Update on RICO Lawsuit Against San Diego Judges, et.al.

People should be outraged that San Diego parents even had to file this federal RICO suit, while politicians from coast to coast sit back and do nothing to protect the families from the severe ethics problems in California’s judicial branch.

I can attest to the fact that many of the judges and court employees who are named in this RICO suit are the same compromised judicial branch employees who framed me for libel, concealed plaintiff perjury, concealed parties to the litigation (a retired US Asst. Surgeon General, Bryan Hardin) in the matter of Bruce J. Kelman and GlobalTox, Inc. vs. Sharon Kramer, Case No. GIN044539, San Diego Superior Court North County Division (2005). 

In my matter of gross public fleecing, they did this to aid the scientific fraud of Mr. Kelman and Mr. Hardin of Veritox, Inc. (formerly known as GlobalTox, Inc) to continue in US public health and workmans’ compensation policies, i.e. that the dynamic duo had proven microbial toxins in water damaged buildings could never reach a level to harm, maim or kill — by applying extrapolations to data taken from one rodent study.  I had exposed how they were mass marketing scientific fraud, in a March 2005 writing.  I named names of those involved.

Many of the court officers, clerks and administrators now named in this RICO suit are the same ones covering up that Mr. Kelman and Mr. Hardin accepted a no less than $25,000 bribe from the Manhattan Institute Center for Legal Policy in 2003 to write the US Chamber Insitute for Legal Reforms’ “A Scientific View of the Health Effects of Mold”. 

Not only was this fraudulent endeavor a think-tank bribery of toxicologists to publish scientific fraud for the purpose of misleading US courts;  Mr. Kelman, Mr. Hardin and the Manhattan Institute forged the name of Dr. Andrew Saxon as a co-author on the US Chamber’s policy paper. Since Dr. Saxon’s name is fraudulently on the paper as co-authoring it, so is the imprimatur of the University of California. Dr. Saxon was a physician at UCLA.  This is prominently displayed to lend false credibility to the scientific fraud.

Think-tank bribed expert defense witness, Mr. Kelman,  and other employees of Veritox, are expert defense witnesses for the US Dept of Justice in toxic tort litigations.  They have been hired to defeat federal liability for claims of illness and disability of federal employees and their families who have been exposed to contaminants in water damaged buildings.  Their schtick is always based on the false concept that their bogus extrapolations establish lack of causation of injury.  In other words, they are high paid and even bribed, forgerers who are also federally contracted doubt sellers — adverse to the public’s best interest.  

They, along with Dr. Saxon of UCLA, are also the co-authors of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine’s (ACOEM) “Adverse Human Health Effects from Exposure to Mold in an Indoor Environment” position statement (published in 2002 and revised in 2010 without a single new scientific reference added and reiterating the bogus extrapolations). 

ACOEM is contracted by the State of California to write the guidelines that workers’ comp physicians must follow when treating injured workers.  Many an injured worker’s claims have been denied based on the fraudulent science of Veritox via ACOEM via California workers’ comp policy via false science in the courts.  It is a cost shifting scheme off of workers comp insurers, government and other employers, onto state and federal social services, aka, the taxpayer. 

I can make the following statement with no reservations, because I can prove it.  (and because I am not a California court employee who must fear retaliation for publicly writing of systemic corruption in the courts by some of their peers and superiors) Mr. Kelman and Mr. Hardin are criminals who have been shielded by more criminals in the San Diego courts, who have been shielded by more criminals in the California courts — while politicians from coast to coast turn a blind eye and the public continues to be defrauded. 

Merely one example of the extrinsic fraud:  In the libel suit Veritox brought against me for the words “altered his under oath statements” in my 2005 writing, there was never a claim that I accused Mr. Kelman of accepting a bribe.  In September of 2005, trial judge Michael P. Orfied  added the bribery allegation to the complaint of his own accord. (Judge Orfield retired right before trial.  Judge Lisa Schall oversaw the 2008 trial.  The science fraud of Veritox in US courts was not permitted to be discussed in front of the jury — and false hearsay documents got into the jury room causing a verdict for Mr. Kelman.  I prevailed over Veritox. One would never know that I prevailed from the fraudulent judgment entered)

In 2006, the Appellate Justice Judith McConnell (former chair of the California Commission on Judicial Performance) wrote in the anti-SLAPP Opinion that my writing was not a false accusation of bribery — as she framed me for libel, concealed perjury, concealed parties to the ligitation, etc.  The word “bribery” never came up in the case again.

