1

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!

5

Nevada received a failing grade of “F” and is fifth

from the bottom amongst all 50 states!

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!

11

12

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.

53

By Definition this is Corruption!

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