04 September 2011

KingCast wins a major battle as Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty quietly recuses herself in KingCast v. Ayotte, NH GOP and Nashua PD free press lawsuit, 2010-CV-501

KingCast Motion to Void Judge Landya McCafferty's Order after her quiet recusal in Free Press racial case K...

Watch for the Motion to Void Magistrate McCafferty's prior Order in this case. Sure Judge Barbadoro reviewed it but he had reviewed my Motion to Recuse and deemed it entirely without merit, ahem. An Order is void if the Judge should have recused prior to acting on the merits but failed to do so. Watch for my Motion to Void tomorrow: An Order is void if the Judge should have recused prior to acting on the merits but failed to do so. See generally Payton v. State937 So. 2d 462 (2006). If Summary Judgment is entered by a disqualified judge the judgment is voidable upon plaintiff's objection." Urias v Harris Farms, Inc. (1991) 234 CA3d 415, 426, 285 CR 659. In this instance the Judge knew all along she should have recused herself, nothing developed as in Payton, soooo....

You might know Terry Dean Nemmers ArrestaJudgekit work from his flyer encouraging former McLane, Graf Attorney Magistrate Landya B. McCafferty to recuse herself in my Civil case because she worked at the same law firm as Defendant Ayotte and Defense Counsel Jack Middleton and Jennifer Parent -- NH Bar President, surely she should have known better, ahem. Surely Jack wrote a letter of recommendation for her ascension to the bench, ahem. Watch the 28 U.S.C. §455 movie here. Well guess what? She recused herself but it doesn't appear to show in the docket sheet, apparently you have to click the top thumbnail to see it. So what now, LaPlante it out because he's an Ayotte supporter, and McCafferty is out, so they give it back to Judge Barbadoro.... who already showed his bias by stating my Motion for Recusal was "totally baseless?" See I busted on them so hard by posting Her Honor's other recusals during the same time period for less cause. I love it when the haters show up and try to say I don't know WTF I'm talking about, they can kiss my ass hahahahaa.... I been knowing what I was talking about since before I left the AG's office and hung a shingle, just didn't have the Internet to show the bullshit when I was subjected to injustice. This case is going to cause such a stink in SCOTUS they would be wise to settle it, but if they don't I don't really care, I'll just keep making movies with my new and brilliant Canon 60D. KingCast and Bobby Knight: We're not here to fuck around this week... now you may be... but I am NOT.

PS: Now that she recused I should file another Motion for Disclosure so we can see how wrong she knew she was in the first place, ahem.


Michael Holman said...

They had better start following the laws in this country, hard work pays off Chris, congrats.

Christopher King said...

In applying the former disqualification statutes, the courts have generally held that a judgment or order rendered by a disqualified judge is void whenever brought into question. (See Giometti v. Etienne (1934) 219 Cal. 687, 689 [28 P.2d 913] [justice related to petitioner's counsel]; Cadenasso v. Bank of Italy (1932) 214 Cal. 562, 567 [6 P.2d 944] [judge owned stock in bank]; Lindsay-Strathmore I. Dist. v. Superior Court (1920) 182 Cal. 315, 333 [187 P. 1056] [judge had remote interest in subject matter]; T.P.B. v. Superior Court (1977) 66 Cal. App. 3d 881, 885-886 [136 Cal.Rptr. 311].)

SHE said...

Congratulations, Chris.

I am personally and deeply joyful to learn this. On so many levels.

We ALL know that this "quiet" recusal was the direct and exclusive result of your persistence.

Viva the First Amendment and freedom of the press! It works!

Christopher King said...

Note that on her journal page 11:59 says she is amazed that I fiiiiinally posted her comment on mine.

Well perhaps she would do well to realize that while I post anyone and everyone's comments here I'm not particularly in a hurry to post them when the author is busy sending me unwanted communications that include, inter alia,

"And how happy are you with a size 4 ass? You threw away real love for her skinny ass," ahem.

Ridiculous. If I dated by body type I probably never would have dated 11:59 in the first place. Not only that, but 11:59 has ascertained the identity, name and place of employment of my new lady and even issued a derogatory and false comment about her and her son, nice.

They live a couple hundred miles from Boston so it's not like we all hang out at the local watering hole and she figured it out like that, right.

She will never get through security at the employer no worries about that, but nonetheless there is a certain sickness going on here. I don't hate her, just need her to leave me alone and perhaps one day we could be friends, but that doesn't seem to sit too well with her, ahem.