 |
| A criminal records search for Kay Sieverding shows no records |
 |
| See, it says opening, terminated and pending counts are "none" |
 |
| Asst US Attorney Robert Anderson said that the government isn't a party, but the court clerk says that I should be detained anyway because Judge Nottingham wants me |
Yet the United States Marshals Service component of the United States Department of Justice detained me without a criminal charge three times three times for 5 months. DOJ has tried to claim that these detentions were legal without a criminal charge because they were ordered by former federal judge Edward "Naughty" Nottingham. This is really a big deal in terms of rights. The Holocaust in Germany was started when the Jews were imprisoned for civil contempt. The U.S. Constitution retains to Congress the power to define crimes. When Congress defines crimes there are lots of hearing and it is the same crime regardless of who does it. When a judge alone has the power to decide what behavior deserves incarceration, then what is legal for you can be illegal for me. The Supreme Court recently ruled that people accused of civil contempt don't have a right to a lawyer. They were referring to people accused in state court of not paying alimony. Now the federal government is wanting to imprison people without their having a right to a lawyer. And any old drunk judge can say what he thinks civil contempt is. In my case, Judge Nottingham dismissed my civil case against the City of Steamboat Springs, Colorado and Kevin Bennett, a convicted felon who was the president of the city council, without writing an opinion, which is required by Rule 52. Then he ordered that I should pay them $100K even though there was no trial and no orders finding that I wrote anything that was incorrect, no Rule 11(c)(6) orders. So I filed documents in another court for relief from judgment. That is why former judge Edward Nottingham ordered that I should become a federal prisoner.
The 4th Amendment reads 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
There was no oath or affirmation supporting a warrant. What that means is that the warrant didn't comply with Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 4, which requires that the document contain a federal offense that is supported by a criminal complaint. That's the only definition of warrant that is in the Federal Register. Anyone can download a blank warrant form and fill in Arrest John Doe because he has a big nose or Arrest Susie Q because she is overweight and there are corrupt judges to be found. So it's important that criminal charges and a criminal complaint actually be filed and that all the steps in the Rules of Criminal Procedure actually be followed.
I have complained to DOJ about this for years and it doesn't want to explain. Usually when I complain DOJ will not even acknowledge my complaints. This may be changing now that the criminal statute of limitations is up for DOJ to prosecute its employees.
Here is an email I got from DOJ Internal affairs recently:
 |
| USMS internal affairs acknowledged my complaint |
Apparently the reason that Charlene Todd called me is that I published a corruption report to Michael Prout on the Lawlessamerica.com website. Then I called Prout several times at 202 303 9155. The first time I called the receptionist who answered the phone said she had heard my name.
Inspector Todd asked me to contact Rick Holden in the Internal Affairs Office of USMS in Denver. So I did. It is not easy to get an email to go through to DOJ but Rick's did. The first page I emailed to him is copied here
 |
| Page 1 of the email USMS inspector Charlene Todd asked me to send to Rick Holden |
Rick Holden
Internal Affairs
USMS
Denver
Dear Mr. Holden
Charlene Todd in Michael Prout's office in D.C. asked me to contact you. DOJ published in the Federal Register in Vol 64, No 215, page 60836 on Nov 8, 1999 that the categories of sources of records in the Prisoner Tracking System are only
"Any and all information necessary to complete administrative processes, safekeeping, health care, and disposition of individual Federal prisoners who are in custody pending criminal proceedings"
yet the attached sieverding form 129.pdf shows that I was charged with civil contempt only, not a criminal charge and yet recors about me were entered into the Prisoner Tracking System in your office.
I attached a blank A0471 detention order pending trail but your office detained me without an A0472 detention order even though I was not sentenced and am shown on various PTS forms as "w-t trial".
I attached a letter from the FBI to myself saying that your office entered criminal charges against me into the NCIC. However, I was not criminally charged.
I attached a closed warrant information network report "f for felony closed warrant" showing that I was arrested on a felony, however, I wasn't charged with a felony.
I attached a felony detainer faxed from your office for myself. However, I wasn't charged with a felony.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a copy of the 1999 federal register page 60836, see the categories of records in the Prisoner Tracking System is in the third column.
 |
In 2004, DOJ published again about the Prisoner Tracking System in the FederalRegister and it used the exact same wording "individual Federal prisoners who are in custody pending criminal proceedings", see below. That is Federal Register Vol 69 No 82 Wednesday April 28, 2004
So here is the Prisoner Tracking System record that the USMS created about me, which as you can see, says that I was imprisoned for civil contempt not criminal contempt. This violated the Privacy Act, 5 USC section 552a subsection (e)(4)(I) and gives me statutory authorization to sue the government. That's an important right because without that the government can do anything it wants to you and no one will be held responsible ever.
 |
| USMS filled in the PTS that I was locked up without a criminal charge |
I didn't plead "guilty". The USMS made that up.
 |
| This AO 472 form says that you had a bail hearing before they locked you up |
 |
| Here's the second page of a blank form saying you had a bail hearing |
So Form AO 472 is required by the Bail Reform Act of 1984 before they lock you up without a trial.
I didn't have a trial, I was locked up by USMS without a trial and without a bail hearing. If anyone wants transcripts of the hearings in which it was discussed that I shouldn't have a bail hearing and didn't have a right to an evidentiary hearing before the USMS should just lock me up, please email me at kaysieverding@aol.com or check the website of lawlessamerica.com. Some of them are on the Michael Prout corruption report and I will probably post more.
Anyway, the USMS office in Denver sent a felony detainer for myself to Wisconsin even though I wasn't charged with a felony or with a misdemeanor.
 |
| USMS claimed I was charged with a felony even though I wasn't
So, this is why I need to have a USMS internal investigations and a public report and this is why I need this blog because the USMS and DOJ wants to pretend that they didn't do anything wrong.
|
How did this happen?
 |
| I was imprisoned because Judge "Naughty" Nottingham was my judge |
My imprisonments were ordered by former Judge Edward Nottingham. The above is a report by ABC News: "Edward Nottingham, the chief federal judge in Denver, Colo., was 'implicated as a customer' in an on-going IRS and Denver Police investigation of an alleged prostitution operation called Denver Sugar / Denver Players" .... lawyers ...are also involved.
Basically what happened is I sued the City of Steamboat Springs Colorado and its convicted felon city council president, Kevin Bennett, who was my former neighbor. Bennett extorted me and harassed me using city powers to benefit his property at the expense of mine. CIRSA, see my blog What is CIRSA? insured them for $ 5 Million. CIRSA's lawyer, David Brougham, asked Nottingham to imprison me so that I wouldn't get any insurance settlement from CIRSA. To do this, Nottingham needed to use the Prisoner Tracking System and the Warrant Information Network, because federal law doesn't have a way to imprison people for civil contempt. Since the United States Marshals Service was guarding Nottingham 24/7 while he was going to the Denver Players brothel and the Diamond Cabaret strip club, the USMS goons were happy to oblige. Since the USMS systems controls are weak it was easy for them to enter non existent criminal charges into the Warrant Information Network and it was easy for them to sue the Prisoner Tracking System in a way that it wasn't supposed to be used.
So that's why I need an investigation of the United States Marshals Service.
 |
| USMS in Colorado faked the signature on this validation log |
Here's my last email from DOJ Internal Affairs, that they take the matter very seriously
 |
| On 6/20/12, Internal Affairs claimed to be taking complaint "very seriously" |
I also have a corruption report to Michael Prout, the USMS internal affairs man, at LawlessAmerica.com. It will come up on search engines under "Michael Prout Corruption Report". That website has downloadable pdfs of longer versions of some of these documents and of transcripts of proceedings before former federal judge Edward "Naughty" Nottingham. In one I am told in court that I don't have a right to an evidentiary proceeding before I am sent to jail. The witnesses against me weren't sworn, I was not allowed to cross examine them, and I wasn't allowed my own witnesses. There are explicit extortionist threats in the transcripts that I and my husband will be imprisoned if we don't file motions to dismiss our civil actions. Anyone who wants more information about my experience should email me at kaysieverding@aol.com or call me at 617 894 5274. I am trying to publish information about my third party lawsuits on blogger.com. See for instance,
http://what-is-cirsa.blogspot.com/2012/06/what-is-cirsa.html
LawlessAmerica is a group of victims of judicial malfunctions. Bill Windsor is currently on a national trip doing digital video recordings of many people who are victims of judicial malfunctions. Go to their website if you are interested in participating. It is comforting to know that you are not alone and the volume of victims may result in reform.
God, I wish for you the justice you deserve. I too was detained illegally. A Judge Maria Stratton did so without charges or bail hearing. Same reasons- sued the wrong person. This wrong person had the right law firm.
ReplyDeleteHard to believe unless it happens to you or someone you love. There is nothing scarier than being jailed and realizing none of the practices or laws are being followed in any way.
A lot of sick people in the legal system and there outrages are something that will haunt us for the rest of our lives.
I wish you would call me at 617 894 5274
DeleteSo proud of you, Kay! Finally, you will get the answers and resolution that you deserve.
ReplyDeleteIn an attempt to not upset you let me give you some tips on the issues that you are causing yourself.
ReplyDelete#1 The USMS is not at fault here, they do not give out the warrants, they only enforce them. They *cannot* argue that a warrant should not be valid and they will not enforce it, if they did the entire system would fall apart.
#2 The warrant was issued as a failure to appear, this is a valid warrant on paper. The USMS has no way of knowing that you were never ordered to appear so you did not and then this warrant was issued, all they can see is the warrant.
#3 The DOJ is also correct here, they are not a party of a failure to appear. This is between yourself and the Judge.
#4 You were charged with failure to appear, this is up to the Judge but can result in a contempt charge and they can lock you up as they see fit without a trial. Unfortunately our system gives Judges wide leverage on this matter.
#5 Your speculation in your e-mail's to the USMS will get you no where (stating that the USMS were bribed) it is your word vs their and yours means nothing.
#6 Name calling gets you nowhere.
#7 Without an attorney you will get absolutely nowhere with this because as much as you believe you understand the law, you cannot enforce it nor do you quote it correctly most of the time. I understand you have done a lot of research and that is a great start, however you do not have the legal background to go further.
I have a strong suspicion that the USMS will find their officers acted correctly under the law, which I believe the did also. The issue you have is with the Judge who issued the warrant. You could go to the local DA, but you said they are all corrupt in that town and unfortunately you have done considerable harm to your character by posting what you have.
What you need to do is get a non profit group/attorney that you can go over all the facts with. If you can convince them of the issue they will be able to take your case and follow the correct legal avenues and go after the correct person / people. I suggest contacting your local ACLU as they handle cases such as this. If/when you do talk with them remember that they are on your side. Make yourself sound as professional about it as possible. You must be seen as credible (it does not matter if you are 100% right, if you look like you have a vendetta or are lying you will get nowhere). Don't do any name calling, don't tell the lawyer that they are guilty of this or that, they know the law much better than you do. Tell them the facts that you know and let them draw their own conclusions. Stating that the USMS was bribed with prostitutes when you have nothing more than a belief will make you sound not credible. However stating that the Judge was linked to a prostitution ring and that he issued the warrant will let the attorney make his own conclusions.
It sounds like you were screwed in this whole thing, but there is a specific way to handle it and unfortunately this is not it.
Dear Billy Vierra
DeleteSince you brought up so many points and it appears that you have done some research I will answer each point separately.
1) The letter from the FBI shows that the USMS entered warrants for bail violation and obstruction into the NCIC and WIN. Those warrants didn't exist anywhere else. USMS is a component of DOJ and DOJ should manage its systems so that there is a confirmation of a charge. In fact, the Office of Inspector General of DOJ recommended to USMS that it have a
"charge validation form". DOJ developed a lousy form, shown above, that allowed the USMS to make up a charge. DOJ could have had a digital form with a confirming email and required that a valid employee number be entered but instead it had a nondigital form because DOJ didn't care enough to guard rights. That is shown by the fact that DOJ's Data Integrity Board which is supposed to administer The Privacy Act, according to 5 USC section 552a (u)(1) doesn't have meetings. Stuart Frisch is the chair.
The Michael Prout corruption report at Lawless America file 2 is a copy of the letter from the FBI. I couldn't put too many documents here or it wouldn't load.
The "failure to appear" warrants weren't valid warrants because they didn't meet the requirements of the 4th Amendment or the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Both require that there be an oath or affirmation. The Rules of Criminal Procedure requires that there be a criminal complaint filed by DOJ and an oath or affirmation of an authorized DOJ employee.
Dear Billy Vierra re # 2
DeleteI was a federal prisoner so only federal law is applicable. Former Federal judge Edward Nottingham did order me to appear, it just wasn't a valid order. It is not a crime to fail to appear in a federal civil court hearing. What is a crime is a failure to appear in a federal criminal proceeding when released on bail after a bail hearing. see 18 USC § 3142 - Release or detention of a defendant pending trial http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3142
The USMS was aware that I was an untried prisoner as they entered my status as WT-Trial on the PTS form. Thus they were required to have an AO472 Form, which is a US Courts form showing that there was a bail hearing which lists the information that is in subsection i if they want to hold you or subsection h if they want to release you. Furthermore, even if you have a bail hearing you can only be held prior to trial if you are accused of certain offenses. These are listed in subsection (e)(3). USMS listed the reason for my arrest on their own PTS form as being "civil contempt". That isn't listed in subsection (e)(3).
The USMS had reason to know that Nottingham was involved with prostitutes as they were guarding him 24/7 and according to the news reports he was very public about it, kissing prostitutes on the street, showing other people porno on his computer. Once I was imprisoned illegally without a criminal charge or a bail hearing then my husband and I both contacted the FBI in Denver by mail and phone. The FBI returned a copy of a letter my husband sent to them that complained that I was being held illegally to a records search that I requested with their notes on it. The USMS returned a report from Paul Sever, a USMS deputy in Wisconsin, saying that he called me in Canada and I told him that the warrant was invalid. That is File 6 on the Michael Prout Corruption Report on Lawless America. It was against the law for Sever to contact me, the USMS is supposed to have written permission from the AG to do an international fugitive search and they are handled by a special DOJ component.
I wrote to the USMS in Denver when I was in jail. I faxed them from Canada and I sent a copy of that to Court and it is on PACER. I also faxed to the U.S. Attorney in Colorado complaining that I was being threatened with arrest without a criminal charge. They claimed that they didn't have a copy of that but the FBI returned a copy last October. I didn't send it to the FBI, the U.S. attorney did. I actually faxed them twice with my address and telephone number in Canada and they didn't call me back. The documents that the FBI returned to me are on PACER in the Federal District of Eastern Virginia in Alexandria case 11-00732 documents 1 and 47. Document 30 there is what the USMS claims is all the records they have on me.
The third time I was arrested without a criminal charge, an assistant U.S. attorney named Robert Anderson showed up in Court and said that the government wasn't a part of this but I was detained without a bail hearing for another 3 weeks anyway.
The third time I was arrested I told the local police that there wasn't a valid warrant. They kept me in their car while the Dane County Sheriff emailed with the USMS records office in D.C. That office emailed that I was wanted for bail violations. That document is downloadable for free from the Michael Prout corruption report at Lawless America file 5. Like I said I couldn't have been wanted for bail violations because not only was I not criminally charged, not only was I not charged with an offense for which bail can be withheld, but also I didn't have a bail hearing which DOJ knew because DOJ always participates in bail hearings and gets an AO472 form from the Federal Court.
The Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News published articles that I was being detained without a criminal charge while I was still detained.
So many people at DOJ knew what was happening when it was happening and did nothing to stop it.
Dear Billy Vierra Re # 3
ReplyDeleteThere are three branches of government that are supposed to be involved when a person is made a prisoner of the Federal Government. The first is Congress. Congress has the exclusive authority to define crimes. See the U.S. Constitution Article 1 Section 8. Congress is to "To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations".
The judicial power of the U.S. under Article III is "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects." Courts don't have the authority to make certain acts criminal, only Congress does. See also the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure # 42, 28 USC section 401, which limits the contempt authority of federal judges, the Anti Injunction Act, 28 USC § 2283 - Stay of State court proceedings, and the "Code of Conduct for United States Judges". http://www.uscourts.gov/RulesAndPolicies/CodesOfConduct/CodeConductUnitedStatesJudges.aspx
DOJ is part of the third branch the presidency and there power is defined in the U.S. Judiciary Act, title 28.
The Courts don't have their own jails. The USMS is part of DOJ. Federal prisoners are under the authority of the Attorney General, currently Eric Holder, and he heads DOJ. The Nondetention Act 28 U.S.C. section 4001 requires that DOJ have a statutory authority to hold prisoners. I am currently in litigation with DOJ in DDC 11-01032 under Judge John D. Bates. DOJ filed on 7/12/12 that they don't have a record of their authority to detain me.
The U.S. is supposed to be a nation under Rule of Law not under Rule of Judges.
Dear Billy Vierra re # 4
ReplyDeleteAs I said before, I was a Federal prisoner so only Federal law is applicable. And I was a prisoner of the Department of Justice, a federal agency, so therefore the Administrative Procedure Act is controlling. The Freedom of Information Act is part of the APA. It says that all agency procedure must be published in the Federal Register. In fact the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Rules of Evidence are published in the Federal Register. In subsection a of 5 USC 552 it says "Except to the extent that a person has actual and timely notice of the terms thereof, a person may not in any manner be required to resort to, or be adversely affected by, a matter required to be published in the Federal Register and not so published."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/552
There isn't anything published in the Federal Register that allows Federal judges to imprison people for not appearing in a federal civil matter. If you are subpoenaed, which I was not, they can send the Marshals to get you and bring you to court if you are within 100 miles of the Court or within the district but that doesn't allow them to order your continued detention.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/552
When the USMS imprisons people it doesn't just shoot them. It uses systems of records i.e. the Prisoner Tracking System and the Joint Automated Booking System. These systems of records are only supposed to be used in compliance with the Notices that DOJ is required by the Privacy Act, 5 USC section 552a, to publish in the Federal Register.
DOJ published in the Federal Register Vol 69 p 23213 et seq.
“The Prisoner Processing and Population Management/Prisoner Tracking system (PPM/PTS) is maintained to cover law enforcement and security related records which are generated in the local USMS district offices in connection with the processing, safekeeping, and disposition of Federal prisoners who are in custody pending criminal proceedings.”
DOJ published in the Federal Register Vol 66 p. 20478 and Vol 71 p 52821 that the "categories of individuals covered by the [Joint Automated Booking System] are alleged criminal offenders" and no one else.
Federal judges had the opportunity to object to these notices in the Federal Register but they didn't do so.
Dear Billy Vierra Re # 5
ReplyDeleteDOJ has the burden of proof to show that they complied with the Privacy Act. My belief is that USMS agents were bribed or blackmailed. Since I published this blog, USMS emailed to me that it completed their investigation. They haven't let me see a copy of their report. They did not email to me that they didn't find any wrongdoing. So therefore I think they did find wrongdoing.
There is a system of records called JUSTICE/USM–002 The Internal Affairs System, It contains:
"statements of the investigator and witnesses, exhibits and reports of investigations prepared by the Office of Inspection, USMS, on findings of alleged misconduct of USMS employees, and records on the disposition of the investigation... Records or information may be disclosed: To complainants and/or victims to the extent necessary to provide such persons with information and explanations concerning the progress and/or results of the investigation or case arising from the matters of which they complained and/or of which they were a victim; There is no d(1) exemption (f) In an appropriate proceeding before a court, grand jury, or administrative or adjudicative body, when the Department of Justice determines that the records are arguably relevant to the proceeding; or in an appropriate proceeding before an administrative or adjudicative body when the adjudicator determines the records to be relevant to the proceeding." (see Vol. 72 FR 33515, 17)
I wrote and asked for the Justice/USM-002 records about myself and I also filed in court to get them.
Dear Billy Vierra Re # 6
ReplyDeleteI didn't call names. I am very aware of defamation laws and am very careful what I say about people.
Someone reading this blog may want to contact former federal judge Edward Nottingham for his statement. He is now an attorney in private practice. His phone number is 303-945-3532 and he has a website offering his services
http://www.nottinghamlaw-mediation.com/Attorneys/Edward-Nottingham.shtml
Another person that someone could call is Paul Sever the USMS deputy who called me in Canada. I think he is still working in their Madison Wisconsin office.
I think the person in charge of the USMS investigation in Colorado was Stephen D. Wallisch.
The USMS staffer in charge of internal investigations is Michael Prout. His phone number is 202 307 9155
Dear Billy Vierra Re # 7
ReplyDeleteLawyers can't enforce the law either unless they work for the government. All they can do is quote it. You say that I am not correctly quoting the law but you are not specific. I know a lot more about law now than I used to because I spend a lot of time researching it. Fortunately that is a lot easier to do than it used to be because of the on-line resources.
The ACLU and other non profit groups are deluged with people looking for attorney assistance.
I am not anti attorney. My husband got 5 or 6 patents and the reason that we had the money to live in Steamboat Springs Colorado to begin with was because of patent licensing which we never could have done without attorneys. All of the statutes and case law that I quote was written by attorneys.
I have proceeded with my self representation mostly because of the statute of limitations. I will lose if I don't continue on my own. I actually think that I am winning. I filed a motion to amend my pleadings and DOJ missed their date to respond.
I think there are many advantages to having an attorney. I have problems proof reading my own documents. I get really emotionally worked up and stressed out.
I've identified claims under the Privacy Act that I think are valid and for which I think that DOJ doesn't have a statute of limitations defense.
If you go to a find lawyer website you will seldom find any lawyers advertising that they do Privacy Act law or that they do section 1983 law. If you type in constitutional law all you will find is criminal defense lawyers. At least I couldn't find any lawyers or law firms advertising services that appeared to cover my situation. There is a law firm in Chicago that takes wrongful imprisonment cases if you were imprisoned for at least 15 years and then freed with DNA evidence. There are also some law firms that will take Rodney King type cases for beatings by police officers.
I like to watch "The Good Wife" but I don't think it represents the current practice of law in the U.S. Generally law firms that do corporate law don't take plaintiff's cases unless the plaintiff is a business. The law firms that take cases for individuals are usually divorce lawyers or criminal lawyers. There are a few law firms that do employment claims -- not very many. The small firms usually don't have the financial capability of doing much in the way of pro bono law or contingency cases. The big law firms usually confine their pro bono cases to criminal defense and indigent family and landlord tenant law. If there is an attorney out there who is interested in helping me then he or she should contact me. I'm not trying to prove anything by representing myself.