Feed a lawyer, or else …

Family Law

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

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