Feed a lawyer, or else …

Family Law

Hunger Strike – Day 3


April 11, 2012

He was scaling two, three steps at the time. It looked like he was flying down the courthouse stairs. He was a young guy. Dressed in, oh you know; the way young kids are dressed these days; over sized shirt and baggy jeans. He looked clean and groomed. As he approached the place where I had my protest signs displayed, he stopped and turned sideways towards me. He was eyeballing the whole setup and I was looking back at him mildly amused.

When our eyes met, he said: “You have some real stuff going on here man”.

“How so”? I asked.

“With that perjury stuff “, he answered.

“Oh yeah”, I said, “Would you like then to sign my petition to prosecute perjury in courts”.

“No man, I can not” he said.

“Why not”, I was puzzled.

“Because I’m seventeen; I’m too young to vote”.

“How come you know about perjury then”? I asked.

“That is how my mom took everything from my dad”, and he started walking away, “But I’m telling you, you have some real stuff going on here”.

He was still smiling and I was left speechless.

I am not going to tell you what the moral of the story is here. You decide it for yourself. I would just like to tell you that perjury is not something this young kid should know about and that it should not have affected his life in any way. I would also like to tell you that perjurers do not belong to any particular sex group; they could be men or women, equally. In any case, perjury is wrong because it destroys lives.

.

.

Funny thing about the hunger strike; day two is the worst. Your stomach is protesting so loudly that you think the whole world can hear you. Cramps can be painful, and then you have to drink water to fool the system. Day three is when everything stops.  You do not feel hungry any more. Energy levels go up, your brain is clear and your thoughts are sharp. Truly, nature hides some big surprises where you do not expect them.

.

Image

Image

April 11, 2012 Posted by | Family Law, Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Hunger Strike – Day 2


April 10, 2012

When I was a kid growing up in a “land far far away” I used to read books by Jack London and Mark Twain. I mean, I did not read them; I “inhaled” them in a day or so. Once I started, I couldn’t stop reading about adventures of their heroes. In 1987 I arrived to Santa Clara’s Silicon Valley as a young engineer and one of the first books I re-read was the “Call of the Wild”, in English; the original language. I will always remember one of its first paragraphs: “Buck lived at a big house in the sun-kissed Santa Clara Valley”.  That is where I was. I arrived to the place where my childhood story begun.

It is raining today in “the sun-kissed” Santa Clara Valley.  Since my hunger strike is not a “fast paced suicide mission” I decided to stay home. After all, I still have a roof over my head.  Not for long, but for the time being, it will do. 🙂

Today was the day when I continued packing my things to move them to public storage.  Each item that I picked to put in a Costco moving box evoked its own memory.  Dotar, Ektar and Katho are Indian musical instruments I bought from extremely talented street vendor in Calcutta, India. Birimbao was purchased at the flee market in Rio de Janeiro; Ukulele comes from Kaanapali Beach in Hawaii. My old turntable on which I was listening to my old vinyl records was pulled out of disk jockey’s desk in Belgrade, Serbia. It was a skeleton turntable (the only one I was able to afford at the time) and I built new power supply and case for it.  It still works fine.  Hundreds of my old cassette tapes store music that I was listening to when I played in a New Wave band, way back when I was a student. All of these items fit into one large box. That box is closed now,  ready to go to storage. I decided to keep my harp harmonica with me, but my guitars will go to my friends place to avoid being damaged by humidity.

Today was also the day when Santa Clara Municipal Utilities was to disconnect my electricity because of the outstanding balance.  Since I am going to occupy this house for one more week, I paid the bill and that left me with $900. That is all the money I have left.

I also received several support e-mails and I thanked people who wrote them . That was nice. There was also one e-mail in which person wanted to be removed from the mailing list.  That is cool, too.  I understand that my fight is not everybody’s priority and I wish them luck with whatever they are doing.

I hope it stops raining so I can go tomorrow in front of the Court to continue collecting signatures for my petition.

Good night everybody! 🙂

.

April 10, 2012 Posted by | Family Law, Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Alamo


I have exhausted all legal means and venues as prescribed by our legal system. On each and every step in the process I encountered layers of corruption, cronyism and personal ties among participants. The whole case, with legal arguments and timeline of events is summarized in following PDF document -> Judicial Corruption

.

Man stages hunger strike to protest injustice in Santa Clara, CA, Family Court

  • My name is Mirko Vojnovic. I used to be an engineer. A good one; 10 US Patents approved and two pending. I have been working hard all my life. I came to this country as a young engineer, hoping that the only laws I would be dealing with would be the laws of physics. It did not turn out that way.
  • On February 21st, 2012, my home of 20 years was sold on foreclosure auction. In few days I will be homeless.
  • I didn’t lose my home because I made a bad business decision or a bad investment. I didn’t lose my home because I was living a lavish lifestyle; or because I was drinking or gambling; or because I was doing drugs. I did not, and do not, do any of those things.
  • I was robbed, in broad daylight, by the people who were sworn to abide by the law and enforce the law. I did not allow them to take my daughter away from me. I won that battle, but lost everything else during a seven year ordeal.

–   I have been robbed by divorce attorneys who perjured themselves numerous times.

–   I have been robbed by judges who are protecting those attorneys.

–   I have been robbed by legal institutions and regulatory bodies who are protecting those judges and attorneys.

–   I have been robbed by cronies who infested our judicial system. And I am not alone.

(To learn more about the case please visit www.feedalawyer.wordpress.com)

(To learn more about Family Court problems visit: Center for Judicial Excellence: http://www.centerforjudicialexcellence.org)

  • I will not be a silent victim. They did not take away my dignity. I, as everybody else, deserve my unalienable Rights, to Life,Libertyand the pursuit of Happiness without oppression.
  • I decided to conduct this hunger strike, starting on Monday April 9, 2012, in front of Santa Clara Family Court (170 Park Avenue, San Jose, CA) with the intention to bring public awareness and demand accountability for fraud and perjury that is rampant in the family courts; not only to help myself, but also other parents and their children in similar situations.

I will end my hunger strike once the following conditions are met:

  1. Santa Clara DA’s office to prosecute attorneys Stefan P. Kennedy and Tamara T. Costa for perjury and to prosecute other open cases against parties who committed perjury and/or are guilty of public corruption, including DDA John Chase; and sue for damages; i.e. collapse of my business, depleting of my lifetime savings and personal injuries.
  2. Attorney General to prosecute retired judge Neal Anthony Cabrinha, his accomplices in staged disqualification proceedings and State Bar cronies who protected attorneys Kennedy and Costa.
  3. Immediate processing of my claims against the Santa Clara County by Santa Clara Board of Supervisors and the State of California by California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board.

At the same time I appeal to ValleyOne Investment, LLC to delay the eviction process.

Mirko Vojnovic                                                       e-mail: mirko_vojnovic@yahoo.com

2335 Menzel Place                                                  tel: 408-644-2717

Santa Clara, CA95050                                             blog: www.feedalawyer.wordpress.com

March 15, 2012 Posted by | Family Law, Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Mirage, or fallen angels …


.

Both of these guys had questionable roles in my case. They are, or will be, no more:

.

.

1.      Judge Neal Anthony Cabrinha

Cynthia Sevely has announced her candidacy to run for Superior Court Judge, Seat Number 7, which will be vacant due to the upcoming retirement of Judge Neal Cabrinha.

http://sevely4judge.com/

..

(link), (link), (link)

.

2.      State Bar of California Chief Trial Counsel James Towery:

Amid a developing ethics probe — James Towery — the embattled Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar of California, has resigned.

http://lesliebrodie.blog.co.uk/2011/06/16/d-e-v-e-l-o-p-i-n-g-james-towery-california-bar-embattled-chief-prosecutor-to-resign-11327086/

.

(link), (link)

.

.

March 3, 2012 Posted by | Family Law, Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tani Cantil-Sakauye completes the circle


Brazen arrogance of public servants whose work is not subjected to public scrutiny:

.

.

.

En banc

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Look up en banc in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

En bancin bancin banco or in bank is a French term (meaning “on a bench“) used to refer to the hearing of a legal case where all judges of a court will hear the case (an entire “bench“), rather than a panel of them.[1][2] It is often used for unusually complex cases or cases considered to be of greater importance.[2] Appellate courts in the United States sometimes grant rehearing en banc to reconsider a decision of a panel of the court (a panel generally consisting of only three judges) where the case concerns a matter of exceptional public importance…

.

… and yet they do not think that it would be appropriate, or necessary to explain their decisions.

February 22, 2012 Posted by | Family Law, Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

World’s Dumbest Criminal


Plain and simple -> some people should not be doing what they are doing:

.

World’s Dumbest Criminal

.

We have already met Santa Clara Deputy District Attorney John Chase and his definition of  “temporary job which is a job that doesn’t last forever” (click on the image below or click on the link).

.

Now…

.

Enter California State Bar’s Supervising Trial Counsel Allen Blumenthal and see how twisted logic is applied by some of our “finest” legal minds.  After you read the article, ask yourself -> are these people really dumb?

.

The answer is NO!

.

They just feel too powerful, protected by their institutions, that they really do not care what people think of their actions..  and they treat you like trash.

.

But, there is a good reason for that: scamming divorcees is a multi billion dollar business in California.

.

