 |
| Ted Taupier and his children |
|
|
|
|
 |
| Judge Gold who holds Ted Taupier's fate in his hands & Jennifer Verraneault who started this Quagmire - for personal gain |
Article on Ted Taupier
The
Demand to the State of Connecticut to look into the Judicial / Criminal Acts
against EDWARD TAUPIER FOR THE FOLLOWING under
Case No. CR14-0675616-T
In the
Superior Court of the Judicial District of Middletown Connecticut:
Rights
being Denied to Ted Taupier
THE FIRST AMENDMENT: FREEDOM OF RELIGION, SPEECH AND THE
PRESS.
THE SECOND AMENDEMNT: THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: PROTECTION FROM UNREASONABLE
SEARCHES AND SEIZURES
THE FIFTH AMENDMENT: PROTECTION OF RIGHTS TO LIFE,
LIBERTY, AND PROPERTY
THE SIXTH AMENDMENT: RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSON IN CRIMINAL
CASES
THE EIGHT AMENDMENT: EXCESSIVE BAIL, FINES and
PUNISHMENTS FORBIDDEN ET AL
THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL WITHOUT EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS
WITH THE PROSECUTOR AND A JUDGE WHO IS NOT RULING IN
FAVORITISM AND
CRONYISM
COMES NOW JW Grenadier with site ProSe
America and a press pass in Maryland reminds this court of its fiduciary
responsibility to Edward Taupier, to the United States of America and the State
of Connecticut. That the Oaths of Office
that both the Prosecutor and Judge Gold took was to protect the right of all to
enforce the United States Constitution, to enforce the Rules and Laws of the
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
That JW Grenadier spoke openly and with “TRUTH” to the
prosecutor Brenda Hans who took JWG’s words with no evidence of what JWG spoke
to Mr. Taupier and twisted them to act in collusion by all appearance with
Tanya Taupier and Antena who by all appearance is trying to hide what their
policy with interoffice romance is.
That on line there is Radio Shows, Facebook comments,
along with several other reporters from Florida to Chicago writing about this
scheme to take Mr. Taupier’s Constitutional rights from him.
That the actions of the courts have been excessive,
harassing with knowledgeable intend to harm Mr. Taupier. That Judges do have immunity when their
actions are pure and not out of spite or to show Favoritism to one side or the
other.
That on 7 January 2015, at
about 11:30 CET (10:30 UTC), two masked gunmen forced their way into the offices of the
French satirical weekly newspaper Charlie
Hebdo in Paris, France. They killed 12 people, including the editor Stéphane
"Charb" Charbonnier, 7 other Charlie Hebdo employees, and 2 National Police officers, and wounded 11 others. Charlie Hebdo had attracted attention for its depictions of Muhammad. That we send our
young men and women into war to fight for rights that we no longer have in
America. That the rest of the World
looks to us and saw what was really going on in our Country when we did not
Support Charlie Hebdo with the
millions who did in France.
That the world is small and the internet
allows all of us to see and watch what is going on with the Judiciary, the
Government and the Elected Officials.
That if Tanya was not having an affair or had done nothing wrong the
question becomes would we be here today.
If Tanya had handled herself as most parents do putting their children
first would we be here today?
That this court will need to show what
risk that Ted Taupier is to society.
That he has done more than tell the “Truth” about being terrorized by
his own country. The “TRUTH” supposedly
your best defense is now in America turning into as in the Monopoly Game to not
past go, do not collect your $200.00 go right to jail for telling the “TRUTH”
The Actions of this court by even a
layman is outrageous and without cause.
That they should be forced to show this is within the law and the
Constitution of America, the Constitution of Connecticut.
That the appearance of the seizure of
property was over a scorned wife being exposed for chooses she made. That the courts in collusion of the power of
Atena trying to keep this from there investors and others has violated the Fourth Amendment Right by
malicious prosecution and false imprisonment and unconstitutional arrest. Thus
violating Mr. Taupier’s Eighth Amendment Right as to Excessive Bail which in
this case constitutes “Cash Bail”.
The e-mails are clear that Ex-Parte
communication between the Prosecutor and the Judge inappropriately took
place. Rule 2.9 EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS (a) A judge shall not initiate,
permit or consider ex parte communications, or consider other communications
made to the judge out of the presence of the parties or their lawyers,
concerning a pending or impending matter.
That prosecuting attorney Brenda Hans
has by all appearance used an e-mail with questions to back a story to further
deny Mr. Taupier of his constitutional rights.
That the question now is has Judge Gold
violated his right to Judicial Immunity with acts of Ex Parte Communications
and has he lost Jurisdiction to hear this case.
Should all his orders be stricken and Mr. Taupier be freed with a
Special Grand Jury immediately put into place to review all criminal
questionable activities of all Judiciary, Government and Elected Officials who
have been involved in this harassment of Mr. Taupier.
Jurisdiction means the power, right and authority to
interpret and apply law. Both are
related to subject-matter jurisdiction which determines the type of case
(subject) a court may hear and personal jurisdiction, the determines the entities
whose cases the court may judge, as opposed to territorial jurisdiction,
which covers the physical area over which the court has authority. When a Judge looses Personal Jurisdiction
(through ruling in Favoritism or Cronyism, Ex Parte Communications} he also
looses subject-matter jurisdiction. The
appearance of the e-mails are Ex-Parte communications and Judge Gold should
recuse himself. There is no Statute of Limitation when a Judge rules
without Jurisdiction either Personal – Subject Matter –or Locality. All Orders from a Judge Lacking Jurisdiction
have no merit no legal standing “All
Orders are considered VOID” It is
believed the worse offense OF A JUDGE AGAINST HIS “OATH” is if he rules in Favoritism and
Cronyism for the benefit of another, considered Fraud on the Court or
Treason.
The rules of Professional Conduct and the Judicial
Cannons are very clear as to how the Judiciary is to act in a Case or in Court
to protect the rights of those that are innocent:
Connecticut’s
Judicial Cannons:
Canon
1. A Judge Shall Uphold and Promote the Independence, Integrity, and impartiality
of the Judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the Appearance of
impropriety.
Canon
2. A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially,
Competently, and Diligently
Canon
3. A Judge Shall Conduct the Judge's Personal and Extra judicial Activities to
Minimize the Risk of Conflict with the Obligations of Judicial Office.
Canon
4. A Judge Shall Not Engage in Political or Campaign Activity that is
Inconsistent with the Independence, Integrity, or impartiality of the
Judiciary.
Wherefore this writer believes Judge Gold
should recuse himself due to the Ex Parte Communications. That Brenda Hans should be disciplined and a
Special Grand Jury be immediately empowered to investigate the Criminal actions
of this Court. That this writer and many
others across America are going to be watching this case and all others that
deny America Citizens the rights that we send young men and women into war
for. That 12 people in France were just
killed for.
.JPG)
