Plaintiff Robert V. Durrsein
AMC Branch
PO Box
33633
Dayton, OH 45433-0629
UNITED
STATES DISTRICT COURT
Southern
District of Ohio
|
Robert V.
Durrstein,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Richard P. Arthur et al,
Defendant
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
Case No.:
No. C-3 00---140
Motion Objecting to June
19,2000 Order Denying Subpoenas and Recommending Dismissals
|
Now comes the Plaintiff objecting to
the Court’s announced course of action and amplifying further the grounds for
action against all parties listed or otherwise involved in the corrupt patterns
of behavior contributing to the direct abuses and violations of law against the
Plaintiff
- Plaintiff realized at the start of this process that the
Court’s interest was in using procedure to continue the practice of
protecting cronies from the law and not in the delivering of justice to
the citizens of the state and nation.
- Realizing the above, it is necessary to now complete the
information on file so that the Supreme Court of the United States may have more complete information upon
which to ponder the need for specific mandates to protect the citizens of
this state from the lawless and corrupt institutions listed as or
associated with the Defendants in this matter. Given this, will the court
please forward to the Plaintiff the forms and instructions for the process
of appeal.
- The court and defendants cite ad nauseum cases hoping to
find excuses to hide from the requirements of the United States
Constitution. Plaintiff cites higher precedents in the case of Colonies v England as evidenced by the Declaration of
Independence signed July 4, 1776, in Congress by 56 of the
representatives of the colonies and the Constitution of the United States signed by 55 representatives of the
Colonies and later ratified by the Colonies as entities. This level of
authority transcends not only the (deceptive use of) precedents cited by
Defendants and the Court, but also transcends the United States Supreme
Court as evidenced by the said Supreme Court’s use of the Constitution as
their guiding precedent(s). These documents and all supporting records,
information, biographies, writings are now completely incorporated by
reference.
- The court has sought knowledge of who specifically should
be the identified for removal from the case. Given the requirements in the
Ohio Bar Standards of Conduct and Canons of Ethics (herein incorporated
completely by reference) requirement for members to report all unethical
behavior by other members. Since the corrupt conduct of Judge Rice is
overt and thus well known by all members of this court, all members of
this court are de facto in violation of both the rules of the Bar of the
State of Ohio and this court itself and therefore all are disqualified
from addressing this (or any other case were the letter of the law, court,
and bar enforced.
- While the court might hesitate to order water to flow up
hill, it has no problem burdening Plaintiff to perform as though he had
the temporal, financial, legal, professional, skill, professional,
training, educational, and manpower resources of the combined resources of
all the law enforcement, prosecutor, legal, and other agency personnel and
agencies in the area and state. The court participates in the proverbial
"Catch 22"" forced upon Plaintiff: when the law enforcement,
prosecuting, and judicial bodies refuse to do their sworn duty and thus
participate in causing harm to Plaintiff and society, the court would
burden Plaintiff with the responsibility to perform the combined tasks of
all these agencies and authorities.
- The court compounds this by knowingly participating in the
denial of legal representation to Plaintiff. The previously cited example
of Attorney Gary Leppla refusing to represent Plaintiff because of the
sure and certain retribution by the Bar and Courts. Mr. Leppla’s integrity,
skills, and talent are well known in this area. Likewise, Mr. Bobby Cox,
an attorney with a reputation for independence advised Plaintiff that
contesting the claim of Cynthia Chaney Durrstein was futile, without any
chance of success, and that Plaintiff should consider himself lucky that
these evil lies were not filed as a criminal complaint. These established,
reputable attorneys, by their actions, confirm the true nature of the Bar,
law enforcement, and the courts. Plaintiff’s greatest concern is that
these attorneys will now incur the secret unethical wrath merely for their
honesty with and professional aid to Plaintiff. In contrast, Richard P.
Arthur continues to send mail to the wrong address in contrast to the
motion changing the address and repeated mention in other motions. Could
this be incompetence? NO! Oversight? NO! Given Mr. Arthur’s competence,
skill, and established behavior pattern, this can only be a deliberate
effort to take advantage of the system to try to thwart the cause of
justice. Another example of Mr. Arthur’s true tactics is his use of
process service upon Plaintiff in the DR case when he had an existing
offer for mail service. Mr. Arthur’s deliberate use of his skills to
generate expense and antagonism truly exemplify the publicly held contempt
for the legal profession. No amount of Bar expenditures for advertising
will ever overcome the performance of such as Mr. Arthur. Truly, even pond
scum has greater moral character for at lest it does not deliberately seek
to create evil and generate expense for others for its own profit. Should
a physician walk through a mall spraying viruses into the air, this court
and the agencies might act in to hold the physician accountable, yet this
court not only endorses behavior such as Mr. Arthur’s, but even seeks to
protect it, thus promoting such activity and becoming a party to the
corruption of the legal processes in this state.
- What pastor would use lies to create an environment that
solicits lies a major portion of the environment and spiritual endorsement
to violate the law and thus a direct contributor to the illegal activities
of Cynthia Chaney Durrstein, Rebecca Jo Bean, Mark Bean, Jeff Seymour, and
Marilyn Seymour? Timothy Hume. What Pastor would tolerate, much less
encourage, use, foment, and generate: lies, evil gossip, false
accusations. Timothy Hume. When brought to his attention, what pastor
would lie about his activities? Timothy Hume. What pastor would then go to
a man’s wife and lie about that man in a manner harmful to and encouraging
the destruction of a marriage? Timothy Hume. What pastor would repeