Post on 26-Jul-2018
2
Sgt. James R. Aymann
Mekong Delta Chu Lai
ONE MAN’S FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION
The Series – Episode One
Revised Edition – Updated
FRAUD UPON THE COURT
RAMPANT CORRUPTION IN THE COURT SYSTEM
OF CLARK COUNTY NEVADA
PLEASE NOTE THAT NONE OF THE STATEMENTS MADE IN
THESE ENTRIES ARE SPECIOUS AND THAT THEY ARE
SUPPORTABLE WITH DOCUMENTS AND EXHIBITS.
We believe that these stories are both timely and compelling.
3
ONE MAN’S FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION
James R. Aymann (Jim) is a combat veteran of the Vietnam War
with a service connected disability and he celebrated his 71st
birthday a
few days ago.
onemansfightagainstcorruption.net was created in August 2014
This website concentrates on Jim’s personal experiences with
Corruption in Nevada State Government.
In the past year alone, (July 2015 – July 2016) this website has had
over 14,000 visits, to include Europe, Asia, Latin America, Australia,
New Zealand with a following from China, Ukraine and Brazil.
To date, Jim has no accounting for visits by mobile phones and
backdoor visits that include phrases and this is without the aid of press
releases, networking, advertising etc.
Jim has also received hundreds of favorable emails in reference to
this website from all over the world.
What is interesting is that Jim has essentially not added anything to
this website in the past year.
However, Jim has posted several articles on the Internet under
pseudonyms.
There is a populist movement that is sweeping across this
country!
This movement is deeply factionalized with progressive sentiments
at one end of the spectrum and reactionary sentiments at the other end
but the common theme and the common thread that runs through this
movement is the complete and total disgust by the populace involving the
4
corruption in the private sector (big business) and the corresponding
corruption of government at all levels that includes all branches.
To begin with, Jim will present the argument that the legal industry
throughout the State of Nevada may be the most corrupt in the USA and
that the culture of Las Vegas may be the most predatory and corrupt in
the USA.
CORRUPTION IN THE NEVADA LEGAL INDUSTRY
“Most Hated Professions – Top 10 List” states
Based on personal experiences, Jim submits that this writer nailed it!
6
Public access to information, political financing, electoral
oversight, Legislative accountability, Judicial accountability,
procurement, internal auditing, lobbying disclosure, ethical enforcement
agencies, ad infinitum received failing grades in the State of Nevada!
To be blunt, Nevada industry, to include lawyers, in conjunction
with Nevada government at all levels is a labyrinthine sewer of
corruption and deception draining into a cesspool and that cesspool are
the Nevada courts at all levels!
Are you getting the picture yet?
In theory, if an individual has a collection of supportable facts ad
infinitum, then the opposing party in an adversarial setting is lying and
cannot prevail.
In reality, in the State of Nevada, supportable facts are meaningless
unless you are connected (big business, affluence, hotshot lawyers,
relatives etc.) you cannot prevail with any state institution in the State of
Nevada, end of story!
7
Every year tens of thousands of hard-working, taxpaying and law-
abiding Nevada residents are victimized in an extremely predatory
private sector.
When these victims appeal to law enforcement or to virtually any
other county and/or state agency and ultimately to the court system at all
levels, they will be victimized again and again and again and again ad
infinitum!
The price of this corruption in Nevada takes a heavy toll.
Thousands of these repeat victims die every year as a result of the
gross injustice, stress and grief that they are repeatedly subjected to by
Nevada State Government!
NEVADA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT/CODE OF ETHICS
“It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”
“A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to
permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the
representation.”
In the State of Nevada these “Rules of Conduct” are meaningless
and ignored!
By definition lawyers in the State of Nevada
constitute an industry within themselves and the laws
that are passed by a corrupt Nevada Legislature
invariably cater to this special interest group!
8
FRAUD UPON THE COURT
For Nevada courts to receive a failing grade of “F” for judicial
accountability is a clear indication that judicial independence is off the
charts. In other words, Nevada courts can do whatever they please with
impunity and immunity!
This is corruption plain and simple!
A website has been posted on the Internet by “Patriot Network”
titled, “Fraud upon the Court by an Officer of the Court” and
“Disqualification of Judges, State and Federal”.
Several strong points have been highlighted in this article
including,
“A Judge is not the court.”
“… Where the Judge has not performed his judicial function – thus
where the impartial functions of the court have been directly
corrupted.”
“Fraud upon the court makes void the orders and judgments of that
Court.”
“Federal law, when any officer of the Court has committed “fraud
upon the Court, the orders and judgments of that Court are void, of
no legal force or effect.”
“Disqualification is required if an objective observer would
entertain reasonable questions about the Judge’s impartiality. If a
Judge’s attitude or state of mind leads a detached observer to
conclude that a fair and impartial hearing is unlikely, the Judge
must be disqualified.”
“That Court also stated that section 455 (a) requires a Judge to
recuse himself in any proceeding in which her impartiality might
reasonably be questioned.”
9
“It is important that the litigant not only actually receive justice,
but that he believes that he has received justice.”
“Recusal under section 455 is self-executing; a party need not file
affidavits in support of recusal and the Judge is obligated to recuse
herself sua sponte under the stated circumstances.”
“By law they are bound to follow the law.”
“None of the orders issued by any Judge who has been disqualified
by law would appear to be valid. It would appear that they are void
as a matter of law, and are of no legal force or effect.”
“Should a Judge not disqualify himself, then the Judge is in
violation of the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution. (The
right to a tribunal free from bias or prejudice is based, not on
section 144 but on the due process clause.”).
“… Then the Judge may have been engaged in the Federal crime of
“interference with interstate commerce”. The Judge has acted in
the Judge’s personal capacity and not in the Judge’s judicial
capacity.”
“If you were a non-represented litigant, and should the court not
follow the law as to non-represented litigants, then the Judge has
expressed an “appearance of partiality” and under the law, it would
seem that he/she lasts she has disqualified him/herself.”
“… Not all Judges follow the law…”
“The Supreme Court has also held that if a Judge wars against the
Constitution, or if he acts without jurisdiction, he has engaged in
treason to the Constitution. If a Judge acts after he has been
automatically disqualified by law, then he is acting without
jurisdiction, and that suggests that he is then engaging in criminal
acts of treason, and may be engaged in extortion and the
interference with interstate commerce.”
10
“Courts have repeatedly ruled that Judges have no immunity for
their criminal acts. Since both treason and the interference with
interstate commerce are criminal acts, no Judge has immunity to
engage in such acts.”
Plaintiff/Appellant James R. Aymann (Jim) has repeatedly included
in court documents (motions, responses and opposition etc.) detailed
instances and accounts of “Fraud upon the Court” with supporting
exhibits!
Invariably every single written complaint involving “Fraud upon
the Court” filed with Nevada Courts at all levels has been completely
ignored without any commentary whatsoever!
13
The failing grade of “F” for “Judicial Accountability” in the Nevada
Court System is accurate!
LAS VEGAS LAWYER PAUL C. RAY
James R Aymann (Jim) conferred with Paul C. Ray a lawyer with
the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. of Las Vegas Nevada. Jim came
prepared with a list of questions.
The purpose of this consultation was to obtain half an hour of legal
information for $45.
14
Jim wanted to determine what his rights were regarding a written
agreement that was not honored.
