The lying corrupt perjured thug, Ronald A. Lucas, a former Passaic County officer
The corrupt and/or incompetent Chancery Judge McVeigh. She conspired with Robert Del Vecchio, American Tax Funding and other convicted felons to sign off on judgments of possession without having subject matter jurisdiction over land possession issues and without performing any hearings. Land possession judgments are adjudicated by the Law Division and not by the Chancery Court. She caused millions of dollars in damages by illegally evicting people from their homes; she also violated the anti-eviction act and the summary dispossess act of New Jersey.
/////////////////////-------------------------/////////////////////
ROBERT
DEL VECCHIO'S FALSE ACCUSATIONS AND RON LUCAS FABRICATIONS
From
|
Barbara
Williams barbarawilliams33@aol.comhide details
|
To
|
bmaer
bmaer@pcsheriff.org, rberdnik rberdnik@pcsheriff.org
|
Cc
|
cvaldes
cvaldes@passaiccountynj.org, proby proby@passaiccountynj.org, wdewey
wdewey@passaiccountynj.org
|
Bcc
|
stuart.rabner
stuart.rabner@judiciary.state.nj.us, jaynee.lavecchia
jaynee.lavecchia@judiciary.state.nj.us, barry.albin
barry.albin@judiciary.state.nj.us, lee.solomon
lee.solomon@judiciary.state.nj.us, ernest.caposela
ernest.caposela@judiciary.state.nj.us, joseph.chapman
joseph.chapman@judiciary.state.nj.us, gina.cruz
gina.cruz@judiciary.state.nj.us, sheila.maisonet
sheila.maisonet@judiciary.state.nj.us, nitza.fontalvo
nitza.fontalvo@judiciary.state.nj.us, ivory.berkley
ivory.berkley@judiciary.state.nj.us, robert.tracy
robert.tracy@judiciary.state.nj.us, glenn.deblasio
glenn.deblasio@judiciary.state.nj.us, june.zieder
june.zieder@judiciary.state.nj.us
|
Office of the Passaic County Sheriff
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
Dear
Sheriff Berdnik/Mr. Maer:
I have just finished reading the following news
report. I provide the link where the
information was found:
Here is an excerpt from that
report.
Re: FALSE POLICE REPORT LEADS TO
INCARCERATION OF INNOCENT HOMEOWNER IN PASSAIC COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
"Mary Johnson":
Recipient: rberdnik@pcsheriff.org
Dear Passaic County Sheriff
Richard Berdnik:
This is an informant tip.
Before I start, I must tell you that this information is 100% correct and I
give you the right to arrest me if you find that I have misled you or lied to
you in any way.
I have obtained the following
information directly from the sources.
Apparently, in May or June 2011,
a person named Robert Del Vecchio, Jr of Passaic County, New Jersey (he is a
lawyer) lied to the Passaic County Sheriff about threats made to him by a
person named Basilis (or Basil) Stephanatos of Wayne, New Jersey (also in
Passaic County). Apparently, Del Vecchio said to sheriff's officer Ronald
A. Lucas that Basilis Stephanatos had threatened him with violence few days
prior to a scheduled eviction on June 28, 2011. As a result, Del Vecchio
asked that several sheriff officers (including Lucas who was a Sworn Law
Enforcement Officer) dispatch to the location of the Stephanatos' residence
located at 687 Indian Road, Wayne, New Jersey 07670.
Specifically, Del Vecchio told
Lucas that Basilis Stephanatos had told him that he "will beg to be
instead fucked in the ass by a 5-ft long rhinoceros dick" if you try to
evict him from his residence.
These accusations of threats of
violence that Del Vecchio made were false. According to information I
obtained, Basilis Stephanatos never threatened Robert Del Vecchio with physical
violence because he never had any contact or communication with him during that
time.
Here is what happened:
In 2008, Robert Del Vecchio put a
lien onto Basilis Stephanatos' residential property for unpaid taxes that
Stephanatos was disputing due to alleged over assessment of his residence (in
fact, after the seizure of the Stephanatos' propety, Del Vecchio sold it for
$330,000 which is the fair market value of the property. However, the
property was assessed by Wayne Township at $475,000. This is about 40
percent greater over-assessment and thus no taxes were legally owed by Basilis
Stephanatos- tragic, tragic, tragic situation).
In any event, around December
2008, Robert Del Vecchio, Jr. (he was a lawyer for American Tax Funding, Inc.)
sent a letter to Basilis Stephanatos , notifying him that a lien has been
placed onto his property. Then on December 26, 2008, Basilis Stephanatos
sent a letter to Robert Del Vecchio demanding that the lien be removed.
Basilis Stephanatos wrote that he is filing a criminal complaint and other
reporting to the media. He basically threatened Robert Del Vecchio with
legal action and not physical violent threats.
This is what Basilis Stephanatos
wrote to Robert Del Vecchio in the December 28, 2008 letter:
"This
is not a threat – it is real. After you see what we have in store for
your client, you will beg to be instead fucked in the ass by a 5-ft long
rhinoceros dick for the rest of your life.
Mary
Christmas and Happy the New Year."
So, Stephanatos never threatened
Del Vecchio with violence (he only wrote about legal action) and certainly this
was 2.5 years prior to the June 28, 2011 incident.
Lucas then testified during the
Grand Jury that Stephanatos was a violent person and that he had threatened Del
Vecchio few days prior to the June 28, 2011 incident.
I was told that you should have
the Stephanatos' letter in your possession, should you want to confirm its authenticity.
Apparently you seized all his computers in 2011, so you should have a copy of
it.
I hope I have been helpful.
Thank you for your great service
to our county.
Very Truly Yours,
Mary Johnson
As you
know, filing false police reports is a criminal offense in New Jersey (and in
most states). Here is the criminal
statute.
N.J.S.A.
2C:28-4. False Reports to Law Enforcement Authorities
- Falsely incriminating another. A person who knowingly gives or causes to be given false information to any law enforcement officer with purpose to implicate another commits a crime of the fourth degree.
Do you
have any comments to make to these reports?
Are you going to file criminal charges against this Robert Del Vecchio,
Jr.?
What
about the Ron Lucas alleged conspiracy to frame this homeowner? The news report above provides some very
significant details regarding what Lucas did to frame him and then testify
during the Grand Jury that Basilis Stephanatos had threatened Robert Del
Vecchio with violence – which turns out to be false.
I am
also reading that these prosecutors, Walter Dewey and Peter Roby (I copy them
on this comment request) have been using the false statements of Lucas and Del
Vecchio to support charges against Basilis Stephanatos and to depict him as
violent person. Which accusations appear
to be false, from what I can see. So,
the Grand Jurors were presented with intentionally false statements and lies
from Del Vecchio and Ron Lucas (who was not even at the scene) and they end up
indicting Stephanatos. Good Lord!
Sheriff,
you seem to have some major issues on-hand.
Are you
going to present these findings to a judge/jury or are you going to suppress
them and hide them from the courts as you did with Stephanatos’ emails/phone
records? Based on this report, you never
even gave a chance to this guy (Stephanatos) to defend himself!!! Nice going!!
Any
comments? This is bad publicity for the Passaic County Sheriff and the Passaic
County Prosecutor's Office. You need to
make it right. Or perhaps, you can hide
this info and attack the victim instead (Basilis Stephanatos).
Sincerely,
Barbara
Williams
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
CC:
Passaic County Administration Building
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
Valdes,
Roby, Dewey
Dear
Judge De la Carrera/Mr. Feinstein:
I am an investigative reporter with Metro Forensics and I have been working on one of our Innocence Projects regarding "State v. Basilis Stephanatos". You are listed as the presiding judge and Mr. Feistein is the Defense Attorney.
We have discovered that significant amount of exculpatory evidence was not presented to the grand jurors and to this court. Recently, we discovered that Robert Del Vecchio filed false statements with the Passaic County Sheriff. These false statements were used to portray Mr. Stephanatos as a violent person during the grand jury proceedings and in briefings before this Court. Please see my correspondence below with the Sheriff.
I can assure the Court that I have fully investigated these statements and are completely false. I also gave information to the Sheriff to be able to retrieve that information from his records, as he seized Mr. Stephanatos' computers.
The biggest bobmshell is the discovery of the Ron Lucas false testimony. I discovered that he was not even at the scene of the alleged assault. As the Court can realize, this is a bombshell of gigantic proportions. I have advised Mr. Stephanatos that he should be afraid of his life, as these revelations show some very deep corruption within the Sheriff Department and the Passaic County Prosecutor's office and these are armed people and have already shot and killed many innocent people under suspicious circumstances.
Please read the information provided below carefully. I fully stand behind my reporting.
Very Truly Yours,
I am an investigative reporter with Metro Forensics and I have been working on one of our Innocence Projects regarding "State v. Basilis Stephanatos". You are listed as the presiding judge and Mr. Feistein is the Defense Attorney.
We have discovered that significant amount of exculpatory evidence was not presented to the grand jurors and to this court. Recently, we discovered that Robert Del Vecchio filed false statements with the Passaic County Sheriff. These false statements were used to portray Mr. Stephanatos as a violent person during the grand jury proceedings and in briefings before this Court. Please see my correspondence below with the Sheriff.
I can assure the Court that I have fully investigated these statements and are completely false. I also gave information to the Sheriff to be able to retrieve that information from his records, as he seized Mr. Stephanatos' computers.
The biggest bobmshell is the discovery of the Ron Lucas false testimony. I discovered that he was not even at the scene of the alleged assault. As the Court can realize, this is a bombshell of gigantic proportions. I have advised Mr. Stephanatos that he should be afraid of his life, as these revelations show some very deep corruption within the Sheriff Department and the Passaic County Prosecutor's office and these are armed people and have already shot and killed many innocent people under suspicious circumstances.
Please read the information provided below carefully. I fully stand behind my reporting.
