Michael Easton, 310 Morton Street, Suite 646, Richmond, Texas, ~31 19

Transcription

1 Peter John Riga, Ph, D,, LL, M., JS, D., JD,, St, D., Th, D, Ph. L,. Attorney at Law. [Emeritus Post Office Box 52518, Houston, Texas Michael Easton, 310 Morton Street, Suite 646, Richmond, Texas, ~31 19 Reply to: Michael Easton (281) (Direct Ring) (281) (T-elecopier) Karen Hogan Staff Attorney 100 Dolorosa, Room 123 San Antonio. Texas Dear Ms. Hogan & Judge Spencer: This written communication is a request that you preserve-and do not delete. shred. erase, or in any way destroy or alter-the following documentary evidence in your possession. care. custody or control. or, if this evidence is in electronic form, from your personal or governmental servers, cellular telephone records, and where applicable. text messages. INSTRUMENTS AND DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESERVED 1. For the period September 1, 2007, through June 6, 2013, each draft, original writing. revision, and/or note, whether one or more. that you transmitted or caused to be transmitted in any form or by any format be it by . United States Postal Service. and 'or personal hand delivery, to or from any member of the Texas Legislature, in which you proposed, commented on, worked on, revised, or assisted any member of the Texas House of Representatives, or Member of the Texas Senate in writing to draft or revise the language dealing with the recusal or disqualification of a statutory probate court judge, including and not limited to Texas House Bill 3669 or Texas Senate Bill in the 83rd Legislative Session and Texas House Bill 2372 in the 82nd Legislative Session. 2. For the period September I, 2007, through June 6, 2013, any communications in any format. either in writing, by , HTML. by text message, on paper or in notes, whether one or more, between yourself-the recipient of this letter -and any active. retired, or former statutory probate court judge that mentions the following names: l Olen Underwood; Mary Olive Calkins: Carolyn James; G. Wesley Urqhart; Patrick Sebcsta;

2 ~ II Susan Norman; Richard Calkins; Michael Easton; Linda Gochrs; Suzanne Kornblit; Alfred H. Bennett; Elliott Naishtat; Royce West; Jessica Farrar; Scnfronia Thompson; Will Hartnett; Polly Jackson Spencer; Wallace Jefferson; Kenneth Zimmern; Steve King; Sharon Brand Gardner; Joe Loving; Nikki De Shazo; Sarah Patel Pacheco; Darlene Payne Smith; Kathleen Stone; Lisa Burkhaltcr; Guy Herman; Crain, Caton and James LLC LLP 3. For the period March 1, 2008 through June any and all communications between yourself. the recipient of this letter, and any of the 29 persons named in request No. 2. be it in writing, text message. . attachment. notes or letters. In light of what various citizens witnessed during the recent legislative term. and the "testimony" of Judges Herman and Fcrchill. as well as what was clear to all: that their [Herman's & Ferchill's personal involvement in proposing. drafting. revising, or spearheading legislation that would end any kind of oversight over Judge Herman's "fiefdom" (THE STATUTORY PROBATE COURTS). and the continued ability of those courts to deprive any citizen of life, liberty, and property in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution (made applicable to the States via the incorporation doctrine). this communication will also serve to place each of you on notice that a challenge to this patently unconstitutional and criminal behavior on your parts will shortly be brought in an appropriate United States District Court. I am especially disturbed at the directive from Guy Herman, to Polly Jackson-Spencer to "get rid" of Judge Olen U nderwood so that all Probate cases can be.handled" exclusively by, and for the Probate Judges, and by and for the Probate lawyers of this state. This directive is a criminal act being directed by G uy Herman, and will be brought to the attention of the U nited States Department of Justice in due course.

3 This foregoing request is important for a variety of legal reasons as articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth ( 5th) Judicial Circuit in Bauer v. Texas, a case which Judge Herman transferred around to avoid recusing any statutory probate judge and the return of Mrs. Bauer`s monies. The Federal Court's disdain of Section 875k among others. was very clear. A judge` s sopal involvement in matters that will come before him or her Fenders that judge disqualified from hearing any the matters in which that he participated in creating. disputing, legislating. advancing. or rendering his official advisory opinion. Finally. and because the law will presume that each of you as public officials are doing the people`s work-and as such. you come under the oversight of the United States Department of Justice- I am confident that none of you will impede the presentation of the case before an Article HI Judge by `.losing`. documents, hard-drives. "crashing," "accidental deletions of s and texts. or the all-too-familiar. "my dog ate the homework" that we have witnessed from the probate regulars in the probate courts who carve up millions of dollars of other citizen`s monies and then dole it out amongst the favored few that come before the Probate Courts, Stated differently. under Title 18 U.S.C which reads in part as follows:..[w]hoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up. falsifies. or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede. obstruct. or influence the investigation or proper_ administration of an matter withhe `urisdiction of an de artment or agency of the U nited States - or any case filed under title I l. or in relation_ to or contemplation of anv such matter or case. shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years. or both., all of you have been made aware. and are aware, that these matters will be presented to a department or agency of the United States, to wit: the United States District Conn. and that the matter is in relation to and in contemplation of presenting evidence to the Federal C ourts that this process was corrupted ab initio by Guy Herman directing the outcome of judicial proceedings, by instructing Judge Jackson-Spencer and Steve King on how to "rule`. on contested matters before any evidence was taken. I I find it most compelling (if not repulsive) that Guy Herman invoked the jurisdiction of the Travis County District Courts to avoid appearing and having to testify truthfully in Harris C ounty, Texas. despite his written agreement to appear- and Judge Spencer blessing that behavior by engaging in a calculated obstruction to destroy the reputation of an honest judge. Certain Texaco Oil executives in White Plains. New York thought that this law did not apply to them and proceeded to shred evidence that was to be used in a civil case after receiving a similar letter. Each was convicted on obstruction and sent to prison under the belief that they could undermine an Art. III Court, and de~ a United States District Judge.

4 I am also confident that this cozy relationship among friends ( such as yourselves- Crain Caton, Gardner, Patel Pacheco. and Payne -'Smith ) has and will produce boxes of records, thousands of s, texts. and cell phone records for the Federal Court to examine. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding the aboveafter you have visited with each other-and sought and taken direction from Guy Herman. as is norm when Guy Herman is involved in such matters. ME/rIc

5 : :0l:21 04 OK STNDRD ECM

6 : : 01 : OK ST RD E