About Me

Name: Eng. Sidaross
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Search

Blog Roll

 

Press Release - No Jury allowed - court in violation- Please do not encourage court corruption, due to fear, and harm Plaintiff In Pro Per

 
From the desk of:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
Hon. Eng. Monique S. Sidaross                                                                              May 15, 2008
With authority of:
Ambassador General, A.G.E.
Minister of Culture
Secretary General UCC                                              
  ANNOUNCES:
 
 
PRESS RELEASE
FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE REASON
 
 
 ACTION REQUESTED 
HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES AND LAWMAKERS TO CONTACT ME, PLEASE 
 
 
FRAUD IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND MAIL
   >>>  JUDGE & DEFENDANTS MAKE COURTS ALONE WITHOUT CONSENT OF PLAINTIFF!!   <<<
 
 
CASE # BC354160   SUPERIOR COURT LOS ANGELES  D18, JUDGE RECUSED FOR DISCRIMINATION. TRIAL 6/18/08 SHALL BE POSTPONED
IT IS A FELONY IF HANDLED WITHOUT PLAINTIFF CONSENT.
 NO TRIAL ALLOWED, NO JURY ALLOWED, JUDGE HELEN BENDIX IS ACCUSED BY VEXATIOUS ACTS AND BREACHING THE CONSTITUTION IF ACTED  OR RULED  IN ABSENCE OF PLAINTIFF AND WITHOUT PLAINTIFF CONSENT. 
 HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES AND LAWMAKERS TO REPLY AND CONDUCT MEETINGS  IN PUBLIC FOR PLAINTIFF TO BE HEARD.
 
 
ALL COURT RECORDS AND MAILS ARE LIES AND FALSIFIED - THIS IS FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION AND QUESTIONING SNEAKY ACT BY THE COURT IN EVERY STEP OF THE MATTER, WHILE MANGLING WITH IN PRO PER.  THIS MATTER IS COMPLEX AND UNIQUE: ALL ATTORNEYS FEAR TO REPRESENT THIS PLAINTIFF DUE TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST OF  REPORTING INJUSTICE IN COURT & BY JUDGES.  PLAINTIFF IS IN PRO PER WITH NO SYSTEM IN THE LAW.  THIS KIND OF LEGAL MATTER  DOES NOT EXIST IN THE LAW, SHALL BE HANDLED WITH SPECIAL WAY AFTER MEETING WITH HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES AND GOVERNOR. 
 
APPEAL AND SUPREME COURTS ARE DEFENDANTS, ARE NOT ALLOWED TO RULE OR CONDUCT APPEAL DUE TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST, DISQUALIFICATION AND RETALIATION REASON.   LAWMAKERS AND HOUSE REPRESENTATIVES TO REPLY FOR PROTECTION AND BEST HANDLING THE MATTER.  PLAINTIFF HAS NOT BEEN HEARD AT ALL.  
 
IF ANY ONE OF THE PUBLIC OR ANY JUDGE LISTENS AND TRUST OR SUPPORT JUDGE HELEN WITHOUT INPUT OF PLAINTIFF, ONE SHALL BE QUESTIONED & ACCUSED OF CONSPIRACY.
 
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 NOTES:
 
The following filing is for public information and for any arrangement of Jury without knowledge of Plaintiff.  Plaintiff does not beleive in Jury system, plaintiff requests presenting allegations on the media, AFTER  Lawmakers  and House Representatives  address issues and court abuse with Plaintiff,  before court proceeding may go through in this matter.  It would be Felony on all legal personnel and judges and any individual who cooperate under duress or bribing or whatever agaisnt Plaintiff best interest and the justice.
 
 
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Engineer  
Plaintiff
, In Pro Per
P.O. Box 6705 
Rosemead, CA 91770
(626) 309-2998
Plaintiff, In Pro Per

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Eng., as an individual, State employee, In Pro Per,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

State of California, a governmental entity; California Department of Transportation, a California Government Agency; individuals directly caused wrongful termination: Art Salazar, Art Duffy, Paula Durham, Steve Nakao, Tom Rut, Gedion Werrede, Barton Newton, Shannon Post, Phil Lutz, Jim Calkins, Hadi Behrooj, Mohammad Ali Molla, Safwat Salahieh, Kamal Abdul Karim, Gay Norris, Bob McNew, Marian Woo, Steve Takigawa, Lydia Lewis, SPB board members, ALJ Bretcher, ALJ Segal, ALJ Brown, Judge Ross, Judge Stoll, Richard Knickerbocker, Leonard Chaitin, Wayne Dryden; Second Appellate Court of State of Calif.; Supreme Court of Calif.; State Bar of Calif.; Board of Engineers of Calif.; Cindi Christenson; Jerry Montoya-Caltrans Legal Div. (11/2/07); J. Helen Bendix (2/29/08); Nena Vuong (3/23/08); and Does 1-50,

                        Defendants.