At the onset of this consultation, Jim made it clear that he was a 63-
year-old combat veteran of the Vietnam War with a 70% service-
connected disability for posttraumatic stress disorder.
Jim handed lawyer Paul C. Ray a seven-page detailed account of
what had transpired. This account also included the conditions and
circumstances involving the attack on his person that he had
experienced 16 days earlier.
Jim suggested a brother of Alana Geneva Peterson as the most
likely suspect as the attacker.
Jim also suggested obtaining complete copies of all police records
and documents involving the attack and hiring a private detective.
Jim clearly asked lawyer Paul C. Ray what the Statute of
limitations was for assault and battery in the state of Nevada.
This was on Jim’s list of questions.
Different facets of the litigation process were discussed.
At no time was the possibility of Arbitration ever mentioned!
Lawyer Paul C. Ray indicated that he would initiate and conduct a
lawsuit on a fee basis for $10,000-$12,000 total.
Jim clearly asked lawyer Paul C. Ray if he would recover attorney’s
fees and costs if he prevailed in the lawsuit.
Paul C. Ray clearly indicated to Jim that it was customary!
The law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. filed a Complaint with the
District Court in Clark County Nevada on behalf of Jim one month
later.
15
Jim’s lawsuit was placed into Arbitration without prior
notification from lawyer Paul C. Ray or any other staff member of the
law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd.!
Jim repeatedly instructed lawyer Paul C. Ray to subpoena all police
records and documents involving his case.
These instructions were repeatedly ignored!
Without the benefit of these additional police records and
documents to include 911 emergency recordings, Paul C. Ray conducted
depositions with Defendant Alana Geneva Peterson and her sister
Defendant Elaina Peterson at a cost of $5000!
Lawyer Paul C. Ray indicated that an elderly couple from Germany
should be deposed as friendly witnesses.
This deposition was unnecessary, as the German couple had
already agreed to testify at the first Arbitration hearing.
Angelika and Joachim Goes Video
The cost of this deposition was $3700 including $700 to have these
friendly witnesses served at the same location in Las Vegas!
Paul C. Ray suggested that a Dr. Holper testify telephonically from
his office.
This doctor indicated that Jim’s $8000 hospital bill should only
have been one third of that amount!
The cost of this deposition was $3500.
To say that this deposition was counterproductive is an
understatement!
It was at this point that lawyer Paul C. Ray first disclosed to Jim
that Arbitration has an award ceiling of $50,000.
16
Jim was shocked and extremely disappointed!
It took lawyer Paul C. Ray over one year to disclose this critical
piece of information to Jim.
The first Arbitration hearing was held on March 18, 2010.
The cost of this first Arbitration hearing was $6300 plus the
Arbitrator’s costs.
At this hearing lawyer, Paul C. Ray repeatedly failed to respond to
damaging statements made by Alana Geneva Peterson. Jim was
exasperated.
Robert Perry White was finally deposed on May 18 2010.
Jim made the positive identification at that time, indicating that
Robert Perry White was the individual that had attacked him on
February 8, 2009
Jim immediately instructed lawyer Paul C. Ray to amend the
complaint changing John Doe I to Robert Perry White and to include
him in the lawsuit.
At no time did lawyer Paul C. Ray ever adhere to these instructions!
Jim contacted the violent crimes unit of “the Las Vegas
Metropolitan Police Department to inform them that he had positive
identification of the person that had attacked him on February 9, 2009.
Please See Episode 3
Jim was informed that the Statute of limitations was in fact one
year and that it was too late and that they would not pursue criminal
action based on this information!
Lawyer Paul C. Ray had falsely indicated to Jim at the initial
consultation that he had two years to locate his attacker from the date of
the incident!
17
At this point, lawyer Paul C. Ray’s demeanor had already started
to deteriorate he had become very ambiguous and evasive when asked
for information relating to the case getting straight answers was
impossible.
This is extremely difficult for anyone with stress related difficulties.
Jim repeatedly made specific complaints concerning lawyer Paul C.
Ray to his assistant Diane Powell.
The Second Arbitration hearing was held on July 7, 2010.
Lawyer Paul C. Ray claimed to have forgotten to arrange for a
court reporter!
Jim’s testimony, his real estate agent’s testimony, the Defendants
real estate agents testimony, and his handwriting analyst testimony is
gone there is no record!
Defendant Elaina Peterson was excused from testifying. She did
not refuse, her sister Alana Geneva Peterson simply stated that she was
suffering from neck pains and needed to go to the hospital!
Elaina Peterson never testified at either hearing, not one word! Jim
had spent the four previous evenings preparing questions specific to
Elaina Peterson for naught!
Agreements between lawyer Paul C. Ray and lawyer Alexander
Mazzia representing the Defendants were contrived prior to this hearing
without Jim’s knowledge.
This is not conjecture or speculation on Jim’s part!
Comments made by Arbitrator Elizabeth Foley prompted Jim to
obtain and read a copy of the Arbitration Rules, Forms and Directions.
This is when Jim first realized that only a maximum of $3000 could
be recouped for attorney’s fees and Arbitration!
18
Jim was shocked, as he was never informed of this, while lawyer
Paul C. Ray was literally spending tens of thousands of dollars on
depositions and briefs!
One-week later lawyer Paul C. Ray telephoned Jim while he was in
his office accompanied by two houseguests.
Jim placed the call on speakerphone and memory record.
Everyone in Jim’s office could clearly hear both sides of the
conversation.
Jim informed lawyer Paul C. Ray of the $3000 limit on the award
of attorney’s fees in Arbitration!
Because of this conversation, it was obvious to those in Jim’s office
that lawyer Paul C. Ray had never informed Jim of the $3000 cap for
attorney’s fees and Arbitration!
Throughout this conversation lawyer, Paul C. Ray avoided
discussing the $3000 limit for the recovery of attorney’s fees in
Arbitration.
In this conversation, Paul C. Ray actually tried to convince Jim that
the Arbitration has merit!
Please consider the following three comments made by Jim during
this conversation:
1. “There is a $3000 limit for recovery of attorney’s fees,
I mean what was I doing? I mean why was this in Arbitration?”
2. “My concern at this point is this thing that I read in the rules,
forms and directions – the $3000 limit for attorney’s fees. I mean it blew
me right over.”
3. “If it would have taken two years to get a trial but it means that I
can recover attorney’s fees, all of it, if it comes to that, then it is worth
19
the wait for me. I mean this is huge being able to recover attorney’s
fees.”
Please consider the following statement by Defendant Paul C. Ray
in this conversation.
Please note, this is one week after the final Arbitration Hearing and
16 months after Jim had hired Defendant Paul C Ray.
“You can get it back, here’s the thing, and you probably won’t even
have a trial for another two years, one or two more years, had you not
done that, but so you know, now what I don’t think you understood,
what she was saying, if you or they don’t like the result of this, you can
do a one day short trial and you can get so that you would get your
original Arbitration and your appeal, get that probably in two years,
where you normally can’t even get a trial in two years let alone an
appeal is always two more years, so it’s faster that’s why you did it”
*Conversation with Paul C. Ray
This is a mouthful and this information should have been provided
to Jim at the initial consultation and not after the arbitration hearing 16
months later!
This was absolutely the first time that Defendant Paul C. Ray
informed Jim of any of these conditions!
Las Vegas lawyer Paul C. Ray had his own agenda and that agenda
was to generate as much money as possible for himself in the shortest
amount of time!
Las Vegas lawyer Paul C. Ray had duped Jim and taken him hook,
line and sinker!
20
Jim wants to be perfectly clear. – At no time did Defendant Paul
C. Ray inform him that the litigation would become arbitration and that
there is a $50,000 ceiling on the amount awardable in Arbitration and
more importantly that there is a $3000 limit on the award of attorney’s
fees in Arbitration!
One week later Jim met with lawyer Paul C. Ray at the law offices
of John Peter Lee Ltd. for the last time.
Nothing was resolved and it was apparent to Jim the Paul C. Ray
intended to remove himself from the case!
His boss John Peter Lee terminated lawyer Paul C. Ray less than
one-month later.
Lawyer Paul C. Ray had been a practicing attorney with this law
firm for 16 years!
As of this writing, the conditions and circumstances of this
termination have still been concealed from Jim!
The two months prior to his termination, lawyer Paul C. Ray
surreptitiously ran up Jim’s bill an additional $17,363 knowing that Jim
could never recoup any of it!
Lawyer Paul C. Ray seems to be incapable of telling the truth!
This reality became increasingly obvious to Jim as his lawsuit
progressed.
There is a saying “Lying carelessly is the ultimate insult.”
Lawyer Paul C. Ray’s demeanor deteriorated as the lawsuit
progressed.
He would frequently contradict himself in a five-minute span.
Getting a straight answer to questions was often like trying to solve
a minimum information puzzle.
21
Defendant Paul C. Ray filed a Reply in Support of Objection to
Commissioners Decision on Request for Exemption.
Lines 18-21 on page 2 states,
“Aymann’s written compliments, quoted below, pointed out how
well his counsel (only now disparages) stayed in close contact with him
about the details of his case from the beginning, including the discovery
process required to identify Aymann’s assailant as well as Aymann’s
initial preference for the Arbitration accessed over the trial process”
This statement by Defendant Paul C. Ray has multiple
misrepresentations!
“The Discovery process required to identify Aymann’s assailant” is
a despicably fraudulent written statement submitted to the Court by
lawyer Paul C. Ray!
One week prior to retaining the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. and
essentially hiring Defendant Paul C. Ray as his lawyer, Jim procured
from his computer a “People Search” printout of Defendant Alana
Geneva Peterson.
This printout identified Robert Perry White as Alana Peterson’s
brother!
Robert Perry White was already Jim’s primary suspect as his
assailant before he even met lawyer Paul C. Ray!
The statement “As well as Aymann’s initial preference for the
Arbitration process over the trial process” is another despicable lie!
Jim has already covered in detail that Paul C. Ray placed this
lawsuit into Arbitration without Jim’s knowledge and at no time
informed Jim that the most he would be able to recoup for attorney’s
fees in Arbitration is $3000!
22
Once again, Paul C. Ray is in fact a trickster, cheat and a liar!
As a Defendant in this lawsuit Paul C. Ray has submitted a litany
of fraudulent statements in documents that he has submitted to the
court!
QUESTIONS FOR LAWYER PAUL C. RAY
Why did you choose Arbitration over litigation when it was clearly
not in your clients best interests?
Why did you fail to inform your client that there was a $3000 cap
on the recovery of attorney’s fees in arbitration?
Why did you run up the legal fees to $56,000 knowing that the most
your client could recover in attorney’s fees is $3000 and the
maximum award is $50,000?
Why were you terminated by your employer John Peter Lee?
Why were you terminated by your boss of 16 years John Peter Lee?
Why did you intentionally not name certain individuals as
Defendants, specifically realtor James Watt, Coldwell Banker and
assailant Robert Perry White?
Why did you fail to arrange for a Court reporter at the final
Arbitration hearing?
The effects of this failure were devastating!
Why did you allow Defendant Elaina Peterson not to testify at
either Arbitration hearing without refusing?
The effects of this failure were devastating!
Why was Gene Tice, who lives in Las Vegas allowed to submit a
false and damaging declaration after the final Arbitration hearing?
Why did it take you 10 months to subpoena the police records?
Why did you conduct a $5000 deposition prior to having the benefit
of the 911 recordings and the police report?
23
Why did you indicate to James R. Aymann that the statute of
limitations for assault and battery was two years when in fact it was
only one year?
Why did it take you 14 months to conduct a deposition with Robert
Perry White?
Please note, James R. Aymann immediately contacted the Las
Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and informed them that he
had a positive identification of his assailant.
Metro informed Jim that a year had gone by and that it was too
late!
Jim was devastated!
Why did you conduct another meaningless and expensive
telephonic deposition with another brother living in Lake Elsinore?
Jim had already made his positive identification and instructed you
not to conduct another meaningless deposition, but you went ahead
and conducted this deposition without Jim’s knowledge!
Why did you conduct very expensive depositions with an elderly
German couple, who were witnesses, when this couple had already
agreed to testify at the first Arbitration hearing!
These depositions were unnecessary!
Why did you charge Jim Aymann $700 to have this couple served at
the same location in Las Vegas?
You conducted a telephonic deposition with a doctor of your choice
(Dr. Holper) that indicated that Jim’s initial hospital bill of over
$8000 should have only been one third of that amount!
How was this possibly in Jim’s best interests?
Las Vegas lawyer Paul C. Ray has repeatedly claimed that Jim was
pleased with his representation!
Nothing could be further from the truth!
24
That may have been the case at the onset but the lawyer
client relationship severely deteriorated between lawyer Paul C. Ray
and his client James R. Aymann! Jim considers the use of faxes
sent to Paul C. Ray and to his assistant Diane Powell under the
lawyer/client to be both unethical and deceptive!
LAS VEGAS LAWYER – YVETTE FREEDMAN
On August 26, 2010, lawyer Yvette Freedman of the law firm of
John Peter Lee Ltd. contacted Jim by telephone and informed him that
lawyer Paul C. Ray was no longer with the law firm of John Peter Lee
Ltd. and that she would be handling Jim’s case.
Lawyer Yvette Freedman fraudulently concealed the fact that
lawyer Paul C. Ray had been terminated six days earlier. She then
fraudulently misrepresented the circumstances of his departure.
At this time, Jim expressed his anger and frustration and indicated
that he would be filing a complaint against the law firm of John Peter
Lee Ltd. with the State Bar of Nevada.
Jim specifically indicated to lawyer Yvette Freedman that he had
never been informed that attorney’s fees awarded by the Arbitrator may
not exceed $3000.
25
That lawyer Paul C. Ray failed to provide for a court reporter at
the final Arbitration hearing.
That Elaina Peterson a Co-Defendant never testified at either
Arbitration hearing!
On September 1, 2010, Jim was awarded costs including attorney’s
fees!
On September 7, 2010, Yvette Freedman introduced a Motion for
attorney’s fees and costs.
She requested $39,551 in attorney’s fees and $10,686 in costs for a
total of $50,238.
This request for attorney’s fees was both pointless and futile.
Once again, the maximum amount award of all for attorney’s fees
in Arbitration is $3000!
Alexander Mazzia the opposing attorney quickly pointed this out.
The Arbitrator waited 10 days for the itemization of the costs where
Jim had prevailed.
Lawyer Yvette Freedman failed to provide one.
Ultimately, the Arbitrator awarded Jim $2500 in attorney’s fees,
$2379.85, and costs that is a difference of $45,350 by the law firm of
John Peter Lee Ltd.’s own accounting!
Jim had already paid over $16,000 to the law firm of John Peter
Lee Ltd. and they were demanding an additional $38,567 for a total of
$54,699 on a judgment of $35,000.
This was well in excess of the initial quote of $10,000-$12,000 for
the entire case before it was even in Arbitration!
26
Please note, to date Jim is not seen a dime!
Had Jim been informed at the initial consultation that the potential
lawsuit would be placed into Arbitration and that the maximum amount
award of all for attorney’s fees in Arbitration is $3000, Jim would never
ever have initiated any relationship with the law firm of John Peter Lee
Ltd.!
On September 16, 2010, Jim went to the law office of John Peter
Lee Ltd. and met with the owner John Peter Lee to obtain his signature
for a Substitution of attorneys.
John Peter Lee asked if he could make a copy of the document, Jim
complied and John Peter Lee proceeded to file Jim’s document without
his authorization, another indication of lawyer John Peter Lee’s
despicable and treacherous methods!
On September 27, 2010, Yvette Freedman emailed a letter to Jim.
She states, “Enclosed please find our office’s notice of attorneys lien.”
The lien was not included in her email!
On October 1, 2010, Jim filed a demand for a jury trial.
On October 20, 2010 and on October 21, 2010, Jim faxed two
separate replies to the notice of attorney’s liens
On December 21, 2010, the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. filed a
Motion to adjudicate the rights of counsel for enforcement of attorney’s
lien and for judgment of attorney’s fees against Jim.
Jim did not receive this motion in the mail until January 16, 2011.
The hearing was set for January 28, 2011.
In the course of this hearing and subsequent hearings involving
this motion, lawyer Yvette Freedman representing the law firm of John
27
Peter Lee Ltd. submitted fraudulent statements under oath and
submitted documents that contain fraudulent and misleading entries.
These concealments and misrepresentations included:
Covering up the fact that Jim did respond to the Notice of Attorneys
Lien in a timely manner!
That lawyer Paul C. Ray had been terminated by John Peter Lee
Ltd!
That Jim had never been informed that there is a $3000 for the
recovery of attorney’s fees in Arbitration!
That Jim had in fact paid over $16,000 to law firm of John Peter
Lee Ltd. for services!
In complete disregard to the initial telephone conversation
conducted between Jim and lawyer Yvette Freedman on August 26,
2010, Yvette Freedman falsely asserted in court that Jim was “pleased”
with the work performed by John Peter Lee Ltd. on his behalf!
Lawyer Yvette Freedman was in fact fully aware that this was false!
Lawyer Yvette Freedman submitted copies of confidential faxes sent
to lawyer Paul C. Ray and to his assistant Diane Powell as exhibits!
This is a serious breach of the fiduciary duty to Jim by John Peter
Lee Ltd. and these confidential faxes were either out of context,
incomplete or misleading in an attempt to fraudulently establish in court
that Jim was pleased with the work performed by John Peter Lee Ltd.
These faxes submitted to the court failed to conceal the serious
erosion of the relationship between Jim and lawyer Paul C. Ray and
subsequently the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. and a 16 month period.
This is a breach of the confidentiality and fiduciary duty that these
lawyers have toward Jim as a client.
28
Please note, these hearings were allegedly not video recorded!
There are allegedly no transcripts available!
It is Jim’s contention that this indicates a cover-up of what
transpired at these hearings by this Court!
To add to the disgrace of this Court, Jim was actually admonished
by Judge Joanna S. Kishner for “casting aspersions” against lawyer
Yvette Freedman.
On January 17, 2011, James R Aymann (Jim) filed a grievance
against the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. with the State Bar of
Nevada.
Las Vegas lawyer Paul C. Ray submitted a response to this
grievance to the State Bar of Nevada. (Please see Episode Seven)
Episode Seven
Paragraph 32 of this response states, “Apparently John Peter Lee
Ltd.’s office did not inform Mr. Aymann that they had involuntarily
terminated me on August 20, 2010 and. I had no way of knowing during
the July 15 call that that would occur in the future. That termination is
included also with the subject of a Bar complaint filed against John
Peter Lee in grievance # SC 11 – 0198/John Peter Lee. I have been
advised that the termination is also potentially a substantial wrongful
termination cause of action.”
This response is dated April 21, 2011 and signed by lawyer Paul C.
Ray.
Las Vegas lawyer John Peter Lee and Las Vegas lawyer Yvette
Freedman filed a document titled Reply to Opposition to Motion to
Adjudicate the Rights of Counsel for Enforcement of Attorney’s Lien
and for Judgment of Attorney’s fees.
29
Please note that the mastheads on this document include the
names of lawyer John Peter Lee and lawyer Yvette Freedman.
In reply to Opposition to Motion to Adjudicate the Rights of
Counsel for Enforcement of Attorney’s Lien and for Judgment of
Attorney’s Fees - Line 2 page 4 of this document begins with “In the
present case Mr. Ray had been practicing law with the firm for
approximately 16 years and has extensive litigation experience. Mr. Ray
has since left the firm to open his own practice. It is incredulous to
believe that such an experienced attorney will suggest to the client that
he would recover all of his attorney’s fees incurred in this case, or any
other case for that matter.”
Jim submits that this entry submitted by lawyer John Peter Lee and
lawyer Yvette Freedman is patently false. “Mr. Ray has since left the
firm to open his own practice” is not the same as “… they had
involuntarily terminated me on August 20, 2010?”
This entry in this Court document is designed to fraudulently
conceal and fraudulently misrepresent to Jim and to the Court the true
nature of lawyer Paul C. Ray’s departure from the law firm of John
Peter Lee Ltd.
This constitutes “Fraud upon the Court”!
THE NEVADA RULES OF PROFESSIONAL
CONDUCT/CODE OF ETHICS
Rule 203 Misconduct:
It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
[3] Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation
30
It was Jim’s contention then and it is Jim’s contention now that
Judge Joanna S Kishner was in violation of the “Canons of Judicial
Ethics” including:
Rule 2.15 Responding to Judicial and lawyer misconduct, which states
as follows:
(B) A Judge having knowledge that a lawyer has committed a violation
of the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial
question regarding the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as
a lawyer in other respects shall inform the appropriate authority.
(D) A Judge who receives information indicating a substantial
likelihood that a lawyer has committed a violation of the Nevada
Rules of Professional Conduct shall take appropriate action.
LAS VEGAS JUDGE JOANNA S. KISHNER
SECOND MOTION TO DISQUALIFY
JUDGE JOANNA S KISHNER
At no time, to date, did Judge Joanna S Kishner refer to Plaintiff’s
Affidavit with Supplemental Exhibits either orally or in writing, as if it
did not exist!
Judge Joanna S. Kishner was undoubtedly involved in this “Fraud
upon the Court!”!
31
Jim was compelled to file a Motion to Disqualify/Recuse Judge
on August 19, 2011. This Motion included further examples of
fraudulent misrepresentations in the “Reply to Opposition to Motion to
Adjudicate the Rights of Counsel for Enforcement of Attorney’s Lien
and for Judgment of Attorney’s Fees”, signed by lawyer John Peter Lee.
“Plaintiff’s Affidavit with Supplemental Exhibits” also included
additional fraudulent misrepresentations in other documents filed and
submitted to Judge Joanna S Kishner by lawyers John Peter Lee and
Yvette Freedman.
“Plaintiff’s Affidavit with Supplemental Exhibits” was
reintroduced a second time as an exhibit in Jim’s “Motion to
Disqualify/Recuse Judge”!