Very Truly Yours,
Barbara
Williams
Investigative Reporter
Metro Forensics
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
Investigative Reporter
Metro Forensics
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Barbara Williams <barbarawilliams33@aol.com>
To: bmaer <bmaer@pcsheriff.org>; rberdnik <rberdnik@pcsheriff.org>
Cc: cvaldes <cvaldes@passaiccountynj.org>; proby <proby@passaiccountynj.org>; wdewey <wdewey@passaiccountynj.org>
Sent: Mon, Mar 14, 2016 6:38 am
Subject: ROBERT DEL VECCHIO'S FALSE ACCUSATIONS AND RON LUCAS FABRICATIONS
From: Barbara Williams <barbarawilliams33@aol.com>
To: bmaer <bmaer@pcsheriff.org>; rberdnik <rberdnik@pcsheriff.org>
Cc: cvaldes <cvaldes@passaiccountynj.org>; proby <proby@passaiccountynj.org>; wdewey <wdewey@passaiccountynj.org>
Sent: Mon, Mar 14, 2016 6:38 am
Subject: ROBERT DEL VECCHIO'S FALSE ACCUSATIONS AND RON LUCAS FABRICATIONS
Office of the Passaic
County Sheriff
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
Dear
Sheriff Berdnik/Mr. Maer:
I have just finished reading the following news
report. I provide the link where the information
was found:
Here is an excerpt from that
report.
Re: FALSE POLICE REPORT LEADS TO
INCARCERATION OF INNOCENT HOMEOWNER IN PASSAIC COUNTY, NEW JERSEY
"Mary Johnson":
Recipient: rberdnik@pcsheriff.org
Dear Passaic County Sheriff
Richard Berdnik:
This is an informant tip.
Before I start, I must tell you that this information is 100% correct and I
give you the right to arrest me if you find that I have misled you or lied to
you in any way.
I have obtained the following
information directly from the sources.
Apparently, in May or June 2011,
a person named Robert Del Vecchio, Jr of Passaic County, New Jersey (he is a
lawyer) lied to the Passaic County Sheriff about threats made to him by a
person named Basilis (or Basil) Stephanatos of Wayne, New Jersey (also in
Passaic County). Apparently, Del Vecchio said to sheriff's officer Ronald
A. Lucas that Basilis Stephanatos had threatened him with violence few days
prior to a scheduled eviction on June 28, 2011. As a result, Del Vecchio
asked that several sheriff officers (including Lucas who was a Sworn Law
Enforcement Officer) dispatch to the location of the Stephanatos' residence
located at 687 Indian Road, Wayne, New Jersey 07670.
Specifically, Del Vecchio told Lucas
that Basilis Stephanatos had told him that he "will beg to be instead
fucked in the ass by a 5-ft long rhinoceros dick" if you try to evict him
from his residence.
These accusations of threats of
violence that Del Vecchio made were false. According to information I
obtained, Basilis Stephanatos never threatened Robert Del Vecchio with physical
violence because he never had any contact or communication with him during that
time.
Here is what happened:
In 2008, Robert Del Vecchio put a
lien onto Basilis Stephanatos' residential property for unpaid taxes that
Stephanatos was disputing due to alleged over assessment of his residence (in
fact, after the seizure of the Stephanatos' propety, Del Vecchio sold it for
$330,000 which is the fair market value of the property. However, the
property was assessed by Wayne Township at $475,000. This is about 40
percent greater over-assessment and thus no taxes were legally owed by Basilis
Stephanatos- tragic, tragic, tragic situation).
In any event, around December
2008, Robert Del Vecchio, Jr. (he was a lawyer for American Tax Funding, Inc.)
sent a letter to Basilis Stephanatos , notifying him that a lien has been
placed onto his property. Then on December 26, 2008, Basilis Stephanatos
sent a letter to Robert Del Vecchio demanding that the lien be removed.
Basilis Stephanatos wrote that he is filing a criminal complaint and other
reporting to the media. He basically threatened Robert Del Vecchio with
legal action and not physical violent threats.
This is what Basilis Stephanatos
wrote to Robert Del Vecchio in the December 28, 2008 letter:
"This
is not a threat – it is real. After you see what we have in store for
your client, you will beg to be instead fucked in the ass by a 5-ft long
rhinoceros dick for the rest of your life.
Mary
Christmas and Happy the New Year."
So, Stephanatos never threatened
Del Vecchio with violence (he only wrote about legal action) and certainly this
was 2.5 years prior to the June 28, 2011 incident.
Lucas then testified during the
Grand Jury that Stephanatos was a violent person and that he had threatened Del
Vecchio few days prior to the June 28, 2011 incident.
I was told that you should have
the Stephanatos' letter in your possession, should you want to confirm its authenticity.
Apparently you seized all his computers in 2011, so you should have a copy of
it.
I hope I have been helpful.
Thank you for your great service
to our county.
Very Truly Yours,
Mary Johnson
As you
know, filing false police reports is a criminal offense in New Jersey (and in
most states). Here is the criminal
statute.
N.J.S.A.
2C:28-4. False Reports to Law Enforcement Authorities
- Falsely incriminating another. A person who knowingly gives or causes to be given false information to any law enforcement officer with purpose to implicate another commits a crime of the fourth degree.
Do you
have any comments to make to these reports?
Are you going to file criminal charges against this Robert Del Vecchio,
Jr.?
What
about the Ron Lucas alleged conspiracy to frame this homeowner? The news report above provides some very
significant details regarding what Lucas did to frame him and then testify
during the Grand Jury that Basilis Stephanatos had threatened Robert Del
Vecchio with violence – which turns out to be false.
I am
also reading that these prosecutors, Walter Dewey and Peter Roby (I copy them
on this comment request) have been using the false statements of Lucas and Del
Vecchio to support charges against Basilis Stephanatos and to depict him as
violent person. Which accusations appear
to be false, from what I can see. So,
the Grand Jurors were presented with intentionally false statements and lies
from Del Vecchio and Ron Lucas (who was not even at the scene) and they end up
indicting Stephanatos. Good Lord!
Sheriff,
you seem to have some major issues on-hand.
Are you
going to present these findings to a judge/jury or are you going to suppress
them and hide them from the courts as you did with Stephanatos’ emails/phone
records? Based on this report, you never
even gave a chance to this guy (Stephanatos) to defend himself!!! Nice going!!
Any
comments? This is bad publicity for the Passaic County Sheriff and the Passaic
County Prosecutor's Office. You need to
make it right. Or perhaps, you can hide
this info and attack the victim instead (Basilis Stephanatos).
Sincerely,
Barbara
Williams
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
CC:
Passaic County Administration Building
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
Valdes,
Roby, Dewey
Office of the Passaic County Sheriff
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
Gary F. Giardina
Business Administrator
Passaic County Sheriff’s Office
435 Hamburg Turnpike
Wayne, NJ 07470
973-389-5900 x2321
RON LUCAS WAS NOT AT
THE SCENE OF THE ALLEGED ASSAULT AND INTENTIONALLY FRAMED THE HOMEOWNER
Dear Sheriff Berdnik/Mr. Maer:
I am an investigative reporter with Metro
Forensics and I have been working on one of our Innocence Projects regarding
"State v. Basilis Stephanatos".
I am writing regarding the report published in the
media regarding crimes committed by the Passaic County Sheriff Department in
framing and concealing evidence from an incident that occurred on June 28,
2011. Here is the link to that report:
We have discovered that significant amount
of contradicting and/or exculpatory evidence was not presented to the grand
jurors and to the Superior Court. Recently, we discovered that Robert Del
Vecchio filed false statements with the Passaic County Sheriff. These
false statements were used to portray Mr. Stephanatos as a violent person
during the grand jury proceedings and in briefings before this Court. Please
see my earlier correspondence with the Sheriff, proving you with a tip on where
to find and authenticate this info.
The biggest bombshell is the discovery of
the Ron Lucas false testimony. I discovered that he was not even at the
scene of the alleged assault. As you realize, this is a bombshell of
gigantic proportions and that is why you are trying to revoke Mr. Basilis
Stephanatos’ bail, essentially silencing him.
CLUE #1 THAT LUCAS WAS NOT AT THE SCENE OF THE ALLEGED
ASSAULT
We have collected at least 25 clues to refute the
allegations that Lucas was at the scene of an alleged assault on June 28, 2011
at a property located at 687 Indian Road, Wayne, New Jersey and at 8:50 am EST.
Here is our first clue.
Clue #1
I am attaching the original charge filed by Ron Lucas
on 6/28/2011 under Section NJS 2C:17-2C.
As you see, he wrote the reason for the charge is “placing sliver[sic] metal container on his front steps causing the
evacuation of neighbors”.
As you know by now, this was a black plastic safety
container for the environmental instruments used in Basilis Stephanatos’
business. It was placed there to be
picked up by the vendor, Pines Environmental.
This has already been confirmed by the prosecutor, Peter Roby, way back
in 2011 before judge Filko.
Note that Lucas writes: “sliver [sic]” (he meant
silver). However, this was a black
plastic instrument case. The date
of this warrant-complaint is 6/28/2011, i.e., the date of the incident. So, Lucas must have had very vivid memory of
that instrument for which he wrote a complaint about. However, he fails to even correctly identify
it in his own report. This is another
clue telling us that Lucas was not there at the scene to eye-witness the
instrument.
Sheriff, I know you are a busy person. Please let me know if you do not want to
receive any more reporting from our Innocence Project on the case of “State v.
Stephanatos”.
Any comments?
Sincerely,
Barbara
Williams
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
CC:
Passaic County Administration Building
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
Valdes,
Roby, Dewey
PROOFS
THAT RON LUCAS WAS NOT AT THE SCENE OF THE ALLEGED ASSAULT AND INTENTIONALLY
FRAMED THE HOMEOWNER BY LYING TO THE COURTS
From
|
Barbara
Williams barbarawilliams33@aol.comhide details
|
To
|
bmaer
bmaer@pcsheriff.org, ggiardina ggiardina@pcsheriff.org, rberdnik
rberdnik@pcsheriff.org
|
Cc
|
proby
proby@passaiccountynj.org, cvaldes cvaldes@passaiccountynj.org, wdewey
wdewey@passaiccountynj.org
|
Bcc
|
joseph.chapman
joseph.chapman@judiciary.state.nj.us, miguel.delacarrera
miguel.delacarrera@judiciary.state.nj.us, mrfeinsteinesq mrfeinsteinesq@aol.com,
stuart.rabner stuart.rabner@judiciary.state.nj.us, jaynee.lavecchia
jaynee.lavecchia@judiciary.state.nj.us, barry.albin
barry.albin@judiciary.state.nj.us, lee.solomon
lee.solomon@judiciary.state.nj.us
|
Office of the Passaic County Sheriff
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
Gary F. Giardina
Business
Administrator
Passaic
County Sheriff’s Office
435
Hamburg Turnpike
Wayne,
NJ 07470
973-389-5900
x2321
PROOFS
THAT RON LUCAS WAS NOT AT THE SCENE OF THE ALLEGED ASSAULT AND INTENTIONALLY
FRAMED THE HOMEOWNER
Dear
Sheriff Berdnik/Mr. Maer/Mr. Giardina:
I am an investigative reporter with Metro
Forensics and I have been working on one of our Innocence Projects regarding
"State v. Basilis Stephanatos".
