Prosecutors Say The Prosecutors Say They Felt Pressured, Threatened Hill Republicans, Justice Dept. Cited
Wednesday, March 7, 2007; Page A01
Six fired U.S. attorneys testified on Capitol Hill yesterday that they had separately been the target of complaints, improper telephone calls and thinly veiled threats from a high-ranking Justice Department official or members of Congress, both before and after they were abruptlyy Felt Pressured, Threatened - washingtonpost.com
Triggers 4th AFFIDAVIT OF PREJUDICE AGAINST FEDERAL JUDGE JAMES ROSENBAUM AffPrejud, unabated by the System for
Motion for ReconsiderationBased
Affidavit of Prejudice/Recusals
filed 27Feb07 unsigned?
Eighth Circuit Court Appeals
|* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *||*|
Sharon Anderson aka Peterson-Scarrella
Attorney Pro Se, Private AG et al
CIVIL ACTION NO.
US of America, all Agencies,State of Minnesota,All Agencies, County of
Ramsey, City of St.Paul, Mayor Chris Coleman et al, Water Board et al
|Defendant||*||Federal Judge James Rosenbaum|
|* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *||*|
Relator-Appellant- MOTION AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM FOR
RECUSAL, AND, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, TO AMEND
JUDGMENT, AND/OR MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL BEFORE AN IMPARTIAL JUDGE
I. POSTURE OF THE CASE
Sharon has previously filed a Motion for Recusal in all case's. in the past 30 years re: Memorandumn e-commerce below. Motion's were denied by Order entered on in file. The denial of Sharons Motion for Recusal was appealed to the U.S. Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and ultimately to the U.S. Supreme Court. The denial of the Motion for Recusal was upheld by the appellate courts,
Sharon Anderson seeks recusal of the Honorable Judge James Rosenbaum, and, in the alternative, an amendment of the judgment to reinstate our claims of retaliation and defamation,complicity to deny Attorney Pro Se's, Private Attorney Generals,Candidates for Public Office of State Attorney General re: Separation of Powers, Theft by Swindle of all our realestate matters, for the past 30 years. Denial of Access to Seats of Government, Jury Trials.
II. STANDARD OF REVIEW
III. SUMMARY OF THE FACTS RELEVANT TO THIS MOTION
IV. RECUSAL IS REQUIRED IN THIS CASE
Because Judge Rosenbaum lied to Congress: is receiving compensation and prestige/pension's, complicity to defraud the US:in a "Patterened Enterprise (RICO) HE must/ should recuse himself.
Sample Memoranudm www.judicialwatch.org for financial disclosures
Justice Antonin Scalia - 1987, 1991, 1997;
Justice Harry Blackmun - 1992;
Chief Justice William Rehnquist - 1995, 1997;
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg - 1999
1/3 309Pelham all personal property including 94 Peterbilt.
V. TO EXPAND THE MATTERN HOLDING IS TO IGNORE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT RULING IN ROBINSON, TO IGNORE THE CASE LAW IN OTHER CIRCUITS ON THIS ISSUE, AND TO IGNORE THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE
VI. SHARON ANDERSON HAS PRESENTED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACTS TO SURVIVE SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON THE RETALIATION AND DEFAMATION CLAIMS,COMPLICITY,CASE FIXING BY THE FEDERAL JUDGE ROSENBAUM.
Q. You can't guarantee to us that
Dr. Bernofsky would have been hired at
A. No. I couldn't guarantee that.
That is a committee decision. But what I
meant -- I use that word very carefully --
"was a good candidate." What I meant was
Carl would have made a good candidate,
meaning that he would have made a good
Very often in searches you get
many people who are not good candidates. In
the case of Dr. Bernofsky, I thought that he
would make a good candidate, meaning that he
could certainly have made the short list.
Q. If the good candidates make the
short list --
A. He certainly would have made the
Q. This position, this tenure track
position that you say you were hoping that
you could find for him, would that involve
teaching duties as well as research duties?
A. Yes. Q. That is teaching undergraduate or
graduates, or both?
A. Undergraduates. Q. Now, at the time that you received
his inquiry, were there possibilities at the
University of Houston for a position for
A . Yes, there were. Q. Would you describe what
possibilities were available at that time?
A. First of all, there were not only
positions available in my department, but
positions on campus. A person like Carl in
that field could look for and seek and find
employment in any number of venues here in
Houston, including the University of
Houston, Rice University that has a
biochemistry department and the Texas
Medical Center, which is a huge life science
Here on campus -- I know the
situation best of all. We here -- in
nutrition, for example, Carl could possibly
have qualified for the positions open, and
there were positions open from time to time.
We just filled one, as a matter of fact, in
September of this year.
Then in addition, on campus, there
is a large Department of Biology that has
for the last five years had two and three
positions open every single year for the
past five years, the same for the Department
of Biochemistry, which merged into the
Department of Biology.
There is also the Department of
the College of Pharmacy, which just had
several positions over the last two years
and has hired people over the last two
At the Medical Center, my
knowledge isn't as intimate. With a huge
place like that, with the representation of
biology and biochemistry and molecular
biology and all of the premedical fields,
there are certainly constantly positions
coming open and constantly positions are
It was not only in my department
that I was interested in helping Carl, but
it was in all of the departments, all of the
relevant departments at the University of
Houston and relevant departments at the
Texas Medical Center. I think that about
sums it up.
The statements in the Rosenbaum Orders were false. The Court glosses over the falsity of the statements by admitting they are technically inaccurate. There is an issue of fact whether the false statements were written with retaliatory animus. This is a jury issue.
Respectfully submitted, by E Commerce via Blogs www.sharon-mn-ecf.blogspot.com in Good Faith, not for delay, in compliance with the 14 day requirement,
Until the Issues of Bad Behavior of any Judge are address'ed the 8th Circuit 's unsigned "Order" is premature, invalid, unconstitutionally void.
Attorney Pro Se/Private AG
Legal Domicile 1058 Summit/PO Box 4384
St. Paul, MN 55104-0384
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I do hereby certify that I have on this 7th day of March 2007 served a copy of the foregoing pleading on all counsel of record by e commerce the same by United States by CD Rom, over the weekend and by Fax to the US Attorney Office
s/s Sharon Anderson P 165913 sa1299
Bank Fraud,SASC_1988_15, lower court Judges embellizzing,equity skimming, money laundering ,Title 18, SharonsRealestate_34, Deaths,Disabilitys , Murders of Property owners, taking DL by unlicensed cops, cops stalking www.sharonderson.org causing broken ankle medical bills over $20 thousand.WaterA06-1150f/_26
2. 42 USC 3631 reducing the citizenery to poverty, "taking" without Just Compensation, mandates Federal Inquiry Title 31TITLE 31 Money_Finance Quitam and the Criminal Code to indict Federal Judge Rosenbaum who refuses to honor Affidavits of Prejudices $150Rcpt0332(Rosenbaum).jpg (image)
Olmstead v. US GovLawbreaker by stealing filing fees re: US Dist.02-0332 Sharon has been denied her property at 42741-321stpl(GunLake) Aitkin MN. for over 5 years, her Tenant Steve M. Quale Sr. was Murdered in the Sherburne Co. Jail 9Feb05
Judiciary Act of 1789. A provision of it was found unconstitutional in Marbury v. Madison According to Congress, U.S. Supreme Court case law and Rhode Island's canons of judicial ethics, a judge must bow out of hearing any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The Rhode Island Canons of Judicial Conduct say that judges must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. "The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired."
According to Congress, U.S. Supreme Court case law and Rhode Island's canons of judicial ethics, a judge must bow out of hearing any case in which his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The Rhode Island Canons of Judicial Conduct say that judges must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. "The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality and competence is impaired."
JUDICIARY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES: CODES OF CONDUCT
Help Balance the Scales of Justice!
|Censure Judge Berrigan?|
Web site created November, 1998 This section last modified February, 2001
This Web site is not associated with Tulane University or its affiliates