Judge Joanna S Kishner filed “Affidavit of Joanna S. Kishner
Pursuant to NRS 1.235 in Response to Plaintiff James R. Aymann’s
Motion to Disqualify/recuse Judge”.
Judge Kishner completely evaded the thrust of this motion, that she
had repeatedly allowed lawyer Yvette Freedman to submit documents
with fraudulent entries and was allowed to submit fraudulent
misrepresentations in her oral testimony!
Jim submits that the “Affidavit filed by Judge Kishner is a disgrace
and once again completely ignores Jim’s “Affidavit with Supplemental
Exhibits” that was submitted to this Judge on two separate occasions!
Jim filed and submitted a “Reply to Affidavit of Joanna S.
Petitioner Pursuant to NRS 1.235 in Response to Plaintiff James R.
Aymann’s Motion to Disqualify/Recuse Judge Joanna S. Kishner” to
Presiding Judge Jennifer P Togliatti on September 19, 2011.
An order denying “Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify Judge Joanna
S. Kishner” was filed on October 12, 2011.
32
This Denial by Presiding Judge Jennifer P Togliatti is equally
disgraceful in that it completely evaded the thrust of the Motion!
Jim filed a Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Nevada on
November 8, 2011.
Jim contacted the Supreme Court of Nevada on four separate
occasions in a nine-month period requesting a copy of the Civil Proper
Person Appeal Packet.
On August 21, 2012, Jim received an Order Dismissing Appeal
from the Supreme Court of Nevada.
This document states,
“Proper Person Appellant seeks to challenge a District Court Order
Denying a Motion to Disqualify a Judge. As no statute or Court Rule
authorizes an Appeal from the challenged order, it is not substantially
appealable.”
Jim submits that this corruption extends to the Legislature of the
State of Nevada and to the Supreme Court of Nevada!
How can it be possible for an Appeal of the Denial to a Motion to
Disqualify a Judge not be appealable?
On January 22, 2013, exactly one year prior to the trial date, Jim
filed his Second Amended Complaint.
This detailed document included: The five-page statement by
Jim describing the events involving the attack on his person by
Defendant Alana Geneva Peterson and her brother Defendant
Robert Perry White.
A transcript of Defendant Alana Peterson’s 911 emergency
telephone call.
33
A “Voluntary Statement” of Defendant Alana Geneva
Peterson to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department.
Alana Geneva Peterson’s counterclaim.
The combined statement of Angelika and Joachim Goes
(witnesses)
The five page partial transcript of Alana Peterson’s testimony
at the first Arbitration hearing.
It is Jim’s contention that his “Second Amended Complaint” was
well crafted and most certainly established a reasonable and undeniable
argument supporting Alana Geneva Peterson’s involvement in the
brutal attack upon Jim’s person!
The five-page statement that was included as an exhibit with Jim’s
“Second Amended Complaint” indicates that Alana Geneva Peterson
described the attacker as a “friend” in her “911 emergency call” and as
a “stranger” who mysteriously appeared then disappeared in her
voluntary statement to the police.
Judge Kishner had access to this Second Amended Complaint with
supporting exhibits 10 months prior to the filing of the Defendants
despicable 11th
hour and “Motion for Summary Judgment”!
Jim could simply have responded to “Defendants’ Motion for
Summary Judgment” with “Plaintiff Second Amended Complaint” to
oppose all issues presented in Defendants Motion for Summary
Judgment.
Second Amended Complaint
It is Jim’s contention that his Second Amended Complaint with
supporting exhibits addressing all issues, including Defendant Alana
34
Geneva Peterson’s involvement in the vicious attack instigated by her
on Jim’s person!
With the upcoming trial just a few weeks away, Jim had been
immersed in preparation and research of trial procedure.
Jim is not a lawyer but a layperson, but still felt very confident that
he would prevail based upon transcripts and supporting exhibits.
It is also Jim’s contention that through the process of the trial the
Jury would have been able to determine that all of the Defendants are
individuals that simply cannot be believed!
Jim felt very confident that he would prevail.
Jim filed his Opposition to Motion to Defendants Alana Peterson
and Elaina Peterson for Summary Judgment on December 4, 2013 six
days prior to the hearing.
This Opposition was abbreviated simply for lack of time.
Jim had another hearing in another lawsuit in opposition to
separate motions to dismiss the following day.
In fact, Jim’s Motion for Continuance on Defendants Motions to
Dismiss, was set for December 5, 2013, an extension of time for Plaintiff
to file an Opposition on November 25, 2013 was essentially denied!
It was Jim’s intention to obtain a continuance at this hearing to
allow him time to prepare a more extensive supplement to his opposition
to this motion for summary judgment.
Such was not the case and instead was immersed in preparing three
separate oppositions to the five motions to dismiss in his other case
35
during the following four days, subsequently Jim was not able to
complete and file the supplement is motion.
It is Jim’s contention that the events that transpired at that hearing
for multiple motions to dismiss were nothing less than sinister!
Judge Earley had indicated at that hearing that she had spoken
with Judge Kishner and was aware of what was transpiring!
Judge Earley was fully aware at that hearing of Jim’s need for a
continuance to address these issues involving his underlying lawsuit!
Jim was not given the additional time that he requested by Judge
Kerry Earley to address these issues and his underlying case!
Regarding Alana Geneva Peterson’s involvement in the attack on
Jim’s person, the brunt of lawyer Alexander Mazzia’s contention was
that Alana Geneva Peterson at no time had physical contact with Jim.
This contention is seriously flawed!
Nevada law states that “Intent” is sufficient to constitute assault.
Physical battery is not required!
Using lawyer Mazzia’s logic, if Robert Perry White had been an
attack dog that Alana Geneva Peterson intentionally unleashed upon
Jim, then she would not be culpable for any wrongdoing in the State of
Nevada, because she had no physical contact with Jim.
This premise by Mazzia is absurd and not supported by Nevada
law!
However, Judge Joanna S Kishner opted to support this
unsupportable contention with no legal basis!
Jim submits that this premise is bizarre and that this fraudulent
presumption on the part of lawyer Mazzia is still another example of his
treachery!
36
The fact that Judge Joanna S Kishner repeatedly went along
with this fraudulent presumption with no legal basis is still one more
condemnation toward the fact that she has still committed yet another
act of Fraud upon the Court.
Please note; lawyer Alexander Mazzia did not include any exhibits to
support this contention in his Motion for Summary Judgment.
Jim filed a Plaintiff’s Supplemental Exhibits and Witness List on
November 27, 2013 and a Plaintiff’s Notice of Intent to place Alexander
Mazzia on the witness list on November 25, 2013.
Jim rubber banded these lengthy documents with his Opposition
and placed all three documents in Judge Kishner’s inbox on December
4, 2013.
These documents were replete with supporting exhibits to support
his opposition and should not have been perceived or conceived as
anything other than Documents submitted to support his opposition!
In addition, these documents indicated that the lawsuit had
expanded from Jim’s pursuit of justice to include exposure of rampant
corruption of state officials, the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police
Department, and individual lawyers and Judges involved in these
lawsuits!
At the hearing Judge Kishner made it abundantly clear that she
was aware of these Supporting documents and their content to include
Jim’s Second Amended Complaint with Supporting Exhibits!
She also made it abundantly clear that she chose to ignore and
disregard these crucial supporting documents replete with supporting
exhibits to support Jim’s Opposition to Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment!
37
Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Answer of Robert Perry White –
October 15, 2013
Although Defendant Robert Perry White was the brother of
Defendant Alana Geneva Peterson and the brother of Defendant Elaina
Peterson, their lawyer Alexander Mazzia did not represent him.
Jim considers this as still another despicable ploy and stalling
tactic by lawyer Alexander Mazzia!
Robert Perry White, the individual that brutally and viciously
attacked Jim in a most cowardly fashion was refusing to participate in
the court process.
It should be mentioned that Robert Perry White has a violent
criminal history that includes a conviction for armed robbery in
Arizona.
Robert Perry White was on probation for another violent crime in
California when he attacked Jim.
Robert Perry White failed to attend any Court functions and he has
admittedly refused to consider any documents requiring his signature
under oath!
Consequently, Jim filed a Motion to Strike Answer of Robert Perry
White
This Motion was denied along with every other Motion submitted to
Judge Joanna S Kishner over a three-year period!
However, at this hearing Judge Joanna S Kishner did say in Court:
“Aymann you’re getting your day in Court.”
“So you’re going to have your day in Court.”
“To ensure that you get your opportunity to have your full day in
Court.”
38
“There isn’t going to be anyone who is going to preclude that
date for any reason.”
“So you’ll have your day in Court.”
Less than two months later and less than six weeks before the trial
date, Joanna S Kishner literally sabotaged Jim’s entire case by granting
the Defendants a partial ruling to their despicable Motion for summary
judgment!
This Judge deprived Jim of his right to present his entire case to a
Jury of his peers based on its merits!
Defendants motion for summary judgment – the hearing December
10, 2013
Video Recording of Hearing
Jim purchased a transcript of this hearing
On page two - lines 19 – 22, Judge Kishner states,
“I just wanted – you filed a Motion the dates you chose; okay.
Therefore, I got it all. It is your Motion; I am going to let you and then
Mr. Aymann you are going to have a chance to respond once he gives
his statement. You have been here before Motion, opposition, and reply.
So go ahead.”
Page seven - lines 2 – 7 – The lawyer for the Defendants Alexander
Mazzia states,
“Okay with regarding the assault case, I’d like to, – and that is a
separate matter than their real estate case.”
Judge Kishner immediately interrupts Mazzia with,
“Correct, and your client is still indirectly named in that.”
39
This is the only instance throughout the entire fifty-minute
hearing whereby Mazzia even mentions the assault and battery portion
of Jim’s lawsuit.
It is Jim’s contention that this interruption by this Judge was
intentional!
This Judge has demonstrated a propensity for unwarranted
interruptions in an attempt to manipulate and control proceedings and
to confuse Jim who is disabled.
Consequently, as per her instructions, Jim only responded to the
portion of his lawsuit involving housing discrimination.
It is Jim’s contention that this constitutes trickery and dishonesty
on the part of Judge Joanna S Kishner and that constitutes Fraud upon
the Court!
On page 18 lines 4 – 6, Jim states,
“I submitted police reports, statements to the police and that has
been admitted I don’t understand how this is possible that Alana
Peterson is not involved in this assault on my person.”
It is Jim’s contention that he followed these instructions to the
letter to the detriment of his lawsuit!
Jim is referring to his Second Amended Complaint filed and
submitted to Judge Kishner 10 months prior to the Defendant’s Motion
for Summary Judgment and 11 months prior to this hearing!
Second Amended Complaint
This Second Amended Complaint was well crafted and most
certainly established a reasonable and undeniable argument supporting
40
Defendant Alana Geneva Peterson’s involvement in the brutal
attack upon Jim’s person.
The five page statement that was included as an exhibit indicates
that Defendant Alana Geneva Peterson described Jim’s attacker as a
“friend” in her 911 emergency call and then as a “stranger” who
suddenly appeared then subsequently disappeared, in her voluntary
statement to the police less than one hour later!
911 Emergency Calls
Alana Geneva Peterson – Police Statement
As the Judge presiding over Jim’s lawsuit, it was Joanna S.
Kishner’s responsibility and duty to be aware of the content of Jim’s
Second Amended Complaint with Supporting Exhibits
This Judge chose to ignore Jim’s Second Amended Complaint with
Supporting Exhibits!
It is Jim’s contention that the Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment had no legal basis to begin with!
This is a rehashing of what transpired 2 ½ years earlier when
Judge Joanna S Kishner and Presiding Judge Jennifer P Togliatti chose
to repeatedly ignore Jim’s Affidavit with a Supplemental Exhibits.
Page 20 lines 1 – 8 Jim states,
“I just remembered one thing. When I filed my Opposition, I left a
Courtesy copy in your inbox and I left a Plaintiff supplemental list of
witnesses and exhibits. In addition, everything I am talking about is in
that document the police reports you name it. It’s in there”
Jim had one reason and one reason only to submit his Plaintiff
supplemental exhibits and witness list rubber-banded to his opposition to
motion for summary judgment and that was to support his opposition to
41
this very belated motion for summary judgment less than six weeks
before the trial!
On page 20 lines 9 – 15 Judge Kishner states,
“The Court in looking at – it’s not – with regards to supplemental
list, do you remember me mentioning a moment ago Sir when I said that
you listed Mr. Mazzia as a potential witness and I said we would discuss
that at the time of the pretrial conference, okay? The reason I said this
because I looked at your list of witness information and those are for
trial purposes. They were not in any way designated for any purposes
with regards to the Motion for summary judgment okay?”
Jim submits that this Judge admits that she was aware of Plaintiff
supplemental exhibits and witness list and its content and chose to
completely disregard this critical document, along with Jim’s Second
Amended Complaint with Supporting Exhibits filed and submitted 11
months earlier!
Instead, this Judge chose to sabotage Jim’s entire case with her
despicable partial ruling!
Plaintiff’s Supplemental Exhibits and Witness List that was
rubber-banded to Jim’s Opposition was not designated for any purpose!
The fact that this document was rubber-banded to Jim’s opposition
clearly indicates that the purpose of this document was to support the
opposition!
Judge Joanna S Kishner was aware of this fact and chose to ignore
it! On page 8 lines 17 – 25, Jim states,
“I’m going to ask that you deny this Motion. Trial has been set for
The 21st
of next month and all these issues will be addressed in a trial
with a Jury. I am not a prognosticator but Alana Peterson; I am going to
42
have her on that witness stand twice, by the time I am done for the
second time, the case will be done as far as I am concerned as far as the
Jury will be concerned. This is a disgrace. Do I need to – are we going to
have the trial now is that what this means?”
Jim submits that this is a very powerful statement presented in
Court, which this Judge also chose to ignore!
Once again, this is tantamount to this Judge again labeling Jim a
liar in open Court, which has been a repetitive occurrence in previous
hearings for three years!
This Judge’s actions were clearly an attempt on her part to prevent
Jim from cross-examining Police Officers, Government Officials, and
his former attorneys in court!
This was nothing more or nothing less, than a cover-up on her part
and payback for Jim’s Motion to have her Disqualified for very
legitimate reasons two years earlier!
Jim filed a Motion for Reconsideration.
Knowing this Judge’s disgraceful history for denying absolutely
anything and everything properly submitted to her by Jim for three
years, prompted Jim to file a Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court of
Nevada.
This appeal had in fact been accepted and docketed!
The Nevada Supreme Court had jurisdiction over this Court Case
and Jim’s lawsuit!
