An Opednews.com article, with picture of Michael Nowacki, in front of a church can be [found here], and has video embedded of the explosive final 37 minutes of our phone conversation recorded today.
We talked about judicial corruption, judges destroying evidence, just making stuff up, police misconduct, the UBS banking scandal, UBS running town and state government, the courts, about the Connecticut Catholic Church accounting fraud, the Connecticut Governor's legal staffers who allegedly pocketed 100's of thousands of dollars, case rigging, lawyers legislating against the will of the people, and much more.
Michael Nowacki is a former CBS executive. He had a front row seat during the 2000 Presidential election campaign and has inside information in which he is gagged in being able to talk about. Nowacki is a Connecticut corrupt official's worst nightmare. Nowacki can easily get whacked, be put in a mental hospital for life, or railroaded to prison for his courageous moral crusade against our rigged courts, government, and their police force.
-stevengerickson AT yahoo Dot Com
Mike Nowacki 02-01-2012
Connecticut Court Corruption- The Nowacki FOIA Case 4.11.11
Text with video:
Uploaded by frankknee on Apr 19, 2011Citizen Michael Nowacki is exposing how the Conn. Judicial Branch has been illegally engaging law-making practices:
On March 18, 2011, the Connecticut Ethics Commission undertook investigation into Chief Family Judge Lynda Munro's alleged unlawful solicitation for "sponsorship" from members of the Connecticut Bar Association for mandated family court directed training for Guardian Ad Litem G.A.L.s held at Quinnipiac University. They dismissed it.
Audience is asked to respond to firstname.lastname@example.org as to whether Munro's solicitation of Bar funding for the GAL Program constitutes "making law from her secretive back chambers accountable by some state enforcement agency?
The FOIA Commission hesitates for having jurisdiction, saying Nowacki's contentions are not Administrative as defined by Conn. Supreme Court. (29:40 & 01:05:40) The hearing officer was referring to the 2006 decision, Clerk of GA 7 v. FOIC. That decision expanded the definition of "adjudicative" records to include simple docket sheet data which would become not subject to FOIA. The hearing officer attests @ 27:35 that he needs no coaching on the law by Mr. Nowacki because he's a professional 22 years on FOIA Law. Yet...
Clerk has nothing to do with the Nowacki case because Nowacki is not asking for anything to do with an individual case and privacy issues. He's asking for information on Public Hearings. The Law Tribune writes http://www.ctfog.org/CCFOI/subsite/LTValvoArticle.htm : "Three of the seven justices in Clerk favored test based on the 1988 case of Bar Examining Commission v. FOIC. Notes: Quinn: March 3, 2008: We do believe that administrative function should be defined as including the management of the internal institutional machinery of the court system, accounting, budgeting, personnel, facilities, physical operations, scheduling, record keeping, and docketing." That statement is answer to Officer Perpetua's J. Quinn question at 45:50.
In the 1983 case of Rules Committee v. FOIC, Chief Justice Ellen Ash Peters noted that the state FOI Act applies only to the Judicial Branch "administrative records" and not to "adjudicative records" that might interfere with the courts' critical function of deciding individual cases. Peters narrowly defined "administrative" matters as the "budget, personnel, facilities and physical operations of the courts." However, that was surpassed as shown above in 2008 by J. Quinn's notes which included all that encompasses internal institutional machinery, the point being Administrative acts as acknowledged by society are quite broad.
At the very least, it can be claimed Nowacki's failed FOIA to J. Munro and others about the GAL program and rule-making procedure was discovering the following: to know about records dealing with GAL budget or sponsorship, GAL personnel and even trainees, facilities at Quinnipiac and physical operations of the courts concerning the GAL. AMC "commando programs". After all, those Public Agency programs are physical operations that accommodate the efficient operations of the court, are administrative; and Nowacki is not seeking "adjudicative records" that might interfere with deciding any individual case.
Rules Committee v. FOIC is not so narrow that it limits the breadth of which administrative functions can still be carried out despite Clerk, thus is still under FOIA juris and oversight.
The hearing officer, Mr. Perpetua, @ 1:21:30 is dead wrong to have gone to such a narrow definition when "internal machinery" is the mantra, and when Nowacki points out the Superior Court and Appellate Court, and Chief Adm. J. Quinn acknowledges their rule-making falls as an administrative act @ 31:15 & 1:12:00. And when the Supreme Ct. NEVER limited Administrative tasks past docket and case sealing. Administrative function should be defined as including the management of the internal institutional machinery of the court system, which must include activity related to Rule-making. Why does Perpetua say different @ 1:21:15 ? Perpetua himself comes under scrutiny for then denying evidence relevance concerning Rule-making 1:15:45 . Judge Lynda B. Munro spearheaded a program aimed at influencing private law firms' hiring and employment practices. This is highly controversial behavior showing impropriety and warranting investigation of a conflict of interest, ethics, and even criminal allegations.
When a judge creates and manages, schedules,and coordinates a program like the GAL (Guardian Ad Litem) or AMC (Atty for the Minor Child) training sessions, a program under great social controversy whether or not it's actually destructive to families, promoted independently by this J. Munro, ... is that or is that not an Administrative function subject to FOIA Commission jurisdiction?
Use YouTube LIKES Vote for YES
Use DISLIKES Vote below for NO
* * * *
Feb. 17, 2012, Hartford Connecticut Legislative Office Building LOB Judiciary Committee Public Hearing. Mike Nowacki lets alleged lying lawyer legislators have it:
Text with video:
Michael Nowacki of New Canaan Connecticut might just be fighting for his life. If you complain about judges, or the courts, in the US, you can end up arrested and in prison. Others commit suicide under mysterious circumstances. Nowacki would have ended up in a mental hospital had it not been for an influential documentary producer who accompanied him to a Homeland Security meeting. The UK, Australia, Canada, and most of Europe also have a similarly abusive system.
[post on Michael Nowacki with link to his website]
Laws are made by legislators who are mostly lawyers. They make money in the courts and they make laws (legislation) to keep people in the court system as long as possible so lawyers make more money. The more unfair the system is, the more money lawyers make.
Look at the [legislators bios], they are Free Masons, have affiliations to other lawyers and they swear an oath to each other that takes precedence over the US Constitution. International corporations and banks run the courts, police, and governments. Prisons are being privatized as corporations are bribing politicians to put more people in prison and to guarantee prison populations will be kept at certain levels. We pay taxes to be slaves and prisoners. We pay to have our families broken up and to have our homes and property seized. [Is this okay with you]?
* * * *
* * * *
Do you want to see higher quality videos on this subject? Do you want alternatives to the crap media you are getting mainstream? Check out [this link], scroll to bottom.
-stevengerickson At yahoo Dot Com
A lot of people have a problem with Newt Gingrich and his 2012 bid to be US President. Newt's hatred for Judges who are damaging all of the US and economy will only win him friends. Lying lawyer Obama is what he is. Do we really want a pair of lying lawyers in the White House?
Some more Connecticut court scams:
February 26, 2012, update to the Michael Nowacki saga:
To go to newest posts, most blogs allow you to click top banner. I was surprised how few people seem to know that.