" trying to put an innocent man in prison.
Second, look at the notarial attestation, the area of the "Criminal Complaint" just below the signature of Jeff Taylor. See the illegible scribbling? Whose scribbling is that? It certainly is not the "signature" of Gerol. See Gerol's "signature" below.
And where is the typed or printed name of the notary? Since when doesn't the DA have to follow the statutory requirement?
And where is the notarial seal? Since when doesn't the DA have to follow the statutory requirement?
What is the name of this alleged notary? And why is he, she, or "it" concealing their name?
Third, notice the three Bar Association numbers below the "My Commission is Permanent", indicating an attorney. The first bar number is assigned to Gerol, the second to Jeffrey A. Sisley, and the third to Patti L. Wabitsch. They didn't all three notarize that phony "Criminal Complaint". Is this more obfuscation and "plausible deniability" Gerol? But the buck stops with you, Gerol, even though apparently no one in your office wants the blame for filing such a blatantly phony "Criminal Complaint" trying to put an innocent man in prison.
Gerol's signature on a letter to Sandy A. Williams obtained from the clerk of court.
This is not the same as the illegible scribbling on the "Criminal Complaint".
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Gerol. I know.
But why don't you grow some cojones so you can do the dirty deed yourself.
You are a disgrace even to the "hue"-man beings (color of mankind).
Gad. Is there anything beneath you, and those of your ilk?
Have you stopped raping babies, Adam Y. Gerol?
Go to the Prologue page for a timeline and summary description of what this website is about
Return to top of this page
Go to The Ozaukee MOB home page, www.OzaukeeMOB.org
Go to Lawless Sheriff Maurice A. "Maury" Straub page
Go to Public Officer Quislings and Traitors main page
Go to independent Investigative Reporter Gene Forte main page
Go to the "800 Lb Gorilla" Lawsuit for Breach of Fiduciary Duty main page
Return to top of this page
Go to The Ozaukee MOB home page, www.OzaukeeMOB.org
Go to Lawless Sheriff Maurice A. "Maury" Straub page
Go to Public Officer Quislings and Traitors main page
Go to independent Investigative Reporter Gene Forte main page
Go to the "800 Lb Gorilla" Lawsuit for Breach of Fiduciary Duty main page