Judge Joanna S Kishner with the assistance of Presiding Judge
Jennifer P Togliatti attempted to force a trial process to continue that
they both had absolutely no jurisdiction over!
43
Three years earlier, at the very first hearing before this Judge,
Jim quickly and correctly assessed the true character of Joanna S.
Kishner!
What Jim has been subjected to is nothing short of an ongoing and
despicable Vendetta by this Judge against a vulnerable and disabled 69-
year-old law abiding and taxpaying citizen of the State of Nevada!
Jim does not intend to ever walk into a Courtroom that is being
presided by this individual with absolutely no sense of accountability!
Judge Joanna S Kishner has repeatedly ignored documents and
statutes in order to formulate multiple schemes to cover up facts and
conceal the nefarious actions of numerous individuals to include Jim’s
former attorneys, government officials, and police officers.
Jim submits that Judge Joanna S. Kishner has permitted and
committed numerous acts of Fraud upon the court.”
Jim submits that Judge Joanna S. Kishner has permitted and committed
numerous acts of Fraud upon the court.”
While James R. Aymann (Jim) was diligently devoting all of his
time to preparing for the lawsuit against Defendants Alana Geneva
Peterson, Elaina Peterson and Robert Perry White, he was compelled to
file the lawsuit against lawyers John Peter Lee, Paul C. Ray, Yvette
Freedman, John C. Courtney and the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd.
because of statute of limitation issues.
Once again, Jim is not a lawyer but that should not interfere
with anyone’s quest for truth and justice.
It was an extremely difficult time and the ongoing difficulties with
stress and depression did not help.
44
These “lawyers” collectively filed Motions to Dismiss Jim’s
lawsuit and simultaneously refused to cooperate with the discovery
process.
Please note, in the following document #2.states, “Plaintiff and
Declarant spoke by telephone during the last week of July and during
said conversation, Plaintiff requested dates whereby he could take
depositions.”
Stolen Valor – John C. Courtney
Collectively these lawyers refused to comply with the discovery
process!
The Litigation Malpractice Tolling Rule was included in all three
of Jim’s Oppositions to these lawyers’ Motions to Dismiss and again at
the final hearing on February 13, 2014 Jim clearly stated “I just wanted
to emphasize the question in each one of the oppositions that I submitted
regarding Tolling the Statute of Limitations…”
45
Lawyer John C. Courtney representing the defendants John
Peter Lee and John Peter Lee Ltd. stated, “What the Supreme Court is
explaining is that the representation ends when the attorney/client
relationship is severed you no longer have a litigation malpractice
Tolling rule in play. You’ve got to bring your claims within two years
of that severance.”
At the hearing scheduled on February 2, 2014 Judge Kerry Earley
concluded with “Let me look through it. I want to look at this case
again, and then I will do a minute order, then whoever wins will do it. I
may prepare the order too, I’ll see.”
On February 25, 2014, a document titled journal entries was
presented by this court.
This document essentially stated that all Motions to Dismiss by the
Defendants were granted and that all nine causes of action submitted by
Plaintiff James R. Aymann were dismiss with prejudice!
Defendant John Peter Lee, the individual that instructed this court
to ignore Plaintiff’s service-connected disability, now deceased, in
conjunction with the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. prepared a
document titled Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law dated April
15, 2014.
Under the heading of Findings of Fact Defendant John Peter Lee
proceeded to include alleged facts that were not included in the courts
journal entries.
He failed to include Plaintiff’s argument for the litigation
malpractice tolling rule in documents submitted to this court and at the
hearing on February 13, 2014.
These arguments were clearly ignored and/or rebuked by Judge
Kerry Earley.
46
Defendant John Peter Lee also included, “Defendant Courtney
argued in support of the motions, stating the new law pertaining to the
issues in the motions has been decided by the Nevada Supreme Court.”
Defendant John Peter Lee also stated, “It is undisputed that the
attorney – client relationship by and between Plaintiff and Defendants,
and each of them, was served on or about September 27, 2010 and that
Plaintiff did not file the instant action until April 5, 2013.”
In an appendix of exhibits submitted to the Supreme Court of
Nevada by the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd., the register of actions
entry dated March 28, 2011, clearly states “Notice of entry of order
granting John Peter Lee Ltd.’s Motion to withdraw as counsel for
Plaintiff James R. Aymann.”
This is still another act in an ongoing litany of fraudulent
statements by Defendant John Peter Lee and the law firm of John Peter
Lee Ltd. subsequently this is yet another act of Fraud upon the Court
and: that has also ignored by this Judge.
Jim was clearly not afforded, what he deems as his right, to conduct
Discovery to include Depositions and then Amend his complaint based
on the evidence established through discovery and then to present his
entire case to a jury of his peers.
Jim countered John Peter Lee’s stalling tactics by filing a Notice of
Appeal on March 24, 2014 and subsequently the Appeal itself to the
Supreme Court of the State of Nevada.
CIVIL PROPER PERSON APPEAL STATEMENT
Almost 2 years later the Nevada Supreme Court filed an Order
Directing Response on February 3, 2016 ordering the Respondents
(lawyers) to submit responses to Jim’s appeal.
47
Lawyer Yvette Freedman was not included in this Order for
Responses.
Jim brought this omission to the attention of the Nevada Supreme
Court and lawyer Yvette Freedman also received an order directing
response.
On May 16, 2016 Jim filed a Reply to Responses by lawyers Paul C.
Ray, John Peter Lee, Yvette Freedman and the law firm of John Peter
Lee Ltd.
Reply to Responses
On July 13, 2016 March, almost 2 ½ years after Judge Kerry
Louise Earley upheld all motions to dismiss by all of the Defendants, the
Nevada Supreme Court issued an order affirming in part, reversing in
part and remanding!
Jim prepared a Motion to Reopen Case from Order from Nevada
Supreme Court: for authorization to amend complaint; for fees and
costs and related relief; Motion to Recuse Judge.
Motion to Reopen
It is very clear to Jim that in reality nothing is changed.
State Integrity Investigation did in fact give a failing grade for
Judicial Accountability in the State of Nevada.
Having the complete and total truth on your side is meaningless in
the hostile setting of an individual suing corrupt lawyers.
This is Nevada, would you go to a casino and play blackjack
whereby the dealer looks at the cards he deals to you and also deals
cards to himself until he can beat your hand.
Such a casino would go out of business.
48
If an individual is unhappy with the treachery and deception that
exists in the Nevada courts, then he is stuck.
There is only one court system and these Judges are dictatorial in
every sense of the word!
CORRUPTION IN NEVADA STATE GOVERNMENT
For the past several years Jim has been asking his friends,
neighbors, acquaintances and even strangers this question,
“Do you feel that corruptions in state government is a serious
problem in Nevada?”
In the course of this time, Jim has had occasion to ask this question
to several hundred people that have dealt with Nevada government and
the response has been a unanimous 100% “Yes.”
Many of these individuals chimed in with their own specific horror
stories.
Jim asked this question to a bail bondsman near the courthouse.
The bail bondsman related one horror story after another involving
law enforcement, the District Attorney’s office, the Attorney General’s
Office and Judges.
Individuals that have relocated to Clark County Nevada and have
resided here for more than a few years have all unanimously indicated
that corruption in government in Clark County Nevada is far worse than
whatever corruption in government they were exposed to in their
previous location.
