Phone Hearing-GMAC vs Me - Denial Due Process-My motion.wmv

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
1,161
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Nov 26, 2009

GMAC vs STAR HILLS
Star: Hills motion to vacate due to denial of due process
Judge Brumfeld converts the issue to make it sound like it is about something other than what is actually before her becuaqse the matter before her is about her own error when she set a trial for GMAC without giving Star any time for proper service, discovery, or case management, then the judge left town, and wothout any notice to Star the casze was transferred to a commissioner and then immediately the case file was tranferred to another completely unfamiliar judge, Twisselman (the case dile was literally carried by GMAC's attorney from one court to the other .. he could have easily tampered with the record and Star did later find evidence of tampering in the file the very next day)

Star was not informed of the transfer to Twissselman's department and was not present but had put in a notice of non appearance for the original trial that was set by Brumfel;d, to be heard by Brumfeld and then was somehow transferred on the trial date and judge Brumfeld was conveniently on vacation.

The thing you need to be aware of here is that Judge Brumfeld is pulling what is called a 'conversion' she is sidestepping the issue by saying it is not clear what i am asking and then defining it as something she is not allowed to hear so she can run away and pass the buck to someone else...

even the commissioner who passed it over to Twisselman said to the clerk..., (in the transcript), "Get rid of this Monster, Find it a home"

Think these courts mighr soon realise that I'm not going to roll over every time they decide to Pass the Buck?

  • likes, 1 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (6)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @1RoaringMonk recuse????? Just for a silly little ole conflict of interest? How will they maintain their slush fund on us? Just us is meant for none of us. It is thier association with their own words with same spellings of words normal people not in their association use with different definitions that they use to administer the just us we are all subjected to.Justice =theft and fraud.

  • I f A judges pension fund is investing in foreclosures shouldnt they recuse themselves ? this is robbery

  • Nice to see you're on the mend Star!!

  • yes this is denial of due process. this might be what they call a tribunal court or as it says judicial business in the just us system where we are not included for those who get the bribes.

  • in part 2 .. but you can barely hear him.. he doesnt have much to say anyway... :p

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more