Letter to Bill Herbert, President of the  State Bar Board of Governors, that went unanswered:

.

Santa Clara,CA

November 20, 2011

Inquiry Number: 10-28699, 11-0-13436 (Kennedy), 11-0-13437 (Costa)

.

Dear Mr. Herbert,

I received a letter from State Bar’s Supervising Trial Counsel Allen Blumenthal, dated November 9, 2011, in which he informs me that my complaint against attorneys Stefan Patrick Kennedy and Tamara Tandoc Costa is denied again. (EXHIBIT 1)

After I studied that letter and reasons why my complaint was denied, I realized that there is still at least one person with decision making powers within your organization that is eager to see my complaint go away. The fact that you did not take any action for months and that you wrote your response only two days after I informed State Bar of FBI’s involvement, only reinforces this conclusion.

The reasons stated in Mr. Blumenthal’s letter are ridiculous and insult to common sense to say the least.

1.   State Bar wrote: “You (meaning I,  Mirko Vojnovic) alleged  that respondents submitted a false statement by claiming you submitted a declaration of person who does not speak English. You claim you made efforts to ensure that the declaration was accurate. That respondents expressed their opinion in a court pleading does not qualify as a basis for finding a misrepresentation. You may disagree, but law is that an opinion is not basis for finding a misrepresentation. As you know, the Santa Clara District Attorney’s office came to the same conclusion when you complained to them and they refused to prosecute for the same reason. We do not find there is clear and convincing evidence that this is a misrepresentation to the court.”

There are several claims that are wrong in that statement.

  1. I DID NOT SUBMIT ANY DECLARATIONS of a person “who does not speak English”.  I made that clear in my complaint, so next time READ before you make fools of yourselves.
  2. It was attorneys Kennedy and Costa who drafted the Declaration of Hannah Han (ex-spouse’s former supervisor), and submitted it to the court.  Once you get that fact right all other excuses you gave for these attorneys become invalid.
  3. It is obvious from ex-wife’s work records that Hannah Han’s Declaration was not corresponding to truth.
  4. By drafting Hannah Han’s Declaration (per Costa’s admission and you have the document that confirms that) and having Ms. Hannah Han sign it under penalty of perjury, Kennedy and Costa committed SUBORDINATION OF PERJURY by tricking non-English speaker to sign something she did not fully understand. I will not go into the details here, have decency to READ documentation I’ve submitted with my complaint.
  5. By submitting perjurious Declaration to the court, in order to reinforce their claim, Kennedy and Costa did not express their “opinion”, but made factual claim. Materiality of that factual claim can not be disputed. You should know how the “materiality” is defined. I should not be the one to teach you that.
  6. Time and again you put foot in your mouth by quoting some other agency, or court decision, to justify your own conclusions. And yet you claim that “… it is not that civil court judge has to make findings prior to our investigating” (Djinna Gochis’ letter, dated April 13, 2011).  So, which one is it? Do you make your own decisions or do we play “merry go round” where one crook quotes another?
  7. I think we had already established that James Towery and his gang have acquaintances in other legal institutions. In case of Santa Clara District Attorney’s office it is his wife, Assistant DA Karyn Sinunu Towery.  She was already, at least once, under the investigation for conspiracy to derail coke-dealing charges against an attorney (EXHIBIT 2).

And now, just for fun, since you like quoting such moral authorities like Santa Clara DA’s office, let me give you another quote you may use next time: “Your ex-wife’s job certainly was temporary in the sense that it was sporadic and IT    DID NOT LAST FOREVER” (Santa Clara DDA John  Chase’s letter, dated September 9, 2011).

You can find this and other “jewels” of legal thought, including some of your “finest” on my blog:   https://feedalawyer.wordpress.com/

.

2.   State Bar wrote: “You alleged that respondents also claimed that you failed to provide documents that were subpoenaed (The subpoena was to Pixel Instruments.) You claim that this statement was a misrepresentation because they omitted to state the reason you did not provide it was because respondents would not accept conditions you required for the providing of the documents, namely that you claim the documents were confidential and you required that they agree that the documents were “for attorney’s eyes only.” That they refused your conditions does not change the fact that you refused to honor their subpoena and they were entitled to state that you failed to comply with their subpoena. We do not find their statement to be a misrepresentation.

