THE WHOLE TRUTH and NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH

The perpetrators are allowed to continue to harass innocent victims and citizens by prosecute an unlawful act upon perjury, lies, misstated facts and deliberate refusal to apply all rights and laws with total disregard for the truth and justice. All of this is done and carried out under "Color Of Law And Justice."

Citizens are being robbed And betrayed while suffering and experiencing great losses. Lives are being destroyed by these unlawful individuals with high influential and knowledgeable expertise of the law.

The trusting citizens become the victim of these gross and deliberate violations due to no training,  limited and no knowledge of the law which the legal system uses to shield themselves. In addition to the trust and confidence exquisitely placed in his high priced and well-trained counsel of the law.

Abuse of Due Process Law

Shreveport Judge sits in judgment of black female attorney's clients while pending an investigation by FBI, District Attorney and Bar Association on her clients complaint

Shreveport Judge refuses to recuse himself when ask to do so by minority female, who is investigating him and his associates for fraud involving minority children estate.

Shreveport Judge and attorney keeps dead man alive for five years.

Black female attorney intimidated into improper representation.

Poor and minority children unable to get help where estate being mishandled.

Children starved and intimidated into compromise of their rights through fear and hunger.

Female attorney driven to physical and mental breakdown due to harassment by officers of the court.

Officers and attorneys of legal system recklessly punish and make examples of anyone that challenge their authority.

How do you get justice when the abusers are the Administrators?

We have absolute facts and proof that some courts and lawyers do not apply the law equally to the poor and minorities, thus denying them due process. Regardless of the innocence or guilt of the defendant, they have a right to unbiased and impartial application of the law. The guilty sometimes are freed and the innocent punished due to the fairness or unfairness of the legal system.

All public agency contacted to seek correction of this abuse in the interest of public order evaded or dismissed these violations by claiming it to be a personal matter.

The only way to discover abuse and corruption is through an individual case that triggers an investigation, then and only then will the extent of these abuses be exposed, due to the untouchable nature of the legal and judicial system. Thus theses Administrators and Professionals are above the law and have to answer to no one. The proof of this can be seen in the fact that no one will investigate and apply applicable laws to either substantiate or disprove these allegations. Their only defense is to blame the victim and refuse to investigate on technical grounds. Fraud is not defendable or excused on technical grounds.

All authorities and agencies entrusted with the public trust and protection, draw negative conclusions and refuses to be objective due to the "Good Old Boys" pledge to support one another. They apply unrelated laws, draws conclusion with absolutely no connection to the action, as evidence by the record , the true charges and applicable laws are completely ignored.

To excuse this abuse as a personal problem is a cop out and a gross denial of justice and unfairly exposed all of our citizens to this unjust abuse.

The Bar Associations are selective in their enforcement of the rules, some violators are exempt and not even addressed. The attorney general of the state even refused to investigate. Attorneys are very reluctant to get involved due to possible retaliation. The Courts refuse to take the victim's petition as a whole. They chose to pick, ignore and take out of context portions that seem to be an advantage to them, and they disregard the same evidence and testimony that is against them.

Texaco Justice Needed In the Louisiana
Judiciary System For Poor and Minorities:

The Courts have ruled that deliberate notarization of an unauthorized signature on a Contract is legal and lawful.

The Courts consistently have ruled that someone who is not a party to a Contract can not sue for it breach, but the same Court allows the Attorney making the Argument to do so, while denying the same right to the other side.

The Courts have ruled that a Judge who is the Adversary of a Plaintiff's Lawyer do not have to recuse himself even though he and his Colleagues are attempting to have her/him disciplined and sanctioned.

The Courts have ruled that Amended Judgment although the Law says it is Absolute Nullity, and not defendable by Prescription. However, some privileged Attorneys are allowed this privilege.

The Court has ruled that a Bank Director Lawyer is not breaking the Law when he represents the Buyer, Seller, Lender and Borrower in a Real Estate Loan Transaction. (contrary to law)

The Court has ruled that a Law Firm can represent two entities in a Loan Transaction, even forming one to receive the funds, then favoring the more important Client by suing their former inferior Client on behalf of the other more influential Client.

District Court rules against the Appeal Court in malpractice cases and ignoring their Ruling of Material facts.

Bar Association used in obstruction of Justice by the Court and Attorneys.

Bar association discriminates in its investigation of Ethics violations. Against poor and minorities.

Court has ruled that a Lawyer who has betrayed his Client through fraud and collusion, and been sued along with his co conspirators can be used as a defense for his malpractice representation and betrayal.

Court rules that Attorneys committing fraud and conspiracy in violation of their Fiduciary duty can be used as defense and will trigger prescription against Plaintiff in that their knowledge is imputed to Plaintiff or their Client.

Court allows perjury, conflicting exceptions and pleadings to be unlawfully plead then rules contrary to law.

Appeal Court rules contrary to previous rulings in poor and minority cases.