A SEAL: For safety of life reason, this caption shall not be altered or changed as judge Stoll, appeal & supreme courts did and put Plaintiff life in danger. Only Plaintiff decides whom to sue for that reason. Dismissal system is defendants’ opportunity to escape, and shall cause life threat or assassination to plaintiff as occurred several times before, and on 11/29/07 after the hearing of Nov 28, 2007 when judge dismissed defendants. Feb 6, 2008 another attempt of attack directly at the door of Plaintiff residence. A Complex Matter with ONE Plaintiff In Pro Per is very frustrating, needs attention and justice of the court.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: No. BC354160
DAMAGES & COURT INJUSTICE
 
 

CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL

OF 6/18/08

AND MOVE OUT OF DEPT 18

 
STOP HEARINGS AND TRIAL IN D18 IMMEDIATELY, OTHERWISE FELONY, CHARGE OF ABUSE, AND VIOLATION OF CONSTITUTION WOULD BE FILED VS. ALL DEFENDANTS ON THE CAPTION.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE ..(Def)….: Hon Judge Helen Bendix ACTION FILED : June 16, 2006 
TRIAL DATE      : June 18, 2008 to vacate &move
TIME                    : 9:30 a.m.      to vacate &move
HEARING DATE: reply by mail
TIME                    :    
DEPT                    :    18

TO ALL PARTIES, 39 DEFENDANTS, AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

Plaintiff (PL) is hereby notifying all parties and the court D18 and D1 of the urgent need to postpone the trial to open time until Lawmakers and House Representatives reply and meet with Plaintiff regarding corruption of court system, self representatives, and litigation process. All hearing and trials are illegal and Plaintiff shall not appear for safety reason.

This matter is public concern and shall be presented in full to the media for the public to read, ask questions, and reply to issues. NO Jury allowed in closed courtroom for safety and justice reason for Plaintiff In Pro per due to prior court harassment, abuse & discrimination that have not been resolved to satisfaction of Plaintiff, and to ensure justice and fair trial. The media & the public are the jury and a new judge is the ruling party.

If otherwise ruling or court order from any judge or court, it would be Felony, breach of constitution, and sanction shall be applied with interest if not paid immediately by the court. All process shall stop since Feb 2008 when judge reported with discrimination and hostile environment in court.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

DATED: May 18, 2008
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                                                                                                

                                                                                                  

 NOTES:

 The following filing is to document the mangling of courts in the mail, no dates on the mail for future lies and abuse to the court process.  Also Plaintiff returns mails recieved from Caltrans Legal Division that keeps doing meetings and hearings with Defendant Judge accused by discrimination against Plaintiff.  Plaintiff is not slave to the judges or to immunity, and shall be treated with respect and justice in courts. Please read some details to  understand the accusation.  You can ask question but with respect. 

   

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Eng., as an individual, State employee, In Pro Per,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

State of California, a governmental entity; California Department of Transportation, a California Government Agency; individuals directly caused wrongful termination: Art Salazar, Art Duffy, Paula Durham, Steve Nakao, Tom Rut, Gedion Werrede, Barton Newton, Shannon Post, Phil Lutz, Jim Calkins, Hadi Behrooj, Mohammad Ali Molla, Safwat Salahieh, Kamal Abdul Karim, Gay Norris, Bob McNew, Marian Woo, Steve Takigawa, Lydia Lewis, SPB board members, ALJ Bretcher, ALJ Segal, ALJ Brown, Judge Ross, Judge Stoll, Richard Knickerbocker, Leonard Chaitin, Wayne Dryden; Second Appellate Court of State of Calif.; Supreme Court of Calif.; State Bar of Calif.; Board of Engineers of Calif.; Cindi Christenson; Jerry Montoya-Caltrans Legal Div. (11/2/07); J. Helen Bendix (2/29/08); Nena Vuong (3/23/08); and Does 1-50,

                        Defendants.

A SEAL: For safety of life reason, this caption shall not be altered or changed as judge Stoll, appeal & supreme courts did and put Plaintiff life in danger. Only Plaintiff decides whom to sue for that reason. Dismissal system is defendants’ opportunity to escape, and shall cause life threat or assassination to plaintiff as occurred several times before, and on 11/29/07 after the hearing of Nov 28, 2007 when judge dismissed defendants. Feb 6, 2008 another attempt of attack directly at the door of Plaintiff residence. A Complex Matter with ONE Plaintiff In Pro Per is very frustrating, needs attention and justice of the court.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: No. BC354160

DAMAGES & COURT INJUSTICE

No reply from defendants or judge

Lawmakers to reply

Plaintiff (PL) returns back 2 mails dated May 7, 9, 2008 received 5/12/08 from Defendant (Def) Caltrans Legal Division during PL waiting for a new judge to be assigned. Exh “A”, “B”

PL will NOT return back 1” thick mail received from D1. It is from Caltrans Legal Div. dated 3/24/08 that PL deposited in the court on March 2008 due to judge is recused for discrimination acts, PL received this mail back on 5/12/08 from court D1 in damaged condition enclosed in another envelope along with 3-page minutes from J. Lee Edmon. Exh C

Minutes addressed returning back 1” thick mail postage paid & denying request of PL for a hearing before J. Lee reg. J. Helen abuse to PL & to the matter. PL is disappointed from court’s negative action. This is illegal and is disputed by PL In Pro Per who reserves her right against any future harm or losses that D1 shall be liable of along with J. Helen Bendix.
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE ..(Def)….: Hon Judge Helen Bendix ACTION FILED : June 16, 2006 
TRIAL DATE      : June 18, 2008 to vacate &move
TIME                    : 9:30 a.m.      to vacate &move
HEARING DATE: reply by mail
TIME                    :    
DEPT                    :    18
 

TO ALL PARTIES, 39 DEFENDANTS, AND ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

Plaintiff (PL) is hereby returning mails closed as is, received on May 12, 2008 from Caltrans Legal Division, for the following reasons: Legal office is Defendant (Def) representing Defendants, Judge recused and is a Def due to discrimination, humiliating Plaintiff in public, conspiring with defendants, harassment and threat in court, falsifying court documents.

While Plaintiff is waiting since 2/7/08 to 5/12/08 for reply from supervising judge, Lee Edmon, reg. discrimination complaint filed by Plaintiff against judge Helen and requesting assignment of new judge, 1) case is delayed, and 2) judge Helen and Defendants are conducting hearings and sending mails and frivolous rulings on the name of plaintiff and abusing my time and court records and causing unnecessary expenses and debts!! Who is liable of this chaos? Therefore, whoever decides or rules shall pay for the consequences of his/her decision, and for further losses, expenses and compensation.

Appeals courts are defendants and are not allowed to hear this matter by either party. Any further steps needed in outside the State courts, J. Helen & supervising judge shall pay for it. If Plaintiff had known of this court corruption, Plaintiff would not have used this abusive court system, but now Lawmakers shall do something about it in order to properly litigate this legal matter; shall clean up the mess occurred since 1994, and cluttering name of PL statewide and worldwide. PL opened this court to seek justice NOT to get harassed, but she is treated like stupid for no system existed but gamesmanship & lies. This is corruption and insult to the humanity and civilization.

Mails are listed below, closed as is:

1.      Small yellow envelope dated May 7, 2008. Exh “A”

2.      Small yellow envelope dated May 9, 2008. Exh “B”

3.      Large Yellow envelope 1” thick dated Mar 24, 2008 in damaged condition and taped all around, enclosed in another envelope dated May 2, 2008 received by PL on May 12, 2008. Is kept with media for demonstration. Exh “C”

No activity in court shall be accepted during investigation, PL medical treatment, and assigning new judge. Plaintiff is not to be taken as stupid for attorneys and judges to play games and politics harassing In Pro Per while laws & courts are lacking respect and system, for In Pro Per.

It is very disrespectful, insult, illegal, and promoting immoral for the Court and judges to keep the court running in hassle and nonsense and lies, in harassment and intimidation and coercing Plaintiff; to side defendants without hearing PL but rather falsify court documents; to allow unequal representation between parties in court and call it laws and system; to cover up on offense and corruption in governmental agencies misusing their power and immunity; and to close women’s legal matters with no compensation and equal justice. It is intolerable, offensive, and denied.

Plaintiff is the owner of the matter and has to be heard completely. Defendants and Judge Helen as a Defendant are not allowed to contact Plaintiff and conduct hearing to rule for Plaintiff it is conflict of interest and felony for the court to assume and keep this nonsense system and corruption putting people under duress and object them to crime. 

Judge Edmon, Supervising Judge, Dept 1, is liable to ensure justice and fairness to all parties NOT to favor to a judge for prestigious reason (a woman engineer acquires same high quality prestige as well) or for economic reason (judge Helen is liable) None of Plaintiff business if a judge disturbed the funding of the matter. Plaintiff had warned the judge repetitively to stop wasting time and delaying the matter since January 2007 and causing nonsense unreasonable debts to Plaintiff In Pro Per. Court and judges have no authority to muddle with or clutter a woman engineer excellent accomplishment, life, and career.

If supervising Judge decides to keep J. Helen (defendant) to conduct hearing and trial to her Plaintiff, ignoring conflict of interest & discrimination, it would be top corruption in the court and is an issue to be discussed on the media to question validity of the constitution, the laws & judges’ qualification in repetitively ruling unjust and nonsense. If any appeal claimed, supervising judge and J. Helen shall pay for their decision and actions!!! Plaintiff did not cause problems and there is no law for In Pro Per either to ensure justice.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

DATED:   May 18, 2008                                                          ________________________

                                                                                                Monique S. Sidaross, Eng

                                                                                                Plaintiff, In Pro Per




 Exh "A", Exh "B", Exh "C"  are pictures of the closed envelopes and could not be pasted here due to font reason.  They are letters from Caltrans Legal Division and Plaintiff has no idea what is inside.  The main concern of Plaintiff is that Defendants are not supposed to contact the judge or the Plaintiff while judge is defendant due to discrimination and humiliation in public in court; Plaintiff requested hearing before Judge Edmon supervising judge to question J. Helen's discrimination.  Plaintiff requests  have to be respected equally to defendants otherwise, court system shall be closed if Judges shall play games with defendants alone stepping on Plaintiff In Pro Per Right and justice and adopt impartiality!!  This is a crime and violation to the constitution.   No activity shall take place until a new judge is assigned and until Lawmakers and House Represntatives contact Plaintiff.   

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

NEW DETAILS  WILL BE POSTED SOON 

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
NEW DETAILS  WILL BE POSTED SOON 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Justice for In Pro Per, crime shall not be buried, PL declines be tricked in court

 
 
Confidential:                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                 dated:  Feb. 29, 2008
 
 Letter, Request for New Judge
 
 
Subject:   RECUSE JUDGE HELEN, DUE TO MY FEAR AND HER   RETALIATION
             CASE # BC354160 - I NEED TO BE HEARD NOT TRICKED IN COURT

 
Dear Honorable ........
            Dear Honorable ........,   
     
I am writing to Your Honors with disappointment and sadness to request and beg the Court &Your
Honors to immediately help in recusing J. Helen from the case mentioned above and assign another judge who respects In Pro Per, and does not retaliate. My claim is based on the ground of bias and prejudice under Code
Civ. Proc. 170.1 (a)(6) & other faxed pleadings
.
 
We have discussed injustice issue in my big complaint in 2005 requesting reform the court system. Your
Honor promised that the court tries to enforce the justice. I am asking your help. Injustice is being repeated
with J. Helen. She is placed with defendants; no body should blame me. Injustice of J. Stoll and Ross should be overturned but I am getting the run around instead. In Pro Per is not an attorney and shall not assume that role. It is illegal advice, brainwash to the society putting people under duress and fear to accept it, otherwise, they be harmed or object to get killed, or harassed by sheriffs in order to shut up!! Is this the freedom of the constitution? This complex matter does not exist in the constitution or the law; so, regular system should not apply. Appeal Courts are defendants for illegal acts and falsifying documents in prior matters; dismissal is out of the subject, it calls for crime. No appeal is considered for this matter from either party (Pl. or Def.). Tricks, false rulings, harassment, yelling, illegality, vexatious acts caused by J. Helen are invalid & shall be set aside. My respect and suggestions as a worldwide officer shall be respected & considered. Please receive the attachment for details.
 
Thank you for your time and consideration. I apologize for overwhelming your office with my complaint, but
justice is requested & can be achieved with your help. Please do not withdraw.
 
 
Best regards,

Eng. Monique Sidaross,

  
Cc:       Governor Schwarzenegger
            World Forum, Ambassadors
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Unequal legal representation in court, illegal court process, Defendant judge insists to stay on matter to dismiss defendants, which law is funding this??!!

 

 

REGARDING DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE HELEN

AND REQUEST OF NEW JUDGE

 

>>>>>       J. Helen is placed with defendants at this time and is not allowed to hold
any hearing or talk to my defendants starting Feb 29, 2008,
all her rulings
 are NULL and anti constitution 
 
 
  <<<<<

 

This matter shall not be litigated until the system gets adjusted to accommodate In Pro Per Status. For history
reason, the starting date of this matter, 6/16/06 has been extended to November 2, 2007 due to continuous
conspiracy, harassment, and retaliation of employer through Caltrans Legal Division. Illegality and crime
towards Plaintiff shall not be dismissed because opinion of a judge (judges’ opinion is at home), or due to
misuse of immunity, or favoritism among all legal system. Women’s career, lives, and safety of life are not for
judges to harass or kill.
 
J. Helen mishandled the matter and caused unnecessary delay with nonsense process and judicial malpractice
and discrimination for her own purpose and support to defendants. Plaintiff, In Pro Per, woman engineer is not
stupid or slave for the court and judges.
 
Judge Helen is biased; prejudiced; intemperance; yelling; undermining Plaintiff and priests visitors in public in
the court; mangling with attorneys of defendants Caltrans; insulting plaintiff in court minutes in Christmas Time; harming Plaintiff health; causing run around and tricks; caused unreasonable costs and waste of time to Plaintiff
while has no income; contacted defendants and conducted hearings without consent of Plaintiff and in absence
of Plaintiff while hospitalized and under medical treatment for more than 2 months due to permanent work
injury, singled out In Pro Per Plaintiff by calling a sheriff to harass or intimidate Plaintiff inside the court and
causes defamation in public, unfair and obvious inequality and prejudice in the court process
, crime increased
at plaintiff residence during J. Helen mishandling the matter,
though Plaintiff notified all parties, for future
documentation, and hoped J. Helen corrects her mistakes, but unfortunately, she persisted and willfully ignored
all requests and civil rights of In Pro Per, accepted nonsense pleadings from defendants, wasting taxpayers’
money, causing unnecessary debt to Plaintiff in addition to prior losses claimed in this  matter, and caused
delay and waste time for more than a year. Therefore, all J. Helen rulings are null, invalid, and shall be set aside
and thrown away and are not existed, especially since 6/07
; reporter’s transcript is false, illegal, missing In Pro
Per reply and is a proof of illegality where Judge meet defendants for 3 months without consent of Plaintiff while hospitalized!!!!!! 
 
People should go to court to get the justice, NOT to get the run around show between judges and
attorneys and Union. In Pro Pers should not study law for free with nonsense writings because of lack of  system in the constitution; we have our own career that serves the country better. Legal advice, due dates, and flexible process, should be considered in such complex matter and given to In Pro Per.  This lawsuit was brought up due to defendants’ attacks to Plaintiff on State Computer with slandering, disparaging statements and defamation, insult, threat of life e-mails, conspiracy, discrimination, sexual harassment, and retaliation since 1994, then Judges conspiracy under influence of union and false immunity, and misusing their immunity to cover up on the crime and illegality mentioned above; alter the legal matter and create false precedents as Judge Stoll did, then Judge Helen dismissed these crimes again, what is her benefit behind it; due to these facts, all ruling are illegal and invalid since she has committed bias, violation against Plaintiff. This is a crime to the humanity, falsifying history of the law, and building false-minded future generation.  
 
         Plaintiff does not believe in Jury system and do not accept decision of the Jury or the judge. They do not
decide for engineers’ career and income. The decision is only mine because this is my career and life and
money. A media forum is the replacement for a jury to present the case to the public without restriction and
hiding and sneaky system. especially if some individuals are prejudice against women, and judge sneaks with defendants for personal reason and to cover up on crime. I only present the facts and harassment done to me
at work and threat of life, asking the court to award me my losses & retirement in a lawsuit forum; that is it. It
should not take years and nonsense games.

REQUEST:

1.                  Legal advice offer to Plaintiff In Pro per, equal to defendants.

2.                  CMC meeting where I can be heard for all my concerns, time and guidance to prepare

3.                  Extension of trial. Help for investigation and presentation, considering the new date for the matter as of Feb 6, 2008, the retaliation and threat of life.

4.                  Plaintiff does not feel safe in the court alone. The court to arrange for a media, while Plaintiff will bring own tape recorder in each hearing.

5.                  Caltrans and the State as defendants DO NOT represent “THE PEOPLE” against Plaintiff. Those PEOPLE elected me as Union President to defend their right against corruption. I refuse using such terminology in my matter. It is not a system or decision of a judge. This is my matter; it belongs to my name.

6.                  I am NOT an enemy to the court/ judges/ attorneys due to asking for justice from their illegal acts by some of them; and by the Employer, the State, but NOT the Governor.

7.                  Serving documents by fax & mail by Plaintiff, and acceptance of Lexus Nexus system

8.                  Since investigators refuse to deal with In Pro Per, and seek attorneys on record, therefore, the constitu-
tion is lacking In Pro Per system and the public is misinformed and cheated. So J. Helen has violated my
          civil rights during hospitalization, and all her rulings are invalid since June 2007 and shall be set aside and striked from record.
9.                  On the other hand, some attorneys are dishonest to clients or women, took my money as Mr. Knickerbo-
cker $7000 and disappeared and caused me loss of my job as well. But the court and state bar support attorneys in stealing money of clients as we can see.   Defendants never submitted any mail to defendant knickerbockers, so all their mails are null and invalid. I have my valid reason not to use attorneys’ service due to cheating and nonsense system; we should not pay for it until gets adjusted. But, J. Helen supports the corruption and theft and denial of Plaintiff compensation form each defendant who committed violation. Plaintiff is not slave here; every one will carry his/her own decision. The constitution and the court shall
be reformed before my case is decided for.
 
10.              The matter shall be reconsidered, since June 30, 2007 with the operative complaint called “NewSAC”
with no striking of any issues or causes of actions,
11.              Plaintiff claims all losses occurred due to sneaky way of defendants and misusing the system of demur-
ring to abuse Plaintiff In Pro Per and wasting taxpayers’ money while J. Helen supported them. During
          the period of Jan to May 2007, and July 2007 to February 2008, and until reinstating the matter in clean
          status, in addition to the original losses of the wrongful termination, hoping this hassle shall not occur
          again. 
12.              Plaintiff does not play brainwash with striking real life violation on paper, this is crazy, and kind of
shoveling crime under the rug, protecting right of criminals than safeguard rights of citizens to be free of
          crimes at homes an on the streets as is being happening and observed with Plaintiff from J. Stoll and J.
          Helen. 
13.              If they are scarred now from being litigated in the court of law from their wicked acts, so they are aware
 that what they did was illegal; why they did illegal acts while all judges and attorneys are under oath from
          first day of their career? This is double violation claimed against all judicial officers in this matter because
          they misrepresented the country and projected false example to attorneys under judges’ influence and
 intimidation of power
. It is willful disrespect to woman engineer, believing women are helpless and
          scared!!! Are women engineers stupid here?
14.             In addition to prior accusations, Plaintiff claims that Judge Helen and those judges on the caption in all
 levels of the courts, lower and higher courts, have breached the constitution of America in all its parts,
          and is asking Hon. J. Czuleger, Hon. J. McCoy, Governor Schwarzenegger, and our President W. Bush
          to take serious action to protect Plaintiff life and career and income, and help in successfully litigate this
          matter for justice reason for Plaintiff, and for establishing a social change in the Court system for future America. 
15.              Plaintiff has taken the initiative and started a research in Doctoral Studies to investigate and put together
a hint for new Constitution in this regard. But a crime is persistent to harm Plaintiff before accomplishing
         this goal for future America and the world. The result is not against judges or lawyers but to create a new system to follow.  
16.            These are just samples, many other issues need to be addressed in CMC meeting with a judge for enforcement. Since the matter includes dispute of the court injustice and lack of In Pro Per system,
therefore, no system that may cause unfair trial, shall be applied on Plaintiff system
17.             I do not believe in Jury system. I need a media set up because I am international officer and the matter
related to the whole society and community of engineers. No jury or judge will decide for my career,
          income, and losses, as an engineer. No Jury instruction shall be given or enforced by the judge without
          Plaintiff consent and Media involvement.
18.             The court is unsafe place for Plaintiff. Plaintiff shall not attend alone in closed room any more without media. No hearings or process shall be held without Plaintiff consent & accommodation to my safety
and respect, and I be heard without striking facts of life. The court system is kind of brainless. No tricks
in my back by judge and sheriffs in court

FEAR AND HATE IN COURTROOM:

My decision became final due to the fact that judge Helen severely mishandled my legal matter with sneaky actions, hate, lies, harm, falsifying my records, harassment by sheriffs, religion discrimination, willfully humiliating Plaintiff in public, and fabrication of documents; all that has caused me to contact Your Honors ahead of time during last few months to aware Your Honors with upcoming future conflict and possible request
of recusing the judge
. It was a form of complaint, which is now a real complaint, and a request to save my legal matter and my retirement. 
 
I have a fear from her to the degree that I did not attend the court in person twice; instead, I used court
call system. I am scarred from her and do not wish to be in the emergency room again. She caused me health problems and did not pay me the costs; I have no insurance or income to pay the medical bills and emergency ambulance at this time. I had never been admitted in emergency rooms all my life and no one hated me before, I
 am strong and healthy but judge Helen’s attacks in the court in public and mishandling my legal matter again favoring to judges had a negative impact on me…. my matter is my career, income, food, future retirement, and recovering worldwide defamation that has been caused to me by the State Employer Caltrans / Union conspiracy, retaliation, and threat of life. Crime should not win for monitory reason and favoritism behind the scene.
 
I need to be heard with respect and seriousness in the court, I do not accept the run around and be
treated with stupidity, and need to discuss issues of concern with a new Judge about problems that should be avoided. All I need is my losses since 1994 in order to end this problem and go on with my life. Each of 37 defendant should be handled separately especially judges who are defendants on the caption, and they are the
main cause of all the problems occurred to Plaintiff myself since 1994
.   Each defendant committed
violence and defamation that are linked to other defendants with retaliation and conspiracy against Plaintiff, myself. 
 
Since this is my claim, defendants cannot bring accusation out of Plaintiff complaint, they only answer
my accusation. I am asking the court to compensate me for my service and retirement, for the worldwide
defamation caused to me by the Union/ employer misconduct and retaliation, and the problems caused by judges throughout the process since 1994. Judge shall not decide unless issues are clearly addressed with Plaintiff.
 
Hoping for your cooperation in solving this problem though I was told that Your Honors’ office does
not recuse the judge, but I am asking the court NOT individual office, the constitution lacks system for In Pro
Per, and judges mistreat us; I have to be told what is the system. In making motions prepared by legal personnel but presented by In Pro Per, judges deny all requests for In Pro Per, so it is waste of time and discrimination, and the judge is liable personally of her acts. Why should I waste my time again? I had it enough from J. Helen

I apologize for taking so much time from your valuable time but I keep the trust in Your Honors in protecting my civil rights and my safety of life. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. Looking forward to hearing from you soon. 

With all respect and admiration, I remain,

 
Sincerely,
 
Eng. Monique S. Sidaross,
 
 
Cc:       Governor Schwarzenegger
            World Forum & Ambassadors worldwide
 
 
 
Dated:  Feb. 29, 2008
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Return unstamped mail to court, moving Trial date to new Judge; Media NO Jury


 
DEFENDANTS / JUDGE CONSPIRACY
 
COURTS & LAWS LACK SYSTEM FOR IN PRO PER,
 
 
The purpose of the filing is that defendants keep requesting dismissal from the judge while Plaintiff recused and sued the judge since Feb 2008, to question the violation/ discrimination against PL since Aug 2007 and mishandling the matter since early 2007 as described below.  Please read details below.
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 
Monique S. Sidaross, Engineer 
MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Engineer 
Plaintiff, In Pro Per
P.O. Box 6705
Rosemead, CA 91770
(626) 309-2998

Plaintiff, In Pro Per

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

MONIQUE S. SIDAROSS, Eng., as an individual, State employee, In Pro Per,

                        Plaintiff,

            vs.

State of California, a governmental entity; California Department of Transportation, a California Government Agency; individuals directly caused wrongful termination: Art Salazar, Art Duffy, Paula Durham, Steve Nakao, Tom Rut, Gedion Werrede, Barton Newton, Shannon Post, Phil Lutz, Jim Calkins, Hadi Behrooj, Mohammad Ali Molla, Safwat Salahieh, Kamal Abdul Karim, Gay Norris, Bob McNew, Marian Woo, Steve Takigawa, Lydia Lewis, SPB board members, ALJ Bretcher, ALJ Segal, ALJ Brown, Judge Ross, Judge Stoll, Richard Knickerbocker, Leonard Chaitin, Wayne Dryden; Second Appellate Court of State of Calif.; Supreme Court of Calif.; State Bar of Calif.; Board of Engineers of Calif.; Cindi Christenson; Jerry Montoya-Caltrans Legal Div. (11/2/07); J. Helen Bendix (2/29/08); Nena Vuong (3/23/08); and Does 1-50,

                        Defendants.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A SEAL: For safety of life reason, this caption shall not be altered or changed as judge Stoll, appeal & supreme courts did and put Plaintiff life in danger. Only Plaintiff decides whom to sue for that reason. Dismissal system is defendants’ opportunity to escape, and shall cause life threat or assassination to plaintiff as occurred several times before, and on 11/29/07 after the hearing of Nov 28, 2007 when judge dismissed defendants. Feb 6, 2008 another attempt of attack directly at the door of Plaintiff residence. A Complex Matter with ONE Plaintiff In Pro Per is very frustrating, needs attention and justice of the court.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. BC354160
DAMAGES & COURT INJUSTICE

Recent Plaintiff Actions- D18 is barred from conducting any hearings- waiting for new judge-
Disputes recent Defendants mail:
Plaintiff won, early 2007

1.   Returned mail to sender at the post office 4-30-08: Defendant Caltrans 1” thick mail with taped, attached, envelope from Superior court D1 on defendant mail, undated, unstamped, received inside the post office! EXH “A”!!?? Suspicious sneaky action, crime repeated many times especially acts of mafia on Feb-March 2007 with loss of Plaintiff certified mail summons & complaint cost $120; breaking in post office before the court hearing 3/07, while 34 defendants collectively never showed up in the hearing, PL won, but J. Helen accepted the violation, rdered PL to serve again with professional server that cost over $4000 that J. Helen is liable for. PL won the matter and has right for compensa- tion & suffering of mafia attacks. Plaintiff has the right to collect sanctions from defendants. Crime shall not be dismissed. Hearing in public is requested Not in closed courtroom for safety reason of PL.  

2.   No any judge has jurisdiction to dismiss any defendants in this matter while Plaintiff In Pro Per has not been heard and defendants did not show up in several hearings. No Jury to rule on this matter.

3.   Return State Bar mail dated 4-23-08 with caption indicate hearing date Feb 29, 2008 and illegal ruling papers of J. Helen while J. Helen was recused and sued during the hearing of Feb 29, 2008 and was asked firmly by Plaintiff Not to address Defendants during that hearing.  J. Helen purposely disconnected the court call on Plaintiff and continued talking with defendants and issued rulings any way. This is harassment; taking In Pro Per as stupid with our money and while J. Helen supported defendants for personal reasons since July 2007 or March 2007 and shall be questioned as a defendant.
 
JUDGE…………: Hon Judge Lee Edmon D1 ACTION FILED : June 16, 2006
TRIAL DATE     : June 18, 2008 to vacate & move TIME                  : 9:30 a.m.        to vacate & move HEARING DATE: Reply by mail TIME                    :    
DEPT                    :   

TO ALL PARTIES, 39 DEFENDANTS, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

     Plaintiff is hereby awaiting reply of D1, superior court of Los Angeles located at 111 N. Hill St., for new judge since Feb 29, 2008, to handle the case properly. Plaintiff won the matter since early 2007, but J. Helen mangles & threatens In Pro Per. and need to be heard on the media. 

In this pleading, Plaintiff is addressing several issues recently occurred, and declines the fact of wasting Plaintiff time and delaying her education and income and causing debt for nonsense court process and papers since Nov and Dec 2006 hearings when all Defendants did not show up; Plaintiff won the matter. Then, in March 2007, defendants did not show up and hide all mails by mafia acts; and July 2007 when Judge insisted to hold hearings and dismiss Defendants while Plaintiff was hospitalized. It has been all corruption and illegality in dealing with Plaintiff In Pro per!!! Court shall be reformed and In Pro Per system to be established starting with this Plaintiff and this matter.

//

RETURNED UNDATED UNSTAMPED MAIL TO SENDER 4-30-08:

On April 30, 2008, Plaintiff found undated unstamped mail inside the post office to be given to Plaintiff!! Mail is 1” thick yellow envelop from Defendant Caltrans with taped white envelope from Dept 1 superior court Los Angeles attached to the defendant mail. See EXH “A”. Mail was returned immediately for suspicious sneaky act inside the post office; this mafia act has been repeated many times throughout this legal matter especially act of mafia on Feb-March 2007 disappearance of Plaintiff’s certified return receipts for mails of summons and Complaint cost PL $120; serving defendants in person in Sacramento that cost airplane tickets and rent car and other expenses upon J. Helen order; PL has not received the return receipts until now; breaking in post office before the court hearing; 34 defendants collectively never showed up in the hearing.

Plaintiff won and has right for compensation. If judge rules otherwise, J. shall be liable of all compensations. Unfortunately, Judge Helen sided defendants in violation, breach of constitution, and falsifying documents. Plaintiff has the right to enforce sanction on all defendants for abuse to In Pro Per & for unreasonable losses. Crime shall not be dismissed for immunity of judges, while In Pro Per is taken as stupid; judtice shall reveal; immunity of judges shall be questioned. Hearing in public is requested not in closed courtroom, for safety reason.

//

Jurisdiction:

No judge has or shall have jurisdiction to dismiss any defendant or any cause of action in this matter while Plaintiff In Pro Per has not been heard, defendants did nto respond to Plaintiff interrogatories, nor showed up in several hearings. This is game arranged by judge inside courtroom while the public is unaware or shut up under duress & fear; investigators refuse to help IN pro Per in investigation, then case closed. Is the woman engineer slave for the court here?!!

No jury is allowed to rule on this matter. PL does not believe in jury system. This matter to be held on media set up for Plaintiff to be heard informally in details. NO nonsense court system. Sanctions and losses incurred, due to J. Helen’s nonsense orders and costly process while PL won the matter since early 2007, shall be added to the compensation with interest, suffering/fear of mafia attacks, waste of time, and debt, if judge wishes to dismiss defendants, judge shall be liable of all losses and crime incurred.

//

State Bar returned mail 5-1-08:

On May 1, 2008, Plaintiff received mail dated 4/23/08 with caption indicates hearing date Feb 29, 2008, and illegal ruling papers of J. Helen while J. Helen is recused and sued during that hearing of Feb. 29, 2008, and was asked firmly by Plaintiff NOT to address Defendants during that hearing. J. Helen purposely disconnected the court call on Plaintiff and continued talking with Def. and issued illegal rulings under duress any way. It is all hassle, illegality, and harassment to In Pro Per with our money; J. Helen violating the constitution since July 2007 or March 2007. J. Helen shall be questioned.

This mail is being returned to State Bar due to invalid rulings and conflict of interest while judge is defendant. State Bar shall not be dismissed until violation discussed and losses awarded to PL. EXH “B”.

//

NO HEARING OR TRIAL SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN DEPT 18, SCHEDULE OF MAY OR JUNE 2008 SHALL BE VACATED. New Judge/court is to be arranged. Plaintiff reserves the right for protection of any harm that may occur under court duress.

//

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

DATED: May 2, 2008
 
 
                                                                                           Eng.  Monique S. Sidaross,
 
 
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »