Judge Johnson's Attorneys Response

On Wednesday, March 8, 2012, the judge's attorneys submitted their response.  They obviously spent a lot of time and money on weak arguments that our legal experts think, and I hope, will go nowhere.  The only way we can now respond is if the Court of Appeals asks us for a response.  They could make a decision with, or without, our response.  The questions asked by the court is what shows that the offenses, or offices, of the named suspects occurred in, or are located in, Dane County (Madison), Wisconsin.  Answer- All of the named suspect's offices are located in Dane County.  But the truth has never been important to the "Good Ole Boys" when they make there decisions.  Maybe it will be now, considering the disarray our courts have been in.  Please stay tuned.

Court of Appeals Order 2-10-12

This is today's order from the Court of Appeals.

Legal experts agree that Ira Robins is correct on jurisdiction.

THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMENT

Here is the statement on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals Web-site:

"COMMENT: AAG Rice, Potter, and Weber removed from case,"

Ira Robins believes "They should also be removed from office."

A SMALL VICTORY

On Monday, 12-19-2011, Attorney Joseph Owens advised Ira Robins that the Wisconsin Court of Appeals has notified him that the Attorney General's Office no longer represents the judge that dismissed Robins' Petition and Complaint for a John Doe Investigation.  The judge has now retained a private law firm to defend himself for his pathetic decision to dismiss the action.  It is obvious that the "Good Ole Boy" judge was just looking of a reason to dismiss the case of evidence tampering and criminal Misconduct in Public Office that Robins alleged.  Robins submitted ample evidence to prove his allegations  It is even more obvious that Robins will "Never Give Up." 

As you might recall, Robins, through his Attorney Owens, has been claiming a serious confilct of interest existed by the Attorney General representing the dismissing judge in the appeal.  Especially, since the Attorney General and the head of the appellate division were both named as defendants in the Petition and both were representing the judge.  What they were all doing was wrong and now maybe the Court of Appals can see just how unethically and criminally they have acted.

Stay Tuned.

JOHN DOE REQUEST

On October 19, 2010 Ira Robins filed a formal request for a John Doe Criminal Investigation (along with substantial evidence) into the crimes committed by State Crime Labratory supervisors and the Attorney General during the DNA hearings in the Laurie Bembenek case and 23 others.  They had placed a false document in the murder file to verify the lies told by the Milwaukee County District Attorney and changed the official protocols to obtain false opinions from their ballistic experts. They admitted their criminal acts in sworn deposition. Their actions gave a dishonest advantage to the state and are considered criminal acts under Wisconsin law of Misconduct in Public Office.

The Petition was filed in Dane County (Madison), Wisconsin and the original judge sent it to the District Attorney of that County who by law had 90 days to begin the process and send a report back to the judge.  During that time Robins repeated requested a special prosecutor be appointed as the DA has a working relationship with the people he had named as defendants in the petition.  The judge never appointed a special prosecutor and the DA returned his report 9 days late with the first two pages naming other parties he knows and works with that were involved in the Bembenek case and claiming he had no conflict of interest.  Any legal scholar will tell you he did.  Additionally, he stated he would not conduct a John Doe as Dane County did not have the funds to do so.  In essence he now knows about the cimes commited by the State Crime Labratory, and its lost integrity, but continues to use it to prosecute unsuspecting defendants.

The Dane County judge, apparently realizing his potential conflict, then recused himself from the matter and another judge from Delevan Wisconsin was then appointed.  That judge wrote a 15 page decision that claimed the Petition was filed in the wrong county. He is incorrect.  Legal scholars will also tell you that the law is clear that the judge is plain wrong.  The Attorney General heads the Department of Justice who in turn heads the Crime Labratory.  Since Robins notified the Attorney General about the criminal conduct and he and his underlings are involved in the criminal acts and their offices are in Dane County that is where the John Doe should be conducted.  So, Robins filed an Appeal on the Judges Decision.  As of December 12, 2011 he is still waiting.

Note: The judge is now represented by the Attorney General in the appeal.  That is in itself another conflict of interest.  But when did the Attorney General ever care about ethics or honesty.  Not in the Laurie Bembenek case or the other 23 cases Robins named.  The fix is still on.

More Evidence of Corruption

Please check out http://irarobinsreports.blogspot.com for evidence of corruption within the Wisconsin court system.  Also, new information will soon appear on this blog.  Stay tuned.

Part 17 C: Petition For John Doe Investigation

(SECTIONS 2 & 3 – MALONEY & PAULUS)

The following is the continuation of the Petition and Complaint requesting a John Doe Investigation that Investigative Consultant Ira Robins filed on October 19, 2010. (Exhibit 17-C-1)

Attached to the Petition was a letter from Sheila Berry, President of Truth in Justice, a nationally recognized, non-profit organization that educates about the wrongfully convicted. That letter contains corroborating information that supports Robins’ Petition. (Exhibit 17-C-2)

Exhibit 17-C-1

Exhibit 17-C-2

PART 17-D – COMING SOON

HOW A JOHN DOE INVESTIGATION WORKS

(LETTERS – JUDGE TO DA, ROBINS TO DA, DA TO ROBINS, ROBINS TO JUDGE, AND ROBINS TO JUDGE, DA to JUDGE, AND MOTION TO APPOINT A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR FILED BY ROBINS.)