In 2010, Justice Huffman (former chair of the executive Committee of the California Judicial Council), made it appear in his appellate opinion that I had made an accusation of bribery and it was found to be false and libelous.  He inferred the bribery of Mr. Kelman by the Manhattan Institute think-tank was part of the libel case, was investigated and was proven not to have occurred. 

Justice Huffman did this after being asked in 2010 to take judicial notice of the direct evidence of the think-tank bribery and UCLA physician forgery of authorship; and how the fraudulent US Chamber’s “A Scientific View of the Health Effects of Mold” was being used in an Arizona litigation in support of Mr. Kelman’s bogus expert defense opinion in a litigation involving two deceased infants and a $25M liability insurance policy.

In the same Appellate Opinion, Justices Huffman, Benke and Irion concealed that trial Judge Lisa Schall (she was a civil court judge before being moved to family court in 2008 — and is a well documented loon in the family court RICO case) and her clerk; falsified the 2008 judgment in my case by backdating it twice. Huffman concealed that the document falsification made all subsequent rulings based on the void judgment — null and void to be used for any purpose. Officers of the courts and Mr. Kelman continued to use the void judgement to harass me for five additional years with no subject matter jurisdiction — while aiding the continuance of the public fleecing and while trying to cover-up the acts of the collusive fraudsters and loons in the San Diego courts.

A plaintiff in this RICO case tells me that the San Diego judges, et. al. have lawyered up.  There are currently approximately sixty defense attorneys which have been hired. They arrogantly, actually tried to have the parents sanctioned $10,000.00 for suing the compromised judges, et.al. 

Personally, I think it is a crime in itself that San Diego parents would have to sue these blatantly compromised government employees.  Where is the leadership in government and the California courts? They have a duty to police and punish for systemic corruption in their midst on behalf of the people — not to force parents to have to go up against sixty lawyers and be papered to death, in the hopes that the systemic fraud in the San Diego courts and all blind eyes, will remain hidden from public light.  

Speaking of blind eyes, I was in Washington, DC last February and met with several Legislative Assistants of U.S. Senators along with a physician who works in the San Diego Family Courts.  These meeting were when I became educated to the problems in San Diego’s Family Court (mine is a Civil Court matter). I personally witnessed the physician hand the fraudulent document that is systematically used in the San Diego Family courts; that is an underlying deceit to this RICO litigation — to the Legislative Assistants (LA) for Senators Feinstein and Boxer; and LA’s for US Senate HELP.  

Senator Feinstein’s and Senator Boxer’s LA’s have law degrees. Like the Senators for whom they work, they are paid with tax dollars to protect the public from government corruption. I witnessed the fraud of the document that is key to this RICO, being clearly explained to them of how it is used to unlawfully and collusively harass families who find themselves in California’s Family Courts.  (If I could understand it, surely those with law degrees could, too.)

I witnessed the LA’s being told of the horrific retaliation San Diego parents experience for challenging the collusive fraud. I heard the LAs promise the San Diego physician that they would follow up. To my knowledge, he never heard from them again.

To my knowledge, the US Senators from California, the Majority Senate HELP and their LA’s have done NOTHING to investigate or try to stop the systemic, collusive corruption occurring in the California judicial branch.  This includes in both extrinsic fraud matters in the San Diego courts that they know is happening – this RICO case brought by the parents in Family Court and the malicious litigation I am dealing with brought by federal contractors of the U.S. Department of Justice, i.e. the criminal owners of Veritox, Inc. (See their website for their latest, audacious malicious libel of the matter.)

Within the below blog, one can find the links to the actual legal documents in the San Diego RICO case.  Shocking does not even begin to describe what is occurring.

From Weightier Matters Blog:

Federal District Court Denies San Diego Superior Court Judges’ Request for $10,000 Sanctions Against Parents; Grants Leave to Amend Complaint

December 26, 2013 By 4 Comments

 P1 88 Order Re Dismissal With Leave to AmendDecember 26, 2013—SAN DIEGO CA—Tuesday United States District Court Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo granted and denied motions in the racketeering lawsuit brought by families against San Diego Superior Court judges and the California Commission on Judicial Performance.  The District Court’s ruling denied the Family Court judges’ request to sanction parents for filing the lawsuit, and denied their motion to dismiss the case entirely, giving Plaintiff permission to amend the Complaint to address the Family Court judges’ criticism of how the Complaint was pled. 

Read more HERE:

Sharon Noonan Kramer