Sunday, April 29, 2012

Judge Nakata Criminal Too

I just remembered some things Judge Nakata has done. I didn't have her on my criminal list, but now I remember some things, and she has to be added. So that pretty much means the only Judges in the last several years, that I've had, who did not commit any actual crimes, that I can think of, even if they did things I didn't like, are Judge Suko (federal Eastern court in WA and didn't have him long enough to know), Judge Quackenbush (did unethical things but nothing criminal outwardly, that I know of yet), and the Portland federal bankruptcy Judge did nothing to me or my case personally, and that's about it. The rest have had motive to torture women and children--me and my son--and to collude with others to obstruct justice. The "unethical" things Quackenbush did, was to suggest I was frivolous when he knew I wasn't, and to close my case, KNOWING that I had medical documentation going to his courthouse, to back up my claim, and knowing that by closing the case he deprived me of a more timely way to challenge termination of parental rights. Nakata committed crimes. They were slightly different from what the other Judges did but along the same pattern. Judge Harmon never actually committed crimes, in court, over me, to my face, but I had her recused to prevent it and then she tried to sneak back in, after she already knew she was recused by me in the past (as if a year of time fixed the reason for recusal). So Harmon snuck back in and then ruled against me. Nakata didn't allow me continuance, which is unethical but not crime. What was criminal was that she threatened and intimidated a witness. And I'm sorry, but if she would do that in full court hearing, as a favor to police, jail guards, and Michelle (CPS/Tony Block--One of Wenatchee's biggest Italian Mafia assholes), then she would do much worse in private I'm sure. She broke the law in full hearing of everyone. So if she's bold enough to do this, it is very clear she thinks that's "nothing" and she is able to do worse privately. She threatened me, in the courtroom, telling me if I dared talk to anyone about any of the people abusing me, or lying about me, she would make sure I went to jail. She said if I dared publish anything in my blog, to the public, about any of the police, the jail guards and how they'd sexually harassed me and forced me to appear without a bra, and if I said one thing about Michelle Erickson (who defamed me and gave false testimony against me, in a court of law, which is perjury), she would put me in jail. So she banned me from testifying against crime and obstruction of justice by a key CPS/Washington state worker. The woman committed perjury. It's a crime. I should not recieve "threats" from Red Judges like Nakata against giving testimony or providing public information about such criminal activity. What if Michelle had raped me? Let's say she did. And then Nakata threatens me in court and says if I tell anyone or blog about it in my personal blog, she will send me to jail. Let's say Michelle Erickson colluded with mobster Tony Block, and others in the State offices, and let's say it amounts to criminal conspiracy. Judge Nakata threatens me with jail-time if I talk about it, or write about it. Judge Alicia Nakata is criminal and I wouldn't put it past her to snort cocaine either. Maybe that's why the only time she was nice to me was when I was with Alvaro Pardo, the man from Colombia, and she thought she could get a fix. Fuck you Nakata and fuck your corrupt judicial "privilege". You committed crime and then tried to use your position and authority to threaten and silence me from reporting crime and speakin up about it. You said, I remember clearly, that I could talk about YOU but not about anyone else. FUCK YOU. Who do you think you are? Tony Block's second hand woman? You protect his mafia? So you think it's okay to report crimes about you because you believe you have judicial immunity to everything, because your friend Laura Laughlin has your back. But you have no problem, whatsoever, violating the law out in the open, to benefit all those in your courthouse, and to protect criminals. That makes YOU a criminal. And by the way, like THAT was a real show of objectivity. Boy are we all sure you are not bias, twisted in the head, and looking for trouble. What is really sad is that if this Judge Nakata is linked to FBI in the slightest way, it's not looking so good. I mean, Wes, the regional FBI guy, was dismissive about both Judge Warren (criminal) and I said I didn't know about Nakata but I wasn't sure. He said he had full faith in Nakata. It's impossible to have faith in a Judge that publicly threatens a key witness from reporting criminal activity. I think I got a "straight up" out of that somewhere. Maybe it right after I wondered if she's the coke snorting Judge, or one of them. She was SURE NICE when I had Colombo with me. Nakata did not just tell me not to talk about crimes committed by Erickson. She threatned me against saying or writing anything about anyone in the entire courtroom, and she specified, the jail guards (who had just sexually harassed me and how would she know to single them out unless she was part of the harassment?)


Anonymous said...

Here is the problem, Cameo. To believe your blog I would have to believe there is a conspiracy at both national and international levels. This conspiracy involves hundreds of people across multiple states and countries coordinating their efforts. On the other hand I could attribute your blog to the effects of mental illness. Unfortunately I have to choose insanity. I enjoy reading your blog. You are very smart and sometimes humorous. But Your ramblings sometimes border on threatening and inappropriate. I hope someday you will seek the help that you need.

Mama said...

Yes is the solution, whomever.

First, before you decide whether or not you believe in "conspiracies", you would have to know what the legal definition of "conspiracy" is. It means 2 acts of crime coordinated typically, or with association between at least 2 persons.

It is not that difficult to create facts sufficient for "conspiracy".

Secondly, you would have to admit to logic--that if crimes occured in the U.S. and also occured in Canada, where I went with my son, this two-country (at bare min.) combination makes crime then, yes, "international" because it is "inbetween" and involving two nations.


Your conclusions of my "mental condition" are the reason why many psychiatrists and psychologists and their patients who actually do need help, never get it.

Instead of being a normal person, you're arbitary and mean and you make no sense whatever. If I were insane, you would not waste your time to write at all, much less address your comments to me specifically.

Instead, you would attempt to go through a "guardian" or spokesperson as part of an ingenious method for creating ficticious appearance of mental illness and the idea I need assistance, when it's unnecessary.

As to threatening, I have threatened to sue with pleasure, yes. As to inappropriate, I don't believe that is something you have defined to merit my response.

Thank you for your wonderful posts and be well!