20 YEARS of SCAMS IN THE MICHIGAN COURT SYSTEM
ATTN FBI
While Crossing State Lines Electronically Michigan Officials unlawfully seized people & property, placed them into involuntary servitude
Held them for up to 100's of 1000's of dollars and/or for up to life in PRISON for no legal reason
A Huge and Unauthorized Waste of Taxpayers Money
in Fraud-Based Prosecutions & unjust Convictions
The Attorney General illegally DELETES this portion of Michigan Law
in the charging documents presented to their VICTIMS in order
to TRICK 100's into unconscionable Plea "Bargains" and PRISON :
" . . . if that person knows, has reason to know, or should reasonably be expected to know that the child is a child or that the child sexually abusive material includes a child or that the depiction constituting the child sexually abusive material appears to include a child, or that person has not taken reasonable precautions to determine the age of the child. "
Incredible Acts of Deceit
TAMPERED: LAWS, WITNESSES, JURIES, EVIDENCE, MEDIA & THE PUBLIC
=====================================================================================
Attorney General of 2007 used this legally inapplicable wording
deceptively & unlawfully for fraudulent prosecutions:
"... in which the victim or intended victim is a minor or is believed by that person to be a minor. "
( Must believe online that " the child is a child " as per Mich laws - It does NOT STATE: " Whether or not the victim or intended victim is a minor " )
Legally it pertains to any of 11 in-person crimes listed in mcl750.145d1a , so:
After an in-person crime is committed it is discovered the minor victim met the offender online .
[see Mich Laws, Jury Instructions & 2002 Public Act 45 ]
===================================================================
The nefariously corrupt manner in which the invalid claims are presented place the court
officials in a complete vacuum of jurisdiction yet they conspire to prosecute anyway, AND
REFUSE TO CORRECT THE INJUSTICES when confronted ( massive liability issues )
===============================================================
The 11 crimes listed in MCL750.145d1a have been around long before
the Internet ( 1931 PA 328 ) -- the Michigan Legislature simply added extra
penalties if a Computer / Internet was used to facilitate an in-person crime
committed or attempted against the minor child
( kidnapping, conspiracy to commit crime ,carry away a child,accost a child, sexually abuse THE child, criminal sexual conduct in 1st, 2nd,3rd & 4th degree , assault to commit csc , in-person sales adult materials, ) 145a, 145c, 157c, 349, 350, 520b, 520c, 520d, 520e, or 520g, or section 5 of 1978 PA 33, MCL 722.675
PROOFS:
1. The Laws as-written - ( by Michigan legislature - not as altered by cons in office )
2. Jury Instructions ( by Mich Supreme Ct appointed Committee )
3. 2002 Public Act 45 ( believe online that The Child is a child instead of knowing it online )
4. The prosecutor WILL NOT VALIDLY CHARGE ANY OF THE 11 crimes in an UNLAWFUL sting operation
5. United States Constitution's Confrontation Clause demands an actual victim.
6.The Law or Rule of Lenity requires criminal statutes to be read in the least oppressive manner to the defendant.
7. Michigan prosecutors only charge tiny fractions of statutes in the stings and are bereft of subject matter jurisdiction in their twisted , perverted , unlawful ,unconstitutional acts for 20 LONG YEARS OF FRAUD
( mostly white males are targeted = RACISM BY THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ?)
=====================================================
JURY INSTRUCTIONS : ( kept hidden from juries )
M Crim Jury Instruction 35.10 Use of a Computer to Commit Specified Crimes :
(1) The defendant is charged with using a computer to [ attempt to commit] the offense of [any of 11 in-person crimes listed in 750.145d1a]1 [against a minor] <<<<< that REQUIRED bracketed phrase is in the instructions under:
Use Note 1 [ which lists the 11 IN PERSON crimes of mcl 750.145d1a ]
The Real Wording & Jury Instructions of the Real Laws :
Computer Jury Instructions: SEE:
Child Sexually Abusive Activity:
No Jury Instructions exist for violating MCL722.675 1978 PA 33 WHILE ONLINE ONLY since it then is illegally transformed into 1999 PA 33 and becomes Contempt of Court when charged
All charges / convictions / sentences / re-sentences / orders from ANY court are absolutely WORTHLESS in these matters
=======================================================================================
might help if you study & understand the matter of juris(law)diction(words)
To Properly charge 1978 PA 33 with Internet statute MCL750.145d2 is when an offender ONLINE lures the minor to an in-person meeting to sell , lend , rent , lease or exhibit FOR COMMERCIAL GAIN any adult content materials.
Commercial Activity online never qualifies as an offense committed, if it were then about 12 billion pages and their website owners must be prosecuted NOW !
