rizona Lawyers on the “Battlefield"
standing up against "illegal Immigration"...Disbarred by Arizona
LANCASTER,
CA, USA, January 1, 2017
Courts
were very liberal, didn’t want to enforce illegal immigration laws…Attorneys
are afraid to actually represent their clients aggressively, because they are
afraid of what the Bar might do to them,” says Lisa Aubuchon, Former Arizona
Deputy County Attorney.
Rachel
Alexander, whose professional career in Arizona also consisted of the
following: Assistant Attorney General, Deputy County Attorney and Special
Assistant for Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.
Alexander goes on to say, she
was suspended for writing an article about Arizona with Fox News; and for
placing her name on a Federal Civil Racketeering (“RICO”) lawsuit with Maricopa
County Sheriff Arpaio, related to a Court Tower. Alexander also said, she was
suspended for one year and a day, which is essentially a Defacto Disbarment.
Jeffrey Moffatt, Federal Attorney –
Censured for telling a judge in Washington, D.C. that he and Secretary of the
Veterans Administration, should be criminally prosecuted for denying a Veteran
his Benefits…
Click on the below Video Link, to see interviews with Alexander, Aubuchon and
Moffatt by Ernie White.
Video Produced by Ernie White Media Productions
William J. O’Neil, State Supreme
Court of Arizona Presiding Disciplinary Judge, has publicly warned Arizona
attorneys “you don’t want to come before me!”
O’Neil has also gone on the record
to say, that when an attorney is disciplined by the Court and “cites criminal
and civil laws” as defenses, they don’t apply in his court room. Disciplinary
proceedings for Arizona attorneys are different and unique, because the Court
uses “Sui-Generis” Disciplinary proceedings.
Consequently, -- “Sui generis is one
of those Latin expressed terms a student is introduced to in law school and, if
taught properly, learns never to use in legal writing.
Sui generis is clearly what Justice
Elena Kagan and three other justices think about two recent decisions of the
United States Supreme Court in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. ___, 2013
U.S. LEXIS 2544 (2013) and Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, 569 U.S. ___,
2013 U.S. LEXIS 3157 (2013). Justice Kagan explains in her dissenting opinion
in”... Source: http://www.law360.com/articles/438426/sui-generis-at-supreme-court
Note, Lisa Aubuchon, Deputy County
Attorney was admitted to the Arizona Bar in year 1990 and Andrew Thomas,
Maricopa County Attorney was admitted to the Arizona Bar in year 1991, yet both
were disbarred by a person not admitted to practice law in Arizona.
Rachel
Alexander was admitted to the Arizona Bar year 2000, also suspended by the same
person not admitted to practice law in Arizona.
The same person not admitted to
practice law in Arizona also wrote a 247 pages, Opinion and Order Imposing
Sanctions against (Aubuchon/Thomas) and against (Alexander), dated April 10,
2012, Case No.: PDJ-2011-9002.
The
Opinion and Order Imposing Sanctions, also appears not to have been signed by
the non-licensed Arizona attorney, with his own handwritten signature to
authenticate such "Opinion and Order Imposing Sanctions."
Needless to say, both Alexander and
Aubuchon, were questioned why the 247 Pages Opinion & Order Imposing
Sanctions was not authenticated by the person not admitted to practice law in
Arizona, they responded in a consensus: “no matter what defense motions we
submitted, no matter what evidence we submitted each and every single piece of
defense evidence and discovery offered, were all “DENIED” by O’Neil and the
Court.
CONCLUSION
If Aubuchon, Alexander and Thomas
want reinstatement of their Bar cards, they are required to Stipulate disciplinary
- “costs and expenses…jointly and severally…in the amount of $101,292.75.”
QUESTIONS
PRESENTED
Doesn’t it appear to you, that
Arizona Attorneys are treated worse than illegal Criminal Aliens, who cross the
Mexico Border on a daily basis into Arizona?
Whether attorney Bar[s] / Courts can suspend or disbar a person from practice
of law in conflict to U.S. Constitutional protections, found within 5th and
14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution?
Law 360 says, in part “Sui Generis…Latin expressed terms a student is
introduced to in law school… learns never to use in legal writing.” Now for
those reasonable minded “True American Citizen’s,” if Law 360 says NEVER to use
“Sui Generis” in legal writing[s], then why is O’Neil and Court, having a pattern
and practice to discipline Arizona Attorneys with “Sui Generis” disciplinary
proceedings?
Do you believe any attorney disciplined by a Bar Association, Tax Exempt
Organization or a Non-Profit Organization, that uses “Sui Generis” disciplinary
proceedings, is deprived of procedural due processes, applicable to both
Federal and State Constitutional protections?
Whether “Sui Generis” disciplinary
proceedings create a new body of Law?
Final questions, to other persons holding professional licenses, how would you
feel if you came under discipline proceedings by your supposed regulatory
agency and they assigned a person not licensed to discipline and prosecute you?
Would you also feel injustice has reared its ugly head, because your
professional license was either Suspended or Revoked, by someone not licensed
within your professional field; thereby taking away your livelihood and food
off your table from you and your family?
For media inquiries, contact Star Moffatt, Spokeswoman for Law Offices of Jeffrey Moffatt (Moffatt Law Firm),
Investigative Journalist and California State Senate Candidate 2012/2016 at:
star@jeffmoffattlawfirm.com, star@mofffattlawfirm.com or telephone (661)
945-6121.
Posts