Major fallacy can be found in the above statement:

  1. You correctly acknowledge that subpoena was issued to Pixel Instruments Corp.
  2. Pixel Instruments Corp. is a SEPARATE LEGAL ENTITY from me, Mirko Vojnovic, petitioner in the divorce proceedings. Pixel Instruments Corp. was not a party to the divorce proceedings[1].
  3. Then, by some foul logic, you, as well as attorneys Kennedy and Costa, equate Pixel Instruments Corp. with me, Mirko Vojnovic, petitioner in the divorce proceedings, and conclude that I failed to comply with the subpoena that was never issued to me.  Such conclusion is preposterous, if not comical, but a very good indicator of how far you would go to stretch the facts in order to deny my complaint. This is an excellent indicator of foul play on your part.
  4. However, you failed to address MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM I complained about, and that is that attorney Kennedy made factual statements claiming that I never provided any documents regarding my interest in Pixel Instruments Corp.  On January 8th, 2008, I provided the documents to attorney Kennedy which clearly showed that my interest in Pixel Instruments stock was acquired after the date of separation. You have that document. The purpose of the discovery process was to find out whether there was “community property” involved.  In light of that Kennedy’s subsequent statements that I did not provide ANY documents were perjurious. Any further “discoveries” and subpoenas initiated by attorney Kennedy were completely frivolous and served no other purpose but to frustrate the proceedings and line up his own pockets.  State Bar can not pretend you did not receive evidence which supports this fact.
.

3.   You are quoting Santa Clara Family Court and Appellate Court to reinforce your decision. You are pretending that you researched the issue, but if you really did, you would find that attorney Kennedy financed Santa Clara Family Court judge Susan Bernardini’s election campaign. Bernardini’s California Form 700 clearly establishes that. Bernardini was the one, who made the order that I was “recalcitrant and evasive regarding disclosure”, completely disregarding documents I provided on January 8, 2008.  As far as the Appellate Court goes, it was Judge Nathan Mihara who expressly denied my motion to augment the record to include ex-spouse’s work record in the proceedings. Mihara’s ties to Hoge, Fenton, Jones and Appel, thus James Towery, can easily be established. Once again, crook quotes crook to justify and cover up their criminal activities.

.

4.   The rest of my claims were just supporting evidence to exemplify dirty tactics those two attorneys used to frustrate the proceedings and violate code of professional conduct. None of them are “crown jewels” that could get them prosecuted, but they are good supporting evidence. Again, you concentrated on those minor issues using one whole page, out of two and a half, as if that was the main body of my complaint. What a waste of time, energy and taxpayers money. However, that again points out that you were not serious about disciplining those two attorneys.

.

5.   On your own website you claim that: “The State Bar’s discipline system is designed to protect the public, the courts and the profession from attorneys who violate ethical rules covering their professional conduct.” [2]  In this case you are clearly acting as an advocate for attorneys Kennedy and Costa and not as a protector of public interest. Further, by denying me insight into opposing party’s claims while not acting as my representative (as a member of public) in zealously protecting public interest, and hiding behind Business and Professions Code section 6086.1(b), makes you to operate in secrecy acting under “color of law” which violates the mandate given to you by The Supreme Court of California. It is violation of due process, thus it is unconstitutional.

.

At this point and taking into the consideration all of the above I hold each and every person that has been involved in this case, either as an active participant or as a decision making authority that has been informed of the current state of the affairs, personally responsible for public corruption under USC Title 18. I will be filing formal verified accusation against State Bar and each one of you with the Supreme Court and the State Auditor.

.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

.

Mirko Vojnovic

Santa Clara

.

Cc:      Allen Blumenthal, Supervising Trial Counsel

Jayne Kim, Interim Chief Trial Counsel.

Joseph Dunn, Executive Director of the State Bar.

Bill Herbert, President, State Bar Board of Governors

Tani Cantil-Sakauye, ChiefJustice,  CaliforniaSupreme Court




  1. [1] Pixel Instrument’s Board of Directors, is a decision making body for the corporation.
  2. It is by law that all documents on the record in divorce proceedings are public and available for anybody to inspect, including business competition. That fact, you and attorneys Kennedy and Costa can not claim you don’t know.
  3. In order to protect Company’s trade secrets and intellectual property because the subpoena was extremely broad and non-specific, (intentionally frivolous and burdensome), Company’s founder and main investor James Carl Cooper and Marketing Director Christopher Jefferson Smith made the decision that subpoena should be handled by one of Mr. Cooper’s attorneys, acting as a Company’s attorney. At that point it would had been illegal for me to hand over any documents without Company attorney’ approval. It was the Company attorney John Arai Mitchell who requested “for attorney’s eyes only”.  (Correspondence between Company’s attorney, Arai Mitchell, and attorneys Kennedy and Costa was provided to you, and if you read it you will see what where Mr. Mitchell’s concerns).
[2] What is the attorney discipline system and how does it work?

The State Bar’s discipline system is designed to protect the public, the courts and the profession from attorneys who violate ethical rules covering their professional conduct. (http://www.calbar.ca.gov/AboutUs/StateBarOverview.aspx)

February 4, 2012 Posted by | Family Law, Law | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments