JHS: Corrupt Courts\Administrative Terrorism

January 9, 2023

Judge Mary Mullarkey
Chief justice of Supreme Court and Head of the judiciary

Please share with the other justices and officers of the judiciary.

The Supreme Court and the judiciary are the peoples' last line of defense
at the State level against judicial errors, wrongful prosecution and
criminal acts by government actors and courts. As a condition of their
job, justices of the Supreme Court and the judiciary promised by oath to
PROTECT the peoples' constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court justices failed (en-banc) to honor their oath to
protect my Constitutional rights. I tendered pleadings, paid the fees
($150.00) then the Supreme Court kept (stole) the money and refused to
hear my case. This fraud is common practice by this court and it signals
to prosecutors that they can rely on winning a high number of cases by
default of not being heard.

The judiciary failed to honor its oath to protect my Constitutional
rights by refusing to reasonably act on complaints and allegations
against its members (BAR members /"good old boys"). Protecting these
"good old boys" is common practice by the judiciary signaling that these
"good old boys" can rely on being protected for their crimes.

The city of Longmont began prosecuting me in mid-1997 for 12 zoning
violations they knew to be false. This case made its way through 2
municipal court trials and 2 District Court appeals, an appeal to the
Supreme Court, multiple sentencing orders, complaint to the judiciary,
post-conviction motions, other complications, charges of violating a
sentencing order, filing of 15 new false charges and finally, dismissal
of all charges in December of 2002.

Conviction was not possible by application of the law. The Longmont
prosecutor, his witnesses and 3 separate judges chose to knowingly
misrepresent the law and the facts and commit perjury. There is evidence
of forged documents being filed in the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court defrauded me of $150.00, then abandoned my case.
Subsequently, my attorney threw out my file, left for Florida and
abandoned my case. I refused to obey the illegal sentencing order. I was
charged with violating the illegal sentencing order. I was charged with
15 new zoning violations the city of Longmont knew to be false. Thank God
for a stupid prosecutor, this gave me a "second bite of the apple".

I made clear to the municipal judge, prosecutor and their witnesses that
this time they would have to apply the law because I would not tolerate
their lies, perjury and misrepresentations a second time. I then hired
another attorney who filed one motion and the municipal judge dismissed
all (false) charges. The next day I took many pictures of my property to
document its condition at time of dismissal.

I was made to defend myself from known false charges by "dirt bag"
government officials and judges at a cost of untold thousands of dollars,
loss of business equity, loss of business income, loss of property rental
income (continuing), personal income (continuing), lower Social Security
benefit (continuing), devalued inheritance (continuing) and personal pain
and suffering.

My initial attorney said, don't piss off the Supreme Court because you
may have to rely on them some day. Looking back, I think the opposite.
Who needs nothing?

I would like to thank the Supreme Court (en-banc) and the judiciary for
the lesson(s). Doing me brown taught me the importance of winning before
the traitors that "operate" the "piss-ant" courts and not to rely on the
traitors who "operate" the Supreme Court and/or the judiciary.

It also taught me not to be upset by being called a criminal and having
it written in public records by "dirt bag" government officials and
judges who in fact are the criminals as long as they don't get upset with
me for calling them what they are.

Why don't you and the other Supreme Court justices honor your oath(s) or
resign?

Sincerely,

Clyde Ioerger
22 Main Street unit A
Longmont CO 80501

INSERTED E-mail below
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2022 17:45:07 -0600
Subject: [Scooplist] OPINION RELEASE: ADMINISTRATIVE TERRORISM
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

Rick Stanley
Constitutional Activist
Phone: 303-329-0481
E-mail: [email protected]

OPINION RELEASE: ADMINISTRATIVE TERRORISM

STANLEY NOTE: Folks, see how a city can detsroy you in the POLICE STATE OF AMERICA. Longmont is as stinky and criminal as the rest in Colorado. When does it stop? When the people have had enough...

Quoting [email protected]:

From Clyde Ioerger (pronounced Yager)

Rick

I watched your case almost from its beginning and attended one of your
hearings in Brighton where the piss-ant judge made pretend he was so
afraid of being arrested by the militia. He should be arrested. Its
criminal (jerks) like him who put honest law abiding people in fear
every day. Fear of being prosecuted, fined and imprisoned for complying with the law and for demanding ones rights. Fear of losing everything by
trumped-up charges. Fear of government discrimination and character
assassination. Need I go on? This guy is a government creep.

I am also the subject of "administrative terrorism" by "cesspool
government officials".

Mine is a case of "habitual administrative terrorism" (that has roots
going back more than 22 years) by governmental officials including
Longmont Colorado council members, a mayor, judge and prosecutor,
departmental directors, legal staff, several city employees, and district
and Supreme Court judges. Every person, including the judges involved
in these acts against me is a slime ball.

On April 8, 2022 I lease/purchased almost an acre of downtown
Industrial Railroad property adjoining US Highway 287 and consisting of 3 separate lots and 3 structures located in the original town of Longmont,
Colorado.

Longmont director of wastewater, Dave Plumb, (also the city manager)
assured me that the city's sanitary sewer was accessible to the property
so, my wife and I sold our home and put the equity into this property.
A local contractor agreed to partner with us and build a large structure
containing 3 rental shops and share the rental proceeds.

After the purchase, the city refused to provide sewer access to the
property. They also refused to accept applications for building permits
and tap fees claiming they would just be denied anyway because the
property was not connected to the sewer. The city notified my attorney
they intended to continue to deny sewer access and building permits.
The city did not make the sewer accessible to this property until almost 20
years later during 2001.

Disclosing the city's refusal to provide sewer and issue building permits
stopped the ability of selling the property. Without building permits, the property could only be used for uses that were a "use by right" in the zoning code because it could not be re-developed for other uses. Our partner couldn't put up a structure so he split. My wife and I were left to choke on this property.

The 1983 municipal code allowed commercial vehicle storage as a use "by
right" in this property's zoning district meaning building permit(s) and
prior city approvals were not required to begin the use, so among other
uses, we started a commercial vehicle storage.

By 1984 the city threatened to put me out of business by finding enough
wrong with my septic system to red tag my structure(s) for no occupancy.
On the heels of this threat, I turned the city in to the county health
department for operating a city structure on a septic tank without a leech bed and instead, it was draining into the storm sewer system. The city fixed this little problem within 4 days by disconnecting it from the storm sewer.

Within a year or so, the city invited me to a meeting where they insinuated that I had been dumping oil into the storm sewer. The city's letter inviting me to this meeting revealed that the city had trespassed onto my property and inspected it without my knowledge, permission or a warrant.

The city continued denying sewer access to our property until late 2001.
During this time the city discriminated by issuing building permits to other properties (including a city property) that were not connected to the sewer allowing them to be developed. The city also discriminated by allowing an auto dealer (auto dealers are required to have a rest room facility) to operate from a building with a recorded occupancy permit restricting it to "storage use only" because the city allowed it to be constructed without water and sewer connections.

In 1985 a city water main broke causing underground flooding on our
property and a vehicle to sink and one of our 3 structures to collapse and had to be torn down. The city repaired their water leak but refused to address the damages to my structure.

During the 1980s and until 1994, the city refused to stop habitually directing street traffic across part of our property making that part of it unusable.

During a 1994 street improvement project, the city upgraded the streets
fronting 2 sides of our property (corner lot). Against my objection, they
admittedly, purposely and knowingly re-constructed the intersection to
continue directing traffic across our property.

During this 1994 street improvement project, the city knowingly further
damaged our property by raising the abutting streets (corner lot) and
trapping run-off on about 70 feet by well over 100 feet of our property,
completely encircling a structure.

Also, during this 1994 project the city removed reasonable access to our
first lot, then forced us to repair their damage by removing uses from the
2nd and 3rd lots to provide access across them to the affected lot. This
was "inverse condemnation" and "forced merger." I filed claims for the
above damages which the city smugly denied in 1996 with a see-us-in-court attitude signed by the city manager.

In late 1996, I filed a complaint against the city with the Governor's office. The Governor's office demanded answers from the Longmont mayor.

A little over 6 months later, the city sent code inspector Diana Dunn and
planner Bob Steimle to harass me with demand that I alter the property or
remove my lawfully grand-fathered commercial vehicle storage, under
threat of court action.

Next, the city sent animal control officers 2 separate times to search the property, both times without warrant and with false allegations of neglect and cruelty.

City attorney Randell Renquist (criminal) began making (several) harassing phone calls threatening court action if I would not alter the property or remove my lawfully grandfathered use.

City sales tax employee Dexter Wyoshida (criminal) harassed me by phone
with false allegations of tax fraud and with threat of audit. He asked me to provide evidence that all taxes were paid on all vehicles stored on my
property. He demanded that I turn in my sales tax license and apply for 2
new ones, one for my commercial vehicle storage and another for my
vehicle and parts sales. This would have created a document the city could use (in court) to argue that my 1983 commercial vehicle storage began on the date of that new tax license application.

Wyoshida contacted the Colorado sales tax licensing audit selection staff
and the Colorado auto dealer licensing investigation staff, seeking audit (by them) of my state sales tax license and my auto dealer license. Without realizing it, the auto dealer licensing investigators became involved in the city's harassment and audited my license, but I caught the tax license audit selection staff in time to stop them from being suckered by the city.

Note:
About 3 years later, a city employee approached me and said, "do you
remember me, I was there when Brad was being mean to you." This
employee claims having been present and overhearing city planning director Brad Schol direct Wyoshida to conduct the above acts against me.

The city began conducting code compliance inspections of neighboring
properties telling them I was the cause for the inspection. I complained
that this was slander, character assassination and defamation and was meant to turn my neighbors against me. Phil DelVecchio, Director of Community Development, answered my complaint by letter saying that the city would quit using my name while doing this.

City code inspector Diana Dunn told her supervisor that my property use
was lawfully grandfathered and that she would not perjure herself in court testimony against me. She was found "ineffective," removed from the case and replaced by code inspector Shannon Stadler (criminal).

The city changed a section of the municipal code without adopting the
change(s) by ordinance (as required by city charter and State law) then
posted the illegally altered code on their web page and in the code book
at the city clerk's office. At the same time, they posted it correctly
(unchanged, as originally adopted) in the public library. Also, it was posted correctly in the adopting ordinance in the city clerk's office.

This was intentional fraud because the city purposely, knowingly and with
intent, posted this (false certificate) in the code book and on the city's web page (internet fraud) knowing that's where lawyers, court clerks and judges search the codes.

In late 1998, the city issued a summons and complaint they knew to be false charging me with 12 separate violations of the above illegally altered municipal code and re-defining 12 commercially stored vehicles on my property as "junked vehicles."

Using the word "junked vehicle" to describe "commercially stored vehicle"
in each false charge was statutory defamation, character assassination and was meant to influence everyone, including judges and the press into belief the city was dealing with a 2nd class citizen, a keeper of "junk." That coupled with posting false code provisions as described above were meant to gain conviction in this case. It worked. Just who is the criminal here?

While preparing for trial, city attorneys Clay Douglas and Randel Renquist and city manager Gordon Pedrow (criminals) denied me access to my criminal justice records (discovery). They said rules of court procedure allowed them to deny me access to that file because an attorney was representing me. They explained that these rules were in place to provide a professional courtesy between prosecution and defense attorneys, so a defendant would not jeopardize his own attorney's position (strategy). They said if I fired my attorney, I would be allowed access to that file.

The city continued withholding public record and/or discovery throughout
the entire prosecution.

This case was being investigated by the Boulder County DA's office at
my request. The investigator (not a criminal) died suddenly and her

hearings.

Prior to this prosecution, the city (VanAllen's department) destroyed all but a few pages of my property file, which was about 1/2 inch thick during the 1980s.

City attorney Randell Renquist directed city departments not to sign or date stamp my copy of any written request for anything including public records and discovery.

The case finally went to trial in late 1999.

Longmont code inspector Shannon Stadler admitted in court that she
trespassed on private property without lawful permission or a warrant for
the purpose of searching my property. Stadler also lied under oath multiple times against me during court hearings.

Chief building official David VanAllen lied under oath multiple times against me during 2 separate court hearings.

Longmont planner Bob Steimle (criminal) lied under oath multiple times
against me during court hearings.

Longmont prosecutor Rod Rangel (criminal) lied under oath multiple times
against me during each hearing and lied (issued false certificate(s)) in
motions to municipal, district and the supreme courts. He is a pathological liar.

Longmont judge Diana VanDeHey (CRIMINAL) made a pretend finding that my "vehicle storage" would have been a violation of the 1983 code and
therefore is not grandfathered. Even after requested, she refused to identify any 1983 code section that she pretended the use would have violated. She continued that lie to the district and supreme courts and included other lies to cover for that one.

Judge VanDeHey sentenced me to pay a fine, court costs, community
service, probation for 1 year (against my will), to remove our commercial
vehicle storage from the property within 45 days and to allow periodic code inspections for up to 1 year.

I appealed the conviction to the Boulder County District Court. Judge Dan
Hale (criminal) affirmed the trial court's conviction by making up a pretend finding (lie) that the 1983 and the 1998 codes were essentially the same therefore, because the 1998 code did not expressly allow the use, it would have been a violation of the 1983 code. Just like VanDeHey, Hale refused to identify any section of the 1983 code section his "LIE BY PRETEND" claims the use would have violated.

Judge Hale remanded the case back to the municipal court for a hearing on
the issue of estoppel. During this hearing, Stadler, Steimle, VanAllen and prosecutor Rangel (criminals) again lied under oath against me. Judge
VanDeHey made a pretend finding (lie) which was unsupported by the record, that I hid my property use (commercial vehicle storage) from the
city and "they just didn't see it." That was bull .... My lawful storage
facility was unscreened and completely visible to U S Highway 287 (main
street) and to 1st avenue. It even shows on the city's own periodical aerial photographs. Just like Rangel, VanDeHey is a pathological liar.

I appealed VanDeHey's order to the Boulder County District Court. Judge
Hale rotated off this case and Judge Roxanne (CRIMINAL) rotated on.
Bailin previously obstructed my ability to reasonably defend myself in the first trial in this case by denying my access to public record/discovery and lying outright in that order. Even with this conflict, Bailin refused to step aside, recuse herself, or grant change of venue enabling her to lie again to affirm VanDeHey's order. She is a lying ... and the 3rd judge who refused to identify any statute my property use allegedly violated in 1983.

As a matter of fact, all 3 of these judges are lying ... because the 1983 code expressly allowed my property use and all subsequent codes grand-fathered the use.

This was followed by a second sentencing hearing after which, due to
heart illness, my attorney made a timely motion to the Colorado Supreme Court for a 4-day extension of time to file a writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court did not answer the motion in time so he hand-carried the writ to the
Supreme Court by the 4th day at which time, the Court demanded the
required fee ($150.00) to docket (accept) it. Around 10 days after the
4th day, the Supreme Court (en-banc) denied motion for extension of time.

The Supreme Court judges (en-banc) ripped me off. They kept (stole) my
$150.00 (fraud) and denied my constitutional right to access the courts.
These judges are traitors to their oath to defend my constitutional rights. Just who the hell are the criminals in this picture?

At this point this case is 4 and � years old and has cost a fortune. I sold personal vehicles, construction equipment and cashed in an insurance policy just to get by, and rode my bicycle to and from work and to do errands.

As if things weren't bad enough, suddenly my attorney dumped all of his
client files, including mine, in the Erie Colorado landfill and skipped off to a new life in Plantation Florida. I had to move on Pro-Se.

I viewed the Supreme Court file and found that when the judges viewed and
decided my motion, they didn't even have my entire file before them because part of it was still in their clerk's office. I also found that someone claiming to be my attorney sent documents to the Supreme Court. The documents were sent to the Supreme Court during a time while I had my attorney's copies of those very documents in my possession. They couldn't have been sent by my attorney because, I had them. The prosecutor, municipal court and district court had the only other copies.

I motioned the Supreme Court to re-consider. They denied my motion
en-banc.

The city notified me that because the Supreme Court refused to hear my
appeal that I had exhausted all my remedies. They reinstated the sentence, fine and one year probation. I was ordered to remove stored vehicles from the property within 45 days and allow compliance inspections during that year.

I filed a motion (pro-se) for post-conviction review with the Boulder County District Court. It went before judge Bailin. I filed a motion to recuse because early in this case, she denied me access to public records and discovery. She denied both motions, after which the city again reinstated the sentencing order.

The city sent a notice of intent to inspect the property for compliance with the sentencing order. I responded that the judge ordered me (in the
sentencing order) to conduct criminal acts against my wife under threat of imprisonment and fines.

I notified them that: my wife and I own the business and the property jointly and she is an indispensable party who will be affected by this prosecution. Also, that she was never charged, tried, or convicted; therefore, her property use remains lawful, and she cannot be tried for this same crime without making me a party, which would bring double-jeopardy. And, that she asserts her constitutional rights and protections against any taking and/or unwarranted search or seizure.

After a long period, the city notified me that I was in violation of probation. Next the city issued a single summons and complaint naming my wife and I as defendants and charging us with 15 violations of the same altered code I was initially charged with. I claimed double-jeopardy because one or more of the charges was included in the first prosecution. The city continued anyway.

I began calling lawyers. It took calling almost 70 lawyers to find one. Several from Boulder, Denver (30 miles) and even farther said they would have a conflict because the city hired them for some little job in the past. One attorney said that cities generally hire effective area attorneys and law firms at least once for the purpose of creating such conflict to create such odds in their favor.

Former Longmont assistant city attorney Diane Goldenstine called my case
a "tar baby" because, in her words, "you were not nice to council." While
her husband was a council member, I supported a committee to recall him
and other council members.

My wife and I had an interview with former Longmont City attorney Ralph
Josephsohn. He said sure, your property use was lawful in 1983 and is
grandfathered but the city is determined to get that use off your property. He said you're going before judge VanDeHey so, you are going to lose. Worse yet, Rangel is the prosecutor so, you are really going to lose. You don't stand a chance with an appeal to the district court because they will give VanDeHey what she wants.

He declined to represent us adding that we would be lucky to find a lawyer that would. He said that our only option would be to remove our lawful use from the property or strike a deal with the city. He then walked out of his own office leaving us there to pick up our papers and leave.

Finally, an attorney agreed to represent us. He filed one motion to dismiss. After nearly 5 years, the city dismissed all charges in late December of 2002.

This false prosecution was so lengthy and costly that we had sold most of
our vehicles and equipment, and liquidated insurance and other savings
(almost everything) just to keep going.

Back to the sewer issue.

Just prior to this dismissal, the sewer (after 18 years) finally became
accessible to the property, so we leased part of the property to a national company. They needed building permits to remodel to suit their use, which required a sewer connection.

Knowing we were on our knees from the lengthy prosecution, the city
escalated the administrative terrorism against us. Seems this was meant
to finish us off.

The city waited until our permit application, engineering, surveying and
approvals were in place and the contractor was hired to extend sewer to our property. Then fire official Mike Zielinski wrote a 2� page memo to our new tenant falsely indicating that our property was extremely contaminated beyond compliance with federal, state and local law. He said his supervisor Mike Selan directed him to write the memo.

Next, city sewer employee Barbara McGrane stopped the sewer
construction project demanding that I must first test my neighbor's property (and ours) and provide evidence that neither property is contaminated. She
refused to accept a late 2000 memo from the Oil Inspection of the State of Colorado notifying us that contamination from a prior bulk fuel storage use on our property were at low enough levels that the state did not require remediation.

Next, the city called a meeting with private attorney Rick Samson, McGrane, city attorney Jay Orourke, and my surveyor and project engineer. At the last moment, McGrane said that I could not attend this meeting. Immediately afterward, my project engineer told us the meeting had nothing to do with sewer. Instead, the city claimed that we did not own part of our property and that the city owned it. He charged me for representing our property interest (legal representation) at this meeting, but refused my written request for notes or minutes of the meeting. McGrane and Orourke also refused my written request for notes or minutes of the meeting.

Our new tenant stopped their re-model project and hired an environmental
attorney and sat still until the sewer connection was almost finished, then issued notice of lease cancellation. The issues caused by the city turned this $17,000.00 sewer extension/connection into a more than $42,000.00 issue, got our lease cancelled and put us many months off schedule.

We got our tenant to stay and are continuing on.

There are numerous other issues brought by the city which, are not yet
resolved.

I nominate the city of Longmont for "stinky municipality" award.

I nominate all city officials involved in this case for "stinky city worker" award.

I nominate Judges VanDeHey, Hale, Bailin and the Colorado Supreme Court
judges (traitors who pooped on my constitutional rights) for "stinky judge" award.

I nominate prosecutor Rangel, city attorney's Douglas Renquist, other city attorneys, assistant DA Brian Quiram and prior city attorneys Goldenstine and Josephsohn for a "stinky attorney" award.

Clyde Ioerger

HOME
South Dakota Vote Fraud
Responses to Articles and Shows	FAQS	Join J.A.I.L.	Donate To J.A.I.L.	Buy A J.A.I.L. T Shirt
State and Federal Sites	Black Collar Crime	J.A.I.L. News Journal	Judicial Horror Stories	Branson's Legal Briefs
Contact National J.A.I.L.	Animated Introduction	Spread The Word	J.A.I.L. Constitution & By Laws	Mission Statement
J.A.I.L. Cannot Give Legal Advice	Website Comments	Current Events	Links Of Common Interest	Yahoo Group