THE OFFICIALS WILL NOT ADMIT THEIR CRIMES
NOR ORDER ENTITLED RELIEF TO ANY OF THEIR SUFFERING VICTIMS
They don't want to be disbarred & imprisoned
=====================================================================================
MICHIGAN'S LEGISLATION IS CRYSTAL CLEAR:
"amended House Bill 5449 of 2001 (Public Act 45 of 2002)....Revise, and eliminate requirement of knowledge of age of child for certain other sex-related crimes. "MCL750.145a et seq
It does NOt say:
"eliminate requirement of child"
The requirement of a minor victim remains since 1931 Public Act 328
==========================================================
EXAMPLES:
Count I: 22 words of mcl750.145c2 were 'charged' out of 152 words [ 2006 wording ]
CountII: 5 words ( penalty only ) of 47 from mcl750.145d2f -using a computer to "violate" Count I - which requires the 152 words of Count I to be legally activated for prosecutions
Count III: "charged" a partial title to mcl722.675 - (for ONLINE ONLY ACTIONS such as Yahoo Chat )
- a title is not part of the law and has no force of law -
ZERO WORDS charged out of 210 ... = ABSOLUTE BS
Then combined with 5 penalty only words of Prohibited Internet Use statute: mcl750.145d2c a commercial activity only applicable to brick & mortar bookstores selling adult content materials-
ILLUSORY SLEIGHT-OF-HAND deceptions
that DO NOT CHARGE ANY REAL LAWS yet 1000s are convicted and sent to PRISON
=============================================================================
Petition to vacate the garbage convictions example https://void-judgments.com/brief-petition-to-vacate.html
____________________________________________________________________________________
Heading 2
EXONERATING JURY INSTRUCTIONS
WERE HIDDEN
COUNT I: mcl750.145c2: 22 of 152 words in the actual 2006 wording of the statute charged = INVALID for prosecution .
NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER FOR STING OPS
or
ONLINE SURVEILLANCE by Michigan Officials
Using a Computer to log onto the Internet and violate NO VALID LAW
using MCL 750.145d2c & d2f = prosecuted for logging onto the Internet
[ Sidebar : Check YouTube concerning Oakland County Probate Court's HORRIFIC abuse of Elderly Citizens- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0P5SZh5LEg ]
Computer Prohibition Laws: MCL 750.145d :
(2) A person who violates this section is guilty of a crime as follows:
(c) If the underlying crime is a misdemeanor or a felony with a maximum term of imprisonment of 2 years or more but less than 4 years, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both.
(f) If the underlying crime is a felony punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of 15 years or more or for life, the person is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or a fine of not more than $20,000.00, or both.
".... Indeed, Plaintiffs could not successfully mount such a challenge because, with the exception of the last five (5) years when the failed internet provisions were added and eventually stricken,
Constitutionality: Act 33 of 1999 violates the First Amendment and the Dormant Commerce Clause of the US Constitution. Defendants are permanently restrained and enjoined from enforcing any provisions of 1999 PA 33.
Cyberspace Communications, Inc v Engler, 142 F Supp 2d 827 (ED Mich, 2001).
Dissemination as per mich law is inapplicable to Yahoo Adults Only Chat of 2007
MCL 752.362 Definitions; C to O.
(2) "Disseminate" means to manufacture, sell, lend, rent, publish, exhibit, or lease to the public for commercial gain or to offer or agree to manufacture, sell, lend, rent, publish, exhibit, or lease to the public for commercial gain.
A “void judgment” as we all know, grounds no rights, forms no defense to actions taken there under, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by ). No statute of limitations or repose runs on its holdings, the matters thought to be settled thereby are not res judicata, and years later, when the memories may have grown dim and rights long been regarded as vested, any disgruntled litigant may reopen the old wound and once more probe its depths. And it is then as though trial and adjudication had never been. 10/13/58 FRITTS v. KRUGH. SUPREME COURT OF MICHIGAN, 92 N.W.2d 604, 354 Mich. 97
A void judgment is, in legal effect, no judgment at all. By it no rights are divested; from it no rights can be obtained. Being worthless, in itself, all proceedings founded upon it are necessarily equally worthless, and have no effect whatever upon the parties or matters in question. A void judgment neither binds nor bars anyone. All acts performed under it, and all claims flowing out of it, are absolutely void. The parties attempting to enforce it are trespassers." High v. Southwestern Insurance Company, 520 P.2d 662, 1974 OK 35 (Okla. 03/19/1974);
and, A void judgment cannot constitute res judicata. Denial of previous motions to vacate a void judgment could not validate the judgment or constitute res judicata, for the reason that the lack of judicial power inheres in every stage of the proceedings in which the judgment was rendered. Bruce v. Miller, 360 P.2d 508, 1960 OK 266 (Okla. 12/27/1960).
People v Swain is continually regurgitated to deny and obstruct justice in Motions to Vacate Void Judgments
People v Adkins and People v Thousand are ABOMINATIONS by the Corrupt Michigan Court System since they
INTENTIONALLY REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE LAW AS WRITTEN even while posting the wording in their caselaw.
( see those final 61 words in the 2007 wording of MCL 750.145C2 ....) THESE COURT PANELS CAUSE CRIMES BY 100s of OFFICIALS in the unlawful warrantless arrests and zero authority prosecutions ....
Michigan AG Dana Nessel Nov 23rd, 2020 : "... intentionally making a false claim[s] of criminal activity to law enforcement [ like AG Mike Cox and dozens of Assistant AGs repeatedly DO for decades] is itself a crime."
MICHIGAN COURTS UNCONSTITUTIONALLY CHANGE LAWS
SO, the 11 crimes in mcl 750.145d1a :
Accost a Child In-Person, find out later it was from an online introduction ( believe in person the individual was under 16 )
Child Sexually Abusive Activity: In-person Child Sexually Abusive Activity after the online intro believing The child was A Child ( a child victim and knowing such is required )
Criminal Sexual Conduct : -- how can csc 1st,2nd,3rd or 4th degree be committed online?
Kidnapping a Child : How does an offender kidnap a child online ?
Carrying a Child away: Kinda hard to do with pixels,,,it must be in-person
Disseminate ( SELL ) Adult Materials: ONLY in-person, but these liars charged online CHATTERS with the mcl 722.675 commercial activity statute