Chicago has a long history and reputation for corruption in
government County Nevada from Chicago Illinois.
49
Without exception, these individuals have indicated that the
corruption in government that they have experienced here in Clark
County Nevada is more prevalent and severe than that of Chicago
Illinois.
The fact that the State of Illinois is the leader in the implementation
of Fraud upon the Court and the fact that the State of Nevada has
essentially ignored Fraud upon the Court as if it does not exist, is
testament to the notion that Clark County Nevada is now the most
corrupt county in the United States.
It is Jim’s contention that Judges, politicians and government
officials need to remove their “professional regalia” and put on a T-
shirt, Levi’s and sneakers and mingle among the working masses of
Clark County Nevada and ask the simple question,
“Do you feel that corruption in government is a problem here in
Clark County Nevada and why?”
Enormous powers and latitude have been bestowed upon Judges,
Law Enforcement, and government officials.
What has been transpiring for decades is a status quo of these
individuals repeatedly ignoring existing statutes to create an atmosphere
of noninvolvement or to the other extreme, when it serves their purpose,
to act in a manner that is profoundly unjust!
The point that Jim is trying to make is that corruption in
government is rampant in Clark County Nevada!
The common theme regrettably is a deep sense of impotence,
frustration, and anger because there is no resolution in sight to solve
this dilemma for the working masses of Clark County Nevada.
50
Since the 1970s, economic and occupational insecurity have
become a major problem for American workers, their families, and their
communities.
While downsizing, outsourcing, the busting and decline of
unionization and welfare supports, the rise of immigration, the prison
industrial complex, and unemployment have brought increased
competition and considerable economic insecurity to working-class
employees in the traditional “blue-collar” fields.
“Big business” and politicians have clearly brought about this
erosion in the status of the blue-collar working-class.
The individuals in this largest bracket of American Society may be
struggling but they are not stupid!
They know what “profession” is responsible for their decline.
Jim submits that it is the contention of this working-class, for good
reason, that lawyers are in fact the most despised collection of
individuals in the United States, this is fact and not open to discussion.
Japan like the United States is an industrial nation. The ratio of
lawyers per capita in the United States compared to Japan is 40 to 1!
Arguments could be made that this is an indication that American
Society has been evolving into a malfunctioning dysfunctional
conundrum.
This is not prejudice on Jim’s part, but a long succession of horrific
events involving one lawyer after another after another and Judges are
lawyers.
Jim has a saying,
“The more complex a system the more prone it is to malfunction.”
51
Lord Acton, a longtime favorite of Jim Aymann states,
“Everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice;
nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and
publicity.”
Lord Acton is also the individual that stated,
“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
The paradox is that Litigant in Proper Person James R Aymann
Simple logic dictates that in an adversarial state of affairs, if has had
the absolute truth on his side from the onset!
One party has the complete and total truth on his side, then
by process of elimination all the other parties must be fabricators!
The reality is that fabricators have two choices, confession or cover
up there is no third selection.
The process of lie detection is approaching the validity of DNA
testing.
The day is coming in the not-too-distant future whereby dishonest
politicians, government officials, lawyers and judges will be out of
business!
Once again, the Supreme Court has ruled and has reaffirmed the
principle that, “Justice must satisfy the appearance of justice”
Las Vegas Judge Joanna S. Kishner, to include Judge Kerry Louise
Earley in respect to Litigant James R Aymann in Proper Person, have
failed miserably in “Satisfying the appearance of justice” repeatedly and
again ad infinitum they have ignored or rebuked an undeniable reality
of facts constituting a series of cover-ups, subsequently committing
multiple acts of Fraud upon the Court!
52
Jim also submits -
“Avoiding a reality is the same as lying.”
THE CORRUPTION OF NEVADA COURTS
James Aymann (Jim) prepared and filed a document titled,
“Plaintiff’s Affidavit with Supplemental Exhibits.”
The purpose of this document was to establish that lawyers John
Peter Lee, Yvette Freedman and the law firm of John Peter Lee Ltd. had
submitted documents to the court that contained fraudulent entries and
that lawyer Yvette Freedman had submitted fraudulent statements in her
testimony.
Jim is not a lawyer and worked very hard in the preparation of this
lengthy document with supporting exhibits.
The existence of this document cannot be denied, it is a matter of
record and listed in the registry of actions.
Jim has referred to this document in numerous subsequent
documents to include appeals.
To date, Judge Joanna S. Kishner, Judge Jennifer P. Togliatti,
Judge Kerry Earley and various Justices of the Supreme Court of
the State of Nevada have continuously ignored this document as if it did
not exist!
Once again, explicit rules involving Fraud upon the Court are
ignored in the court system in the State of Nevada.
Once again, Judicial Accountability received a failing grade in the
State of Nevada by State Integrity Investigation.
Once again Judicial Independence is off the charts, meaning that
Judges can do whatever they want with impunity and immunity.
54
Tags
one man’s fight against corruption, James R. Aymann, Episode one,
revised edition, updated, fraud upon the COURT, rampant corruption in
the court system of Clark County Nevada, combat veteran, Vietnam
War, service-connected disability, website, Nevada state government,
populist movement, deeply factionalized, progressive sentiments,
reactionary sentiments, common theme, complete and total disgust by
the populace, corruption in the private sector (big business), corruption
of government at all levels, legal industry, most hated professions – top
10 list, lawyers, lawyers destroying America one lie after another,
Nevada, State integrity investigation, Nevada gets F grade, legislative
accountability, Judicial accountability, labyrinthine sewer of corruption
and deception, supportable facts, victimized, hard-working, taxpaying,
law-abiding, Nevada residents, Nevada Rules of professional
conduct/code of ethics, rules of conduct, dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation, patriot network, impunity, immunity, a Judge is not
the court, litigant, believes that he has received justice, recusal, not all
Judges follow the law, a Judge wars against the Constitution, Paul C.
Ray, John Peter Lee, Yvette Freedman, John Peter Lee Ltd.,
consultation, statute of limitations, assault and battery, arbitration,
attorney’s fees, District Court in Clark County Nevada, 911 emergency
recordings, deposition, positive identification, violent crimes unit, Las
Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, statute of limitations, court
reporter, Alana Geneva Peterson, Elaina Peterson, Alexander Mazzia,
Elizabeth Foley, $3000 limit on the award of attorney’s fees, generate as
much money as possible for himself, terminated, lying carelessly is the
ultimate insult, deteriorated, printout, attorneys lien, State Bar of
Nevada, grievance, Judge Joanna S. Kishner, motion to
disqualify/recuse Judge, Plaintiff’s affidavit, supplemental exhibits,
Supreme Court of Nevada, civil proper person appeal statement, order
dismissing appeal, 911 call, Judge Kerry Earley, underlying case, police
55
reports, economic insecurity, occupational insecurity, downsizing,
outsourcing, decline of unionization, rise of immigration, the prison
industrial complex, and unemployment, increased competition,
considerable economic insecurity, working-class employees, traditional,
blue-collar, big business, politicians, blue-collar working-class,
American society, malfunctioning dysfunctional conundrum, prejudice,
Judges are lawyers, “the more complex a system the more prone it is to
malfunction”, “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts
absolutely”, adversarial state of affairs, complete and total truth,
confession, cover up, polygraph, “Justice must satisfy the appearance of
justice”, “avoiding a reality is the same as lying”
Jim Aymann with Tracy
Time flies and thanks to Google Chrome