I am writing regarding the report
published in the media regarding crimes committed by the Passaic County Sheriff
Department in framing and concealing evidence from an incident that occurred on
June 28, 2011. Here is the link to that
report:
We have discovered that significant amount
of contradicting and/or exculpatory evidence was not presented to the grand
jurors and to the Superior Court. Recently, we discovered that Robert Del
Vecchio filed false statements with the Passaic County Sheriff. These
false statements were used to portray Mr. Stephanatos as a violent person
during the grand jury proceedings and in briefings before the Superior
Court. Please see my earlier correspondence with the Sheriff, providing
you with a tip on where to find and authenticate this info.
The biggest bombshell is the discovery of
the Ron Lucas false testimony and the conspiracy formed by the Passaic County
Sheriff officers to frame Basilis Stephanatos. I discovered that Ron
Lucas was not even at the scene of the alleged assault. As you realize,
this is a bombshell of gigantic proportions and that is why you are trying to
revoke Mr. Basilis Stephanatos’ bail (guaranteed by the state constitution),
essentially silencing him.
25 CLUES THAT LUCAS WAS NOT AT THE SCENE
OF THE ALLEGED ASSAULT
We have collected at least 25 clues to
refute the allegations that Lucas was at the scene of an alleged assault on
June 28, 2011 at a property located at 687 Indian Road, Wayne, New Jersey and
at 8:50 am EST.
Here is our first clue.
Clue #1
I am attaching the original charge filed
by Ron Lucas on 6/28/2011 under Section NJS 2C:17-2C. As you see, he wrote the reason for the
charge is “placing sliver[sic] metal
container on his front steps causing the evacuation of neighbors”.
As you know by now, this was a black
plastic safety container for the environmental instruments used in Basilis
Stephanatos’ business. It was placed
there to be picked up by the vendor, Pines Environmental. This has already been confirmed by the
prosecutor, Peter Roby, way back in 2011 before judge Filko.
Note that Lucas writes: “sliver
[sic] metal” (he meant silver).
However, this was a black plastic instrument case. The date of this warrant-complaint is
6/28/2011, i.e., the date of the incident.
So, Lucas must have had very vivid memory of that instrument for which
he wrote a complaint about. However, he
fails to even correctly identify it in his own report. This is another clue telling us that Lucas
was not there at the scene to eye-witness the instrument.
Sheriff, I know you are a busy person. Please let me know if you do not want to
receive any more reporting from our Innocence Project on the case of “State v.
Stephanatos”.
Any comments?
Sincerely,
Barbara
Williams
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
Investigative Reporter
barbarawilliams33@aol.com
CC:
Passaic County Administration Building
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
Valdes,
Roby, Dewey
//////////////////////////---------------------------------------//////////////////////////
Passaic County
Administration Building
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
401 Grand Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505
Main Number: 973-881-4800
Fax: 973-225-0155
Dear
Ms. Valdes:
There are news releases in the media that suggest that the Chancery Judge Margaret Mary McVeigh has been issuing or allowing to issue "judgments of possession" and "writs of possession" although she never had subject matter jurisdiction over land possession issues. The Passaic County Sheriff would then execute these void judgments and writs, causing harm and injury to residents of this county.
What is a real explosive bombshell, is the fact that no hearings of land possession were ever held by this Judge. These are some very, very, very, serious, serious, serious allegations.
There are news releases in the media that suggest that the Chancery Judge Margaret Mary McVeigh has been issuing or allowing to issue "judgments of possession" and "writs of possession" although she never had subject matter jurisdiction over land possession issues. The Passaic County Sheriff would then execute these void judgments and writs, causing harm and injury to residents of this county.
What is a real explosive bombshell, is the fact that no hearings of land possession were ever held by this Judge. These are some very, very, very, serious, serious, serious allegations.
A judgment is
void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when the court has no authority to
adjudicate the controversy. See Bank v. Kim, 361 N.J. Super. 331, 339 (App.
Div. 2003) (mortgage foreclosure judgment void in violation of bankruptcy
automatic stay). Here, the Chancery court had no subject matter
jurisdiction over the property possession issue and thus any order issued by
that court was void, a legal nullity. Therefore, the sheriff was
enforcing a void (and fraudulent as well) court order.
Are you aware of these charges? From what the news reports say, this Judge (Margaret Mary McVeigh) has been refusing to respond. The Sheriff Berdnik also has not been talking and has directed the matter to you.
Perhaps you can shed a light into this situation. Any responses to the subject of illegal or void judgments of possession issued by the Chancery Judge McVeigh without any hearing?
I am attaching some of the news releases, FYI.
I look forward to your reply. This is a very serious matter, as you understand.
Sincerely,
Are you aware of these charges? From what the news reports say, this Judge (Margaret Mary McVeigh) has been refusing to respond. The Sheriff Berdnik also has not been talking and has directed the matter to you.
Perhaps you can shed a light into this situation. Any responses to the subject of illegal or void judgments of possession issued by the Chancery Judge McVeigh without any hearing?
I am attaching some of the news releases, FYI.
I look forward to your reply. This is a very serious matter, as you understand.
Sincerely,
Allison
Brown
allisonbrown26@aol.com
allisonbrown26@aol.com
/////////////////////-------------------------/////////////////////
Hon. Judge Margaret Mary McVeigh,
P.J.Ch.
Superior Court of New Jersey
Paterson Courthouse
Annex, Room 250
65 Hamilton Street
Paterson, New Jersey 07505-2018
Phone: (973) 247-8168
FAX: (973) 247-8172
Hon. Mary C. Jacobson
Assignment Judge
Mercer County Courthouse
P.O. Box 8068 Trenton, NJ 08650-0068
609-571-4000
Dear Chancery
Judge McVeigh and Assignment Judge Jacobson:
I believe
that I have given you plenty of time to respond to the VERY SERIOUS CHARGES
against you (see attached emails). As of now, you have failed to
respond. As you know, when a person has a duty to respond and fails to do
so, this silence can be used against that person as evidence of guilt.
All the news
reports indicate that because of your recklessness, or incompetency, or even
conspiracy, you injured thousands of property owners and that you forced people
out of their properties by issuing fraudulent "judgments of
possession" without having any subject matter jurisdiction and without
performing any hearing or trial and without providing any notice. Even
worse, when the shocked property occupant saw the eviction notices and asked
for the 6-month stay written in the NJ statutes, you refused to do that and
allowed the sheriff to forcefully throw these people onto the street. All
that without you having a subject matter jurisdiction and without performing
any hearing or fact finding or application of the law to the facts. You are
also charged of violating a number of New Jersey Court Rules: see R.
4:6-7, Pressler & Verniero, Current N.J. Court Rules, comment 1 on R. 4:6-7
(2015); 1:13-4. Transfer of Actions, Rule 1:7-4(a). DISGRACEFUL,
CORRUPT NEW JERSEY JUDICIARY.
THESE ARE
SOME PRETTY SERIOUS, HORRIFIC AND TERRIFYING ACCUSATIONS AGAINST YOU.
How do you
respond? The public and the victims await to hear from you. Please
do not continue to bring disgrace to the honorable New Jersey Judiciary.
Sincerely,
Emma Rogers
emmarogers456@aol.com
emmarogers456@aol.com
////////////////-------------------------///////////////////////////---------------------///////
Office
of the Passaic County Sheriff
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
Dear
Sheriff Berdnik/Mr. Maer:
There
are some news reports that the Chancery Judge Margaret McVeigh has been
issuing judgments of possession without having subject matter jurisdiction and
without performing any hearings. The news reports state that the Passaic
County Sheriff has been executing orders issued by this judge (Margaret Mary
McVeigh), although she had no subject matter jurisdiction over land
possession. The land possession is adjudicated in the Law Division,
Special Civil Part or regular Law Division.
As
you know, at least 20 individuals and entities pleaded guilty to defrauding
homeowners using tax foreclosure proceedings. One of the ways to do this
was to fool this Judge McVeigh into drafting the "judgments" or
"orders". For example, the accusations say that she apparently
allowed the issuance of a "Final Judgment" where the following
language was inserted by the convicted felon Robert Del Vecchio, American Tax
Funding, and others:
“AND IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff dully recover against the said
defendant …possession of the premises… and that a Writ of Possession issue
thereon”.
This Chancery
Court judge had no jurisdiction over the subject matter of land
possession. As of today, she has refused to respond as to why did she
insert or allowed that language to be inserted into that "final
judgment"?
Further
accusations are that she never even held any hearing over the land possession
issue. Margaret McVeigh just merely allowed that language to be inserted
into the text, so that the convicted felon Robert Del Vecchio immediately
seizes the property of the land possessor without any due process and in
violation of several New Jersey statutes.
From
what we understand, you (the Passaic County Sheriff) executed these obviously
void and illegal judgments or orders despite the fact they were not issued by
the Law Division.
In
some cases, you forcibly removed the possessors of the land or tenants and that
you did cause damages. You then filed charges against homeowners who
would refuse to leave their properties by refusing to obey void judgments or
orders from a court that has no subject matter jurisdiction or personal
jurisdiction.
How
do you respond to such accusations or questions? Didn't you know that
only the Law Division has subject matter jurisdiction over property
possession? Did you know that land possession judgments/orders issued by
a Chancery Court are void and have no legal effect? Did you know that you
may be held liable for damages based on the Forceful Entry and Detainer
statutes?
I
look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Emma Rogers
emmarogers456@aol.com
emmarogers456@aol.com
/////////////////////////---------------------------//////////////////////
Dear Judge
Margaret McVeigh:
We have
uncovered some new HORRIFIC AND TERRIFYING ACCUSATIONS AGAINST YOU. You
apparently allowed the issuance of a "Final Judgment" where the
following language was inserted by the Plaintiffs (convicted felon Robert Del
Vecchio, American Tax Funding, and others):
“AND IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff dully recover against the said
defendant …possession of the premises… and that a Writ of Possession issue
thereon”.
Of course you
had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of land possession. Why did you
insert or allowed that language to be inserted into that "final
judgment"?
The HORRIFIC
AND TERRIFYING ACCUSATIONS AGAINST YOU is that you never even held any hearing
over the land possession issue. You just merely allowed that language to
be inserted into the text, so that the convicted felon Robert Del Vecchio
immediately seizes the property of the land possessor without any due process
and in violation of several New Jersey statutes.
They did not follow the Wrongful Entry and Detainer Act and the Anti-Eviction Act, or the Summary Dispossess Act. As a result, they caused millions of dollars in damages by forcibly removing tenants or land possessors without due process.
They did not follow the Wrongful Entry and Detainer Act and the Anti-Eviction Act, or the Summary Dispossess Act. As a result, they caused millions of dollars in damages by forcibly removing tenants or land possessors without due process.
FYI, subject
matter jurisdiction can neither be conferred by agreement of the parties nor
waived as a defense, and a court must dismiss the matter if it determines that
it lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Macysyn v. Hensler, 329 N.J. Super. 476,
481 (App. Div. 2000) (indicating that such a motion can be made "at any
time"); see also R. 4:6-7; Pressler & Verniero, Current N.J. Court
Rules, comment 1 on R. 4:6-7 (2015).
How do you
respond to these new charges against you?
Sincerely,
Sincerely,
Mary Brown
Crime Investigator
//---------------------///////////////-----------------
Crime Investigator
//---------------------///////////////-----------------
Dear Judge
Margaret McVeigh:
There are
numerous reports in the media that you have been issuing judgments of
possession or facilitating the issuance of same, although you have no subject
matter jurisdiction over land possession issues. The Law Division has
exclusive jurisdiction over land possession judgments and issuance of writs or
warrants - the Chancery Court has no jurisdiction over land possession issues,
yet you have been issuing judgments of possession and associated orders.
You know of course that such judgments are void ab initio, a legal nullity.
Apparently,
you have caused significant financial and other damage to residents of this
state as a result of your allegedly reckless or even criminal acts.
There are a
lot of people accusing you of corruption and even conspiracy to intentionally
damage homeowners and business owners through your reckless acts to ensure tax
collection. How do you plea? Many people are calling for your
arrest and resignation. See for example this post:
MEET THE CORRUPT AND/OR INCOMPETENT CHANCERY JUDGE MARGARET MCVEIGH. SHE CONSPIRED WITH OR WAS MISLEAD BY ROBERT DEL VECCHIO, AMERICAN TAX FUNDING AND OTHER CONVICTED FELONS TO SIGN OFF ON JUDGMENTS OF POSSESSION WITHOUT HAVING SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OVER LAND POSSESSION ISSUES.
http://metroforensics.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-corrupt-andor-incompetent-chancery.html
Do you have anything to say to these serious charges?
Did you issue or facilitated the issuance of judgments of possession or writs or warrants of possession without having subject matter jurisdiction? A simple YES or NO would suffice. The public and victims need to know.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation with this inquiry. We want to make sure that unfounded allegations are not released into the media.
Sincerely,
Mary Brown
Crime Investigator
NOTE: As of today's date (3-7-2016), this judge has not responded to the accusations above.
//------------------------///////////////////////--------------------
Office
of the Passaic County Sheriff
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
William Maer
Media Information & OPRA Processing Unit
11 Sheriff's Plaza
Paterson, NJ 07502
bmaer@pcsheriff.org
973-389-5900
Dear
Sheriff Berdnik/Mr. Maer:
There
are some news reports that the Chancery Judge Margaret McVeigh has been
issuing judgments of possession without having subject matter jurisdiction and
without performing any hearings. The news reports state that the Passaic
County Sheriff has been executing orders issued by this judge (Margaret Mary
McVeigh), although she had no subject matter jurisdiction over land
possession. The land possession is adjudicated in the Law Division,
Special Civil Part or regular Law Division.
As
you know, at least 20 individuals and entities pleaded guilty to defrauding
homeowners using tax foreclosure proceedings. One of the ways to do this
was to fool this Judge McVeigh into drafting the "judgments" or
"orders". For example, the accusations say that she apparently
allowed the issuance of a "Final Judgment" where the following
language was inserted by the convicted felon Robert Del Vecchio, American Tax
Funding, and others:
“AND IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff dully recover against the said defendant
…possession of the premises… and that a Writ of Possession issue thereon”.
This Chancery
Court judge had no jurisdiction over the subject matter of land
possession. As of today, she has refused to respond as to why did she
insert or allowed that language to be inserted into that "final
judgment"?
Further
accusations are that she never even held any hearing over the land possession
issue. Margaret McVeigh just merely allowed that language to be inserted
into the text, so that the convicted felon Robert Del Vecchio immediately
seizes the property of the land possessor without any due process and in
violation of several New Jersey statutes.
From
what we understand, you (the Passaic County Sheriff) executed these obviously
void and illegal judgments or orders despite the fact they were not issued by
the Law Division.
In
some cases, you forcibly removed the possessors of the land or tenants and that
you did cause damages. You then filed charges against homeowners who
would refuse to leave their properties by refusing to obey void judgments or
orders from a court that has no subject matter jurisdiction or personal
jurisdiction.
How
do you respond to such accusations or questions? Didn't you know that
only the Law Division has subject matter jurisdiction over property
possession? Did you know that land possession judgments/orders issued by
a Chancery Court are void and have no legal effect? Did you know that you
may be held liable for damages based on the Forceful Entry and Detainer statutes?
I
look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Emma Rogers
emmarogers456@aol.com
emmarogers456@aol.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
RONALD A. LUCAS USE OF PERJURED TESTIMONY AND FALSE, FABRICATED OR FRAUDULENT EVIDENCE TO MISLEAD THE GRAND JURORS AND HELP INDICT AN INNOCENT HOMEOWNER
Sheriff’s Officers Ronald A. Lucas and Victor D’Agostino
both lied before the grand jury, i.e., they committed perjury, a criminal
offense. We are asking this Court or the
Attorney General to charge these individuals with perjury after we prove their
lies and fabrications in an evidentiary hearing.
Between their investigation reports and the grand jury
testimony, Lucas and D’Agostino have presented at least seven (7)
different scenarios of what happened during the morning of June 28, 2011. That is, seven (7) different scenarios they
present on their own words (either written or spoken), without even being cross
examined by the defense. Can this Court
imagine what will happen if Dr. Stephanatos or his defense counsel is allowed
to cross-examine these lying individuals?
We can guarantee to this Court that there will be some very significant
Perry Mason moments and we are asking that we are allowed to cross-examine them; the right to confront the accusers is a fundamental
right guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the Federal and New Jersey Constitution. The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth
Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "in all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the
witnesses against him." Generally, the right is to have a face-to-face
confrontation with witnesses who are offering testimonial evidence against the
accused in the form of cross-examination during a trial. The Fourteenth
Amendment makes the right to confrontation applicable to the states and not
just the federal government.
General overview of Dr. Stephanatos’ former
dwelling that was seized by the conspirators.
Photo taken from the front of the property, two weeks prior to the
tragic incidents of June 28, 2011. Note
the philodendron subincisum planter at the front of the porch area. Lucas went behind the philodendron subincisum
planter and placed his face at the side window so that he can see inside the
home. This is a criminal activity prohibited under 2C:18-3. Unlicensed entry of structures; defiant
trespasser; peering into dwelling places and in violation of the Fourth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and N.J. Const. (1947), Art.
I, Par. 7. Lucas then went behind the rhododendron
bushes where he claimed that he fell and injured his shoulder. These facts, including the location of Lucas,
prove beyond any doubt that Lucas was illegally peering and searching inside a
dwelling without having a Warrant for Removal (see N.J.S.A. 2A:39-1 Unlawful entry prohibited). He then later claimed that he was just coming
up the steps and he was assaulted at about 8:50 am, despite the fact that
electronic records obtained from Dr. Stephanatos business computer showed that
he was sending emails to his business clients as of 8:55 am and earlier. Lucas also claimed that a Pelican scientific
case used by vendors of Dr. Stephanatos’ business was a metal ammunition box, a
fraudulent assertion that has been refuted before Judge Filko by Prosecutor
Peter Robby. Lucas also claimed
that he saw a “shotgun”, but no “shotgun” was ever found.
Lucas Lie #1
Specifically, both officers lied when they testified that
the defendant had his front door open and his storm door shut and that they
were able to see the defendant pointing a gun at them through the glass storm
door. (Lucas testified to this at GJT10-24 to 11-12; Da7; D’Agostino testified
to this at GJT16-1 to 17; Da10).
It is the defendant’s contention that he had the front
door (and all other doors) closed and locked with a deadbolt. He had placed a business sign in the front
door (see image below) so that the Sheriff’s Officers would see that there was
a tenant on the premises and that they could not proceed with the illegal
removal without a Warrant for Removal obtained from a Law Division Judge in
compliance with the Unlawful Entry and Detainer Laws of this state. See N.J.S.A.
2A:39-1 Unlawful entry prohibited.
Had defendant left the door open, they would not have been able to see
the business sign.
It makes no sense that I would keep the front door open
for the sheriff to come in, when in fact I did not want anybody to come inside
my home while the appeals were pending in the appellate courts and there was a lawsuit
in the Law Division to vacate the tax deed. These two deputies are
obviously lying to cover their criminal activities. Having a JD Degree, I knew that if a leave a
door open, I am actually inviting the sheriff to enter my home; the same result
is if I answer the door. That is why I
did not answer the door (in fact, I very rarely if ever answer the front door). I would never do such a thing.
Furthermore, the sheriff post-incident reports all show
that my back door was locked with deadbolt, my garage was locked with deadbolt,
and my car was also locked. Who locks
his car inside a locked garage, and who places deadbolts in garage? Well, a person like Dr. Stephanatos who knew
the law and knew that he needed to prevent everybody from coming inside his
home, especially that day, until the Appellate Courts adjudicate the case. Dr. Stephanatos also knew that what Robert
Del Vecchio and ATF were doing was illegal and that they took advantage of the
sheriff and the lack of competence or heavy caseload of Chancery Judge McVeigh.
Lucas Lie #2
During the grand jury proceedings, Lucas also lied to the
jurors when he said that he was only trying to serve process papers. This is an obvious fabrication, a terrible
lie, as he also testified that several officers were dispatched during that day
in two sheriff vehicles with the specific intend to forcefully remove Dr.
Stephanatos without obtaining a Warrant for Removal from a Law Division
Judge. The process papers he referred to
had already been delivered to Dr. Stephanatos.
How come several officers are now attempting to re-deliver the same papers? This makes no sense, as it is a lie, a
perjury committed by Lucas.
View of the front door of Dr.
Stephanatos’ dwelling at 687 Indian Road, Wayne, New Jersey. Photo taken from the front of the property,
two months after the tragic incidents of June 28, 2011. Note the significant sun glare, making it
impossible to see inside the home during the morning hours. The philodendron subincisum planter at the
front of the porch area has been removed, as the conspirators emptied Dr.
Stephanatos’ home from all his belongings.
After nobody answered the door at 8:50-8:55 AM on June 28, 2011, and because
of the sun glare, Lucas went behind the philodendron subincisum planter and
placed his face at the side window so that he can see inside the home. This is a criminal activity prohibited under 2C:18-3. Unlicensed entry of structures;
defiant trespasser; peering into dwelling places. It is also an illegal search prohibited by
the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and N.J. Const. (1947), Art. I,
Par. 7. Lucas then went behind the yew
and rhododendron bushes where he claimed that he fell and injured his
shoulder. These facts prove beyond any
doubt that Lucas was illegally peering and searching inside a dwelling without
having a Warrant for Removal (see N.J.S.A.
2A:39-1 Unlawful entry prohibited). Lying Lucas then later claimed that he was
just coming up the steps and he was assaulted.
Lying Lucas also claimed that a Pelican scientific case used by vendors
of Dr. Stephanatos’ business was a bomb; when no bomb was found he claimed that
he thought it was a “metal ammunition box”, a fraudulent assertion that has
been refuted before Judge Filko by Prosecutor Peter Roby. Lying Lucas also claimed that he saw a “shotgun”. This is what was reported to the other
officers and to the media. The media
published and televised reports show that Lying Lucas claimed that there was a
“shotgun”. No “shotgun” was ever found
(because it only exists in the imagination of Lying Lucas). Lucas then changed his story and after he saw
the defendant’s lawful guns, he claimed that he saw a rifle, instead.
Lucas Lie #3
In addition, I have irrefutable evidence (email and phone
logs) showing that I was either on the computer doing business work or calling
the state officials right at the time that these sheriff’s deputies claim that
they saw me through an open front door. For example, Lucas testified that he arrived
at the property at 8:50 am. There is an
electronic record provided in the Appendix to Motion to Change Venue that shows
that Dr. Stephanatos sent an e-mail to one of his clients at 8:55 am. This
irrefutable evidence proves beyond any doubt, that Dr. Stephanatos was
at his office computer at the back of the house (about 50-feet away from the
front door) doing his normal daily business.
Thus Dr. Stephanatos has an irrefutable alibi to refute the false
statements of these two corrupt individuals who claim that at around 8:50 to 8:55
am they saw him pointing a gun at them as they were walking up the front porch
steps.
Another reason that the front doors were both closed is
the following: I have window-mounted air
conditioning units. I would take the air conditioning units off the
window around mid-September and I would install them around Memorial Day (end
of May). When I install the air conditioning units, then I keep all the
doors and the windows closed, so that I do not lose energy.
Yet another reason I always keep the doors closed is that
my home office is located at the back of the dwelling and I cannot hear very
well what is happening at the front of the home. Since the home is located in a rather
isolated, wooded area of Wayne, it has been burglarized before. Thus, the lack of hearing and the fear of burglary
had made me keep the doors locked at all times- all doors, in fact: back doors,
front doors, and garage doors. Besides,
I very rarely used the front doors, as the garage entrance is located closer to
the back door entrance. So, I almost
never used the front doors. That is
another reason that Lucas and D’Agostino committed perjury when they said that
I left the front door open. The computer
electronic record was in the possession of the State before the grand jury
proceedings; however, the corrupt prosecutor Walter Dewey refused to give it to
the jury and of course refused to allow me to testify.
Lucas Lie #4
Dr. Stephanatos also requests this Court to take judicial
notice of the fact that a box taken by the Passaic County employees from Dr.
Stephanatos’ residence was a business instrument (a so-called Pelican case used
for transporting sensitive business equipment) and not a “metal ammunition box”
as the Passaic County employees have been misleading the grand jury and the
courts and the public, damaging Dr. Stephanatos reputation. It is obvious that these two crooked
individuals wanted to give the false impression to the grand jurors that Dr.
Stephanatos had pre-planned an assault and he had stockpiled ammunition in a
metal box. This was highly prejudicial
fabrication by the corrupt Passaic County prosecutors. Of course, who would place a metal ammunition
box at his front steps, leave the front door open for the sheriff to come
inside his home to illegally remove him, and then go back 50 feet away from the
door to his back office and start writing emails and doing business for his
clients? Nobody; certainly not Dr. Stephanatos
who is a highly educated individual who holds BS/MS/PhD Degrees in engineering
and a J.D. Degree as well and has served as expert engineer for many years. These are all lies and fabrications of Lucas
and D’Agostino and the Passaic County corrupt prosecutors.
Of course we now know that these were fraudulent and
perjured statements by Lucas and D’Agostino.
The State has admitted before Judge Filko, that the alleged “metal
ammunition box” was a rental instrument contained inside a plastic protective
case (called Pelican case) to be picked up by a vendor of Dr. Stephanatos’
business, Pine Environmental, Inc. the morning of June 28, 2011. The Passaic County prosecutor, Peter Roby,
has already admitted in open court before Judge Filko that it was a rental
instrument for Dr. Stephanatos’ business- however, the prosecutor during the
grand jury proceedings said to the grand jurors that the two lying and corrupt
Sheriff Officers (Lucas and D’Agostino) thought that the business instrument
was “a metal ammunition box”, giving the impression to the grand jurors that I
was prepared for a battle and I had a metal ammunition box at my front porch. (Of course these are insane assertions by
these two crooked deputies, as this was a plastic box and not a metal box and
only an insane moron or a crooked “officer of the law” would mistake it for a
metal ammunition box - please see the
sample images below to see the significant differences between an ammunition
box and a Pelican case). In fact, in
November 2011, when Dr. Stephanatos was allowed to get back his seized business
computers, he was told by the sheriff employee doing the paperwork that the
sheriff did not know what the Pelican case was. Imagine, if these two crooks lied about the
Pelican case, what else have they lied about? – Well, they pretty much lied
just about everything. We demand a full
investigation into their corrupt and perjured testimony, as these two liars
have caused the events of June 28, 2011 through their incompetence and lying
and fabrications and perjured testimonies and false reports.
Typical
metal and plastic ammunition boxes. Note
the significant difference between these boxes and the Pelican case shown
below.
This
image shows a typical Pelican case used to ship scientific instruments similar
to the one seized from Dr. Stephanatos’ front porch. The State has already admitted on the record in
open court before Judge Filko that the Pelican case had been placed at the
porch to be picked up by the vendor, Pines Environmental, Inc. on the morning
of June 28, 2011. The State lied to the
grand jurors and told them that they believed it was a bomb or a metal
ammunition box and that is one of the reasons they believed they were facing a
dangerous person in Dr. Stephanatos.
What a bunch of liers and losers.
Of course later, in November 2011 before Judge Filko, Mr.
Peter Roby, a Passaic County prosecutor, admitted that the business instrument
was not an ammunition box and he did confirm that he talked to Pine
Environmental, Inc and did confirm to him that their employee (the Pine
Environmental driver) was due to come and pick up the instrument that morning
from Dr. Stephanatos’ front porch (this is where I would typically place the various
rental instruments for pickup and delivery).
Again, none of these facts made it to the grand jury, in a clear attempt
by Peter Roby and his associates (such as Water Dewey who made the presentation
to the grand jury) to mislead and lie to the grand jury so that the jurors
believe that somehow Dr. Stephanatos left an illegal or dangerous device at his
front porch. What a bunch of liars these
prosecutors and sheriff deputies are.
The indictment must be dismissed with prejudice, based on these lies and
fabrications and omissions of crucial facts by the State and Passaic County
employees so that they mislead and prejudice the grand jury against Dr.
Stephanatos. In fact Dr. Stephanatos’
lawyer, Mr. Carl Herman, had met and also sent a confirmatory letter to the
Passaic County prosecutors (see Exhibit B for a copy of the letter send to the
State) to allow me to testify during the proceedings regarding the events of
June 28, 2011. However, the Passaic
County prosecutors refused to allow me to testify and present clearly
exculpatory evidence for elements of all the charges. Thus the State fed the grand jury with lies
and fabrications and half “truths”, against the grand jury New Jersey law. Essentially the State impermissibly and
prejudicially interfered with the grand jury’s investigative function.
Lucas Lie #5
Lucas and D’Agostino also claimed that they did not ring
the door bell and that instead, they saw a man waiting for them with a
gun. This is also a fabrication, a lie,
as Lucas rang the doorbell at about 8:52 am (or between 8:50 am and 8:55 am). The sheriff investigation reports show that
other sheriff employees wrote that “somebody answered the door”. These statements corroborate Dr. Stephanatos’
recollection that Lucas rang the doorbell.
When Dr. Stephanatos did not answer the door (I would never answer the
door, and certainly I would not answer it that day), he bypassed the two big
planters and went towards the edge of the porch and started peering inside the
home, as the sun glare makes it impossible to see inside the home during the morning
hours (it is a north/northeast facing home).
That way he performed an illegal search in violation of the Fourth
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and N.J. Const. (1947), Art. I, Par. 7.
Lucas Lie #6
After peering inside the
dwelling, Lucas then jumped off or fell off the edge of the porch, proving that
he was located at the side window peering inside. He does admit in his Investigation
Report that he “jumped off the porch”. He could not simply follow the steps of the
porch the same way D’Agostino did, because the planters blocked his exit from
his location at the edge of the porch.
The only way he could go was behind the bushes. This is crucial evidence, adding credibility
to my scenario and proving yet again that Lucas lied to the grand jurors.
View
of the rhododendron bushes located before Dr. Stephanatos’ dwelling. Photo taken four weeks prior to the tragic
incidents of June 28, 2011. Note the
philodendron subincisum planter at the front of the porch area (middle left in
the above image). At about 8:55 AM on
June 28, 2011, after nobody showed up at the front door, Lucas went behind the
philodendron subincisum planter and placed his face at the side window of the
front door so that he can see inside the home.
This is a criminal activity prohibited under 2C:18-3. Unlicensed entry of structures;
defiant trespasser; peering into dwelling places and an illegal search in
violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and N.J. Const.
(1947), Art. I, Par. 7. Lucas then went
behind the rhododendron bushes where he claimed that he fell and injured his
shoulder. These facts prove beyond any
doubt that Lucas was illegally peering and searching inside a dwelling without
having a Warrant for Removal (see N.J.S.A.
2A:39-1 Unlawful entry
prohibited). He then later claimed that
he was just coming up the front steps to deliver papers (and not to evict Dr.
Stephanatos – what a bunch of hooey) and he was assaulted. He also claimed that a plastic Pelican
scientific case used by vendors of Dr. Stephanatos’ business was a metal
ammunition box, a fraudulent assertion that has been refuted before Judge Filko
by Prosecutor Peter Roby.
Furthermore, it is not
possible that these two individuals did not say anything to me, without
announcing that they were sheriff officers or law enforcement officers and
without me saying anything to them (as they have testified); they were both armed and prejudiced against
me (based on the testimony by Lucas) and it makes no sense that they simply
walked away; the only way this could
have happened is if the doors were both locked (i.e., both the storm and the
main wooden door) and they could not have any contact or communication with me
at that time. These are the same type of
people who shoot to kill citizens in their backs and then plant evidence and
even shoot and kill kids who hold plastic guns.
And they claim they simply walked away?
Hard to believe. Because it is a
total and complete fabrication.
Please note that Lucas and D’Agostino are partners.
They drove in the same car during that day and they testified that they both
walk towards the front steps at the same time. Thus, it makes not much
sense that Lucas would go behind my front bushes (the yews and the
rhododendrons), while D’Agostino would go towards his sheriff car. This
scenario is only likely if Lucas was located in front of the side door window
and at the very edge of it (this is where I saw him standing, having his face
on the glass window and illegally peering inside the home). There was no reason for him to do so, if he
was just delivering papers, as he testified.
He could have left the papers in the mailbox or left them at the door
step.
View of the front door of Dr.
Stephanatos’ dwelling at 687 Indian Road, Wayne, New Jersey. Photo taken from the front of the property,
two months after the tragic incidents of June 28, 2011. Note the significant sun glare, making it
impossible to see inside the home during the morning hours. The philodendron subincisum planter at the
front of the porch area has been removed, as the conspirators emptied Dr.
Stephanatos’ home from all his belongings.
Because of the sun glare, Lucas went behind the philodendron subincisum
planter and placed his face at the side window so that he can see inside the
home. This is a criminal activity
prohibited under 2C:18-3.
Unlicensed entry of structures; defiant trespasser; peering into dwelling
places. Lucas then went behind the
rhododendron bushes where he claimed that he fell and injured his
shoulder. These facts prove beyond any
doubt that Lucas was illegally peering and searching inside a dwelling without
having a Warrant for Removal (see N.J.S.A.
2A:39-1 Unlawful entry
prohibited). He then later claimed that
he was just coming up the steps and he was assaulted. He also claimed that a Pelican scientific
case used by vendors of Dr. Stephanatos’ business was an ammunition box, a
fraudulent assertion that has been refuted before Judge Filko by Prosecutor
Peter Robby.
Very
important: my bushes (yews/rhododendrons) were made of some very hard
wood. It is very difficult to go behind them without being scratched.
Lucas in fact stated to his partner and two other officers that he was
scratched by the woods. This proves that
Lucas was standing at the inaccessible to the public window and was peering
inside Mr. Stephanatos’ residence – this is a criminal act under New Jersey law
and an illegal act under federal law.
Furthermore,
Lucas and D’Agostino testified/wrote that they split in two different
directions. Lucas went towards the “woods” (he meant the bushes located
before Dr. Stephanatos’ residence), while D’Agostino went towards the sheriff
cars parked at the top of the driveway. This can only happen if Lucas was
standing at the edge of the porch at the side door window and from there he
went behind the bushes (the “woods”) located in the front of the home.
That was the only route he had available, because the two planters were in his
way and he could not go back towards the door easily. This proves my
allegation that Lucas was standing at the very edge of the porch and by the
side door window, peering inside the home.
D’Agostino was standing in the walkway, and from there he walked towards
the sheriff cars at the top of the driveway.
If
both of them were standing in front of the door, there is no reason for them to
take different routes. All these facts
provide irrefutable proof that these two crooked “officers of the law” have
committed perjury.
AND NOW THE BOMBSHELL OF THE
CENTURY
All the above lies and fabrications and inconsistencies
make one wonder: how is it possible
these sheriff employees made so many mistakes in recollection the evidence? Well, the answer to this question is that Ron
Lucas was not the person peering through the side window of Dr.
Stephanatos. It was another young
sheriff employee who switched places with Ron Lucas because Lucas was the only sworn
law enforcement officer. Lucas however,
cannot get his story straight and has mady so many errors and there are
numerous inconsistencies in his story and between what he wrote in his report
and between what D’Agostino wrote and said.
Lucas was not the person
illegally peering through Defendant’s side window, as the Defendant has
recently obtained a photo of Lucas and he is not the person that he saw having
stuck his face onto the side window;
Defendant remembers a young person peering through his side window; that
person had full set of hair and no facial hair, while Lucas is in his 50s and
has facial hair and he is very-very bold.
The young sheriff employee was in his late 20s to early 30s and had full
set of hair and also had very sharp eyes illegally searching inside the residence
as the Defendant did not answer the door at 8:50 am. Defendant hereby requests a list of the names
of all Sheriff employees who were originally dispatched at the 687 Indian Road
property at 8:50 am. This is obviously a
bomb-shell, as it will expose the conspiracy among these Sheriff employees to
frame the Defendant.
The
lying corrupt thug, Ronad A. Lucas.
I am attaching the original charge filed by Lucas on
6/28/2011 under Section NJS 2C:17-2C. As
you can see, he wrote the reason for the charge is “PLACING SLIVER[sic] METAL
CONTAINER ON HIS FRONT STEPS CAUSING THE EVACUATION OF NEIGHBORS”. As you know by now, this was a BLACK PLASTIC
SAFETY CONTAINER FOR MY BUSINESS INSTRUMENT placed there to be picked up by the
vendor, Pines Environmental. Note that Lucas
writes: “SLIVER [sic]” (he meant silver). However, this was a black plastic instrument
case. This is another clue telling me that Lucas was not there to
eye-witness the instrument.
THIS IS VERY SERIOUS
ALLEGATION AND THIS COURT MUST PERFORM AN URGENT INVESTIGATION.
The Seven Shades of Lucas
These corrupt liars cannot get their story straight – can
this Court imagine what will happen when we cross-examine them? According to the old maxim, “False in one –
false in all”, we respectfully submit that Ronald Lucas and Victor D’Agostino
cannot be trusted, they lied and fabricated their stories to serve the people
who hired them, i.e., the conspirators Robert Del Vecchio, American Tax
Funding, et al. If they lied in one or
several parts of their story, then the entire deposition must be dismissed.
It is important to note that Lucas has changed his story
a number of times: at one time he claims
that he was walking the front stairs and he saw a man standing there and
pointing a gun; at another version he claims that he was standing at the open
door and that he then saw a person coming towards him; at a third time he
claims that there was an altercation; at a forth scenario, he claims that Dr.
Stephanatos never said anything to him (i.e., that there was no altercation);
at a fifth scenario, he wrote in his report that he “jumped of the porch”
(meaning that he was already on the porch and not just coming up the stairs);
at a sixth version he claims that he never rang the doorbell; at a seven
scenario, he stated to his colleagues that he rang the doorbell (this is
confirmed by the statement of other officers who wrote that Lucas told them
that Dr. Stephanatos answered the door); at another version, he claims that Dr.
Stephanatos was barricaded, yet he also claimed that Dr. Stephanatos had his
front door wide open; at another version he claims that he saw a “shotgun”
pointed at him (this was also published in the news media and reported in some
sheriff employee reports, but no “shotgun was ever found because it was a
fabrication by Lucas the Lier) but then he changed his story (after he had a
chance to illegally enter my home) and now he claims that he saw a single-shot Ruger
hunting rifle; in another version he claims that he saw a bomb at the porch,
only to change his story and claim that he saw a “metal ammunition box” – the
State has already admitted that none of these fabrications were true and that
it was a Pelican case used in Dr. Stephanatos’ business that was about to be
picked up by the owner of the case, Pine Environmental, Inc.. However, the State never made these findings
aware to the grand jury.
All these versions have been presented by Lucas, without
having been cross examined by the defense, without placing a time table to his
story elements and without cross-referencing the story given by D’Agostino in
his testimony and his Investigation Report and corroboration with the
investigation reports of others. Can this
Court imagine the Perry Mason moments, when we will cross-examine these liars?
The Fabrications and Intentional Omissions of
Walter Dewey
The
prosecutor, Walter Dewey, also mislead the jurors and fabricated “facts” by
eliciting false testimony from Officer D’Agostino regarding the pointing of a
gun out of a “window”. The officers had
indicated that they saw me standing behind a glass storm door and that I never
opened the door. No “window” was ever
mentioned by the two individuals, as no window exists in the front porch of the
dwelling.
(I denied
that I was standing behind the storm door:
I have stated many times that I was in my office doing my business, I
have the computer records to prove it, those records were submitted to the
prosecutors, and I kept the doors of the home locked with a deadbolt).
But the
prosecutor asked D’Agostino if I was pointing a gun “out the window”. Then D’Agostino said “yes”. This Court should note that there is no
window in the front porch- that was another misleading and prejudicial question
by the corrupt Passaic County prosecutor.
The prosecutors obviously wanted to mislead and lie to the grand jury by
stating that the defendant was pointing a weapon outside a window, something
that the two sheriff employees never wrote in their reports, as no window was
involved. In fact, Lucas never testified
or wrote that the defendant was pointing a weapon outside a window. The corrupt prosecutor Walter Dewey elicited
this statement from D’Agostino only.
Certainly this is a fraudulent and misleading question/statement that
will most certainly damage the State’s “case” (the State never had any case,
they just made this up as they were going along; we now know that no “shotgun” was ever found,
and no “metal ammunition box was ever found”, and no “bomb” was ever found. So these corrupt liars made up a story to
tell the grand jury and the public to justify their wrongful actions.)
As the
defendant has stated before, both the wooden door and the storm door were
closed; the defendant locked the main door with a deadbolt, as always does, because
he lived in a remote and wooded area of Wayne and he was always afraid for his
security. Since he has a legal
background (he was studying for the final exams of the final year of law school
during that week), he knew that if he left the door open (or any window), then
he would have been consenting to an entry inside the home by the Passaic County
employees. There is no way on earth that
he would leave the door open and the computer records show that he was in his
office doing his business and sending emails- none of that information was
allowed by the corrupt prosecutors to be submitted to the grand jury.
Here is
another example of the fraudulent tactics of the Passaic County prosecutor to
lie and mislead the grand jury:
Count 4 charges that the defendant “did recklessly create
a risk of widespread injury or damage by purposely or knowingly barricading
himself into 687 Indian Road . . . while armed with a deadly weapon, contrary
to the provisions of N.J.S. 2C:17-2c.” (Da4; emphasis supplied).
N.J.S.A. 2C:17-2c provides, in pertinent part:
A person who recklessly creates a risk of widespread
injury or damage commits a crime of the fourth degree, even if no such injury
or damage occurs.
N.J.S.A. 2C:17-2e provides: “For purposes of this
section, widespread injury or damage means serious bodily injury to five or
more people or damage to five or more habitations or to a building which would
normally have contained 25 or more persons at the time of the offense.”
It is important to note here that the defendant’s home is
in an isolated area of Wayne, New Jersey.
There are no homes neighboring to the north. There is only one home neighboring to the
east (about 50 feet away) where there was only one woman present and another to
the west (about 100 feet away) where the owners were at work. Thus, this charge is also fraudulent, as less
than five people and less than five habitations were within 100 feet from
defendant’s home. Another example of the
prosecutorial misconduct faced by the defendant.
This
obviously corrupt prosecutor also refused to allow Dr. Stephanatos to testify
to the grand jury to present facts about the defense. He refused to do so and presented numerous
lies and fabrications and refused to provide clearly exculpatory evidence. What a corrupt thug right there in Passaic
County. Only god knows how many people
he has wrongfully convicted.
A
JUDGMENT RENDERED WITHOUT PROPER SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION IS VOID. SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION CANNOT BE WAIVED
BY THE PARTIES OR OTHERWISE AVOIDED
JURISDICTION OF THE NEW JERSEY COURTS
To further prove that a
Chancery Court has no subject matter jurisdiction over land possession issues, here
is the jurisdiction of the New Jersey courts, as is provided at http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/civil/. As you can see, the Chancery
Court has no Jurisdiction over property possession issues. On the other
hand, the Law Division handles either the Landlord-Tenant issues(to
summary dispossession actions) or actions for possession of real estate
(unlawful detainer/writ of possession). This is very critical
information, as you can imagine.
Superior Court, Law
Division, Special Civil Part
The
Special Civil Part handles claims for monetary damages of $15,000 or less
(unless the overage is waived) and unlawful detainer actions. Case types
typically filed in the Special Civil Part are damage claims arising from
contract, consumer debt, auto negligence property damage, and statutory penalty
enforcement, and non-monetary matters such as writs of replevins and actions
for possession of real estate (unlawful detainer/writ of possession). Judges
without a jury typically adjudicate Special Civil Part cases. There are
approximately 406,000 cases filed in the Special Civil Part each year.
The
Special Civil Part, Small Claims Section handles cases in which the demand is
$3,000 or less and actions for the return of all or part of a security deposit
when the amount does not exceed $5000. Annually, approximately 35,000 cases are
filed with the Small Claims section.
The
Special Civil Part, Landlord - Tenant Section has limited, special
jurisdiction. It is limited to summary dispossession actions in which the
dispute arise out of a landlord - tenant relationship. The only relief
available is whether possession is returned to the landlord with the tenant’s
summary removal from the property. Annually, approximately 170,000 cases are
filed with the Landlord-Tenant section.
For
more information on Special Civil Part click here.
Superior Court,
Chancery Division, General Equity
Chancery
Division, General Equity handle claims for non-monetary relief, such as
restrictive covenant enforcement, labor injunctions, foreclosures, and
corporation or partnership governance disputes. A judge without a jury tries
General Equity cases. There are approximately 8,900 cases filed in General
Equity each year.
The above prove beyond any doubt that the Chancery Judge
had no jurisdiction over the possession issue and any orders issued by a court
devoid of subject matter jurisdiction are void and cannot be enforced. The worst part here is that this “adjudged”
possession judgment was never adjudicated, as there was never a hearing or
trial ever took place. The convicted
conspirators simply wrote that language into a “final judgment” issued in May
2011 and gave it to a Chancery judge in another county, Mercer County, to sign
it. Then they obtained an ex-parte Writ
of Possession from a Clerk of Mercer County (note that the subject property was
located in Passaic County, and the Mercer County Clerk had no jurisdiction over
the Defendant’s property located in Passaic County).
As defined by our Supreme Court in James v. Francesco, 61
N.J. 480, 485 (1972), "a judgment is void if there has been a failure to
comply with a requirement which is a condition precedent to the exercise of
jurisdiction by the court." A void judgment is one rendered by a court
lacking jurisdiction with regard to the party against whom it is rendered or
lacking jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action, Restatement,
Judgments (2d) Section 1 pp 30-33 (1982), and it may be set aside without the
need of showing a meritorious defense. See Jameson v. Great Atlantic, 363 N.J.
Super. 419, 425 (App. Div. 2003). New Century Financial Services, Inc. v. Suk
Cha Carrero, Appellate Division, Superior Court, February 2007, Docket No.
A-3926-05T23926-05T2.
Thus, the “final judgment cited by the State was void,
not voidable. It had no legal effect
whatsoever. Thus, any Writ issued
pursuant to such void judgment was also void, of no legal effect.
A judgment is void for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction when the court has no authority to adjudicate the controversy. See
Bank v. Kim, 361 N.J. Super. 331, 339
(App. Div. 2003) (mortgage foreclosure judgment void in violation of
bankruptcy automatic stay). Here, the Chancery court had no subject matter
jurisdiction over the property possession issue and thus any order issued by
that court was void, a legal nullity.
HOW THE CONSPIRATORS MANAGED TO FOOL (OR CONSPIRED WITH) THE
COURTS
Despite the luck of any fact finding by Judge McVeigh
(Judge McVeigh never conducted a bench trial to determine the facts consistent
with Rule 1:7-4(a)), on May 13, 2011, the Mercer County Honorable Mary C.
Jacobson, P.J.Ch., entered a “final judgment” against defendant in favor of
American Tax Funding, LLC (“ATFH”). (Final Judgment annexed at Da44-46) upon
the presentation to that court of a form that had been prepared by the
conspirator Robert Del Vecchio. That form
includes language “AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the plaintiff
dully recover against the said defendant …possession of the premises… and that
a Writ of Possession issue thereon”.
Contrary to what the conspirators wrote in this form and presented to a
Mercer County Court for signing, there
was never an adjudication of the possession of the premises. There
is no judicial record that the State can provide that indicates that such
possession litigation ever took place.
As was stated in the previous section, the Chancery Court had no subject
matter jurisdiction over the property possession issue and it could not have
been adjudicated by that court. This
fact alone provides clear and convincing evidence of a conspiracy between
McVeigh and the convicted criminals (Robert Del Vecchio, ATF, and others) to
defraud the Defendant of his property and business.
Basically the conspirators presented to the Mercer County
court a form that has adjudicated both the ownership issue and the possession
issue. The conspirators managed to fool
the Mercer County court clerk by providing this fraudulently prepared form that
states that the possession issue has been adjudged by the Passaic County
Chancery Court. Basically, the
conspirators took advantage of the dysfunctional legal system of New Jersey where
one court does the fact finding and another court signs the orders (and in this
instant case, Judge McVeigh of Passaic County Chancery Court, never held any
fact finding and application of the facts to the law session in violation of
Rule 1:7-4(a). The conspirator Robert
Del Vecchio took full advantage of this confusion and managed to full the court
system.
This final judgment also contains the language “This
judgment shall not affect the rights of any person protected by the New Jersey
Tenant Anti-Eviction Act (N.J.S.A, 2A:18-61.1 et seq.)” (Da45). The significance of this clause is discussed
in the Motion to Change Venue brief and it is applicable here as Defendant’s
businesses (Metropolitan Environmental Services and Metropolitan Environmental
Services, PC) were tenants at that property and could not have been evicted
without legal process. The Writ of
Possession fraudulently obtained by the conspirator Robert Del Vecchio did not
include Metropolitan Environmental Services.
However, the Passaic County Sheriff did evict these business tenants
without having a Writ of Removal or a Warrant for Removal. This is an undeniable fact and proves beyond
any doubt that the sheriff employees did violate the Defendant’s possessory
rights and caused massive economic and non-economic injuries in the process.
These practices by these convicted criminals have been
criticized by the state of New Jersey and the Public Advocate Division.
See for example the following excerpt from the “Toolkit for Tenants Living
in Foreclosed Properties”, published by the Department of the Public
Advocate, Trenton, NJ 08625, dated March 2010:
Courts and Sheriffs
In
addition to owners and those who work for them, the courts and sheriff officers
sometimes mistakenly target protected tenants during the foreclosure process.
The writs of execution and final foreclosure judgments are drafted by the
attorneys for the lenders. The attorneys sometimes use language in court papers
that cause problems because it seems to cover tenants (for example, “and any
and all persons occupying said premises”). Other times attorneys specifically
name tenants and certify (swear to the court) that those tenants are not
covered by the Anti-Eviction Act. This
is especially problematic because tenants often do not have the opportunity to
demonstrate that they are in fact legitimate tenants until after the removal
has already been ordered by the court and scheduled by the sheriff. If a court
order specifically names a tenant to be removed, the sheriff must evict that
person. Sometimes, however, sheriffs read the language in the order and believe
that they must evict everyone. Also, some notices that sheriffs create and post
on property include language, such as “occupants” instead of “owners,” that
appears to include tenants. The
Attorney General distributed a memo to sheriffs regarding the rights of tenants
living in foreclosed properties.
Thus,
the judges and the sheriff knew of the practices of Del Vecchio and ATF; yet,
the sheriff employees acted as agents for Del Vecchio and intentionally
violated Dr. Stephanatos’ possessory rights, including a host of other
offenses. Dr. Stephanatos had informed
the two judges and the sheriff of these practices by Del Vecchio and ATF and
had alerted the authorities (the sheriff, the governor, the local senator
O’Toole, etc.) that these individuals are breaking a host of state and federal
laws. Dr. Stephanatos also filed appeals
and suits to vacate the tax deed.
Dr. Stephanatos also had significant possessory interest,
including the filing of a Suit to Vacate the Tax Deed, the filing of two
appeals, the possession of a business in the premises, and the right to buy
back the rights to the property. See N.J.S.A. 54:5-104.100. This
state law is consistent with the legislative findings in N.J.S.A.
2A:18-61.1a. See also Royal Tax Lien Services, LLC v Morodan,
Appellate Division, Docket No. A-1211-14T3, July 20, 2015 wherein the court
stated:
On the other hand, the tax sale laws and our court rules are designed
to allow owners to redeem their properties where possible, and to receive relief from inequitable judgments. The analysis
found in I.E. clearly favors defendants, and although not binding upon us, it clearly and convincingly outlines the equitable weight
that should be accorded to a defendant’s concerns in this scenario, the
consequences of which are draconian.
The equities at stake can
vary when the redemption value is disproportionately low relative to the
owner's equity in the property. As the court stated in I.E.'s, LLC v. Simmons,
392 N.J. Super. 520, 536 (Law Div. 2006), the law results in a "harshness
of the tax sale certificate proceedings in this State, where people with
substantial equity in a property, for whatever reason, fail to pay property
taxes and thereafter default in the tax sale certificate foreclosure
proceedings."
In that case, the redemption amount was $22,837.50 and the property's
value was $275,000. Ibid. That disparity is similar in magnitude to the
disparity in this case. That opinion also stated:
Until the Legislature devises a better system, courts of equity
must do their best to balance the equities, taking into account the necessity
of allowing the transfer of clear title and the need to compel the payment of
property taxes against the necessity of ameliorating, in appropriate
circumstances, the onerous impact of the procedure in circumstances where the
party has remained in possession of the property and has substantial equity in
it.
[Id. at 537.]
This Court should also compare the law of the state of
New York, where similar process must be followed, i.e., the issue of possession
must be decided by a Law Division judge:
NEW YORK STATE REAL PROPERTY ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS LAW(RPAPL)
ARTICLE 7
SUMMARY PROCEEDING TO RECOVER POSSESSION OF REAL PROPERTY
Sec. 713. GROUNDS
WHERE NO LANDLORD-TENANT RELATIONSHIP EXISTS.
A special proceeding
may be maintained under this article after a ten-day notice to quit has
been served upon the respondent in the manner prescribed in section 735, upon
the following grounds:
1. The
property has been sold by virtue of an execution against him or a person under
whom he claims and a title under the sale has been perfected.
2. He
occupies or holds the property under an agreement with the owner to occupy and
cultivate it upon shares or for a share of the crops and the time fixed in the
agreement for his occupancy has expired.
3. He or
the person to whom he has succeeded has intruded into or squatted upon the
property without the permission of the person entitled to possession and the
occupancy has continued without permission or permission has been revoked
and notice of the revocation given to the person to be removed.
4. The
property has been sold for unpaid taxes and a tax deed has been executed
and delivered to the purchaser and he or any subsequent grantee,
distributee or devisee claiming title through such purchaser has complied
with all provisions of law precedent to the right to possession and
the time of redemption by the former owner or occupant has expired.
5. The
property has been sold in foreclosure and either the deed delivered pursuant to
such sale, or a copy of such deed, certified as provided in the civil
practice law and rules, has been exhibited to him.
Based on New Jersey and New York law, including the law
of all other states, to remove a person in possession, the owner must occupy
the premises himself (this was not the case here) or no rent was being paid or
for breach of the peace. In other words, only after they met few
exceptions (such as not paying rent, etc.) and through an Order from a Law
Division Judge could have allowed these defendants to enter Dr. Stephanatos’
property and to remove him from his dwelling. They did not follow the
Wrongful Entry and Detainer Act and the Anti-Eviction Act, or the Summary
Dispossess Act and they willfully lied to the Mercer County Clerk in May 2011
that there were no tenants in the premises (see Exhibit B in Attachment 7 for
the willful misrepresentation by Robert Del Vecchio that no tenants were
present at the residence of Dr. Stephanatos and that Dr. Stephanatos had no
possessory interests in his home).
The defendants also knew
that the Wrongful or Unlawful Entry statutes protect Plaintiff’s right to
remain in possession of his residence. Specifically, N.J.S.A. 2A:39-7
says that title shall not be an issue since Plaintiff was in continuous
possession of his residence for 16 years.
N.J.S.A. 2A:39-7
Title not inquired into; defense of 3 years possession
Title shall not be an
issue in any action commenced under this chapter. 3 years peaceable possession
by the defendant shall be a defense to the action.
Defendants Del Vecchio and ATF failed to disclose these
statutes to the sheriff that prevent the sheriff from evicting a person from a
residential property without a Warrant for Removal. This way they managed to fool the sheriff to
perform an unlawful search and unlawful entry and to forcefully remove Dr.
Stephanatos from his lawfully-occupied residence on June 28, 2011. The
New Jersey Law clearly says that these individuals can be charged with criminal
trespass, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:18-3, including many other criminal
charges, such as Theft by Unlawful Taking, Robbery, Burglary, etc.
Dr. Stephanatos’ possessory interest in his home could
not have been violated by the defendants without the very specific legal
process of N.J.S.A. 2A:18-53 et seq.[1]
However, the defendants willfully violated Dr. Stephanatos’ legal rights
It is very crucial for this Court to understand that the
conspirators never instituted such land possession proceedings before any court
of competent jurisdiction. It is
mandatory that summary dispossess proceedings, civil action for the possession
of land, or otherwise be held by the conspirators, in accordance with New
Jersey law, but the conspirators intentionally did not do that. These convicted criminals simply drafted the
document entitled “Final Judgment” and they gave it to a Judge in Mercer County
(Judge Jacobson) to sign the two pages. This
was part of the conspiratory scheme of these criminals, i.e., to file false
certifications with the courts, to mislead the courts in signing judgements of
possession without holding any hearing or any New Jersey law-mandated legal
process. The State has not and cannot provide ANY legal proceedings to this
Court where the Judgment of Possession was adjudicated. And certainly cannot provide any evidence
regarding such proceedings against Metropolitan Environmental Services, a
proper and legal tenant of the 687 Indian Road premises.
Importantly, the New Jersey law allows for extension of
the eviction time, even in case where a valid Writ was issued. See N.J.S.A.
2A:42-10.6. Here, the Defendant
called and wrote and pled with the conspirators and Judge McVeigh to stop the
illegal onslaught and to stay the illegal eviction, but to no avail. Judge McVeigh sure should have known that no
eviction hearings (Judgment of Possession) were ever held. She should have known that what the
conspirators were doing was illegal; she
could not have been that incompetent of a judge. Perhaps she is an incompetent judge, as she
also failed to consider defendant’s full equity in his home (as is mandated by New
Jersey case law (see Royal Tax Lien
Services, LLC v Morodan, Appellate Division, Docket No. A-6030-12T1, July
3, 2014)) and she never conducted a bench trial to determine the facts consistent
with Rule 1:7-4(a).
Judge Jacobson in Mercer County simply issued a judgment
against defendant based on the statements of the conspirators Robert Del
Vecchio and American Tax Funding (ATF).
The entire panorama of circumstances indicate that defendant was denied
due process. There are issues and
defenses of entrapment, duress and improper government conduct.
It is the Defendant’s position that New Jersey’s
Anti-Eviction Act (N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1 et seq.) and New Jersey’s
Foreclosure Fairness Act (N.J.S.A. 2A:50-69 thru 72) were violated by the
State’s and conspirators’ actions in this case as they evicted a legal tenant
of the premises, Metropolitan Environmental Services. The fraudulently obtained Writ of Possession
cited by the State, does not include Metropolitan Environmental Services and
the Defendant had the right to defend his business from illegal eviction. Even more importantly, State Law requires a
Warrant for eviction of a residential tenant.
[1]
2A:39-1 Unlawful entry prohibited. With
regard to any real property occupied solely as a residence by the party
in possession, such entry shall not be made in any manner without the
consent of the party in possession
unless the entry and detention is made pursuant to legal process
as set out in N.J.S.2A:18-53 et seq., as amended and supplemented; P.L.1974,
c.49 (C.2A:18-61.1 et al.), as amended and supplemented; P.L.1975, c.311
(C.2A:18-61.6 et al.), as amended and supplemented; P.L.1978, c.139
(C.2A:18-61.6 et al.), as amended and supplemented; the "Tenant Protection
Act of 1992," P.L.1991, c.509 (C.2A:18-61.40 et al.); or N.J.S.2A:35-1 et
seq. and "The Fair Eviction Notice Act," P.L.1974, c.47
(C.2A:42-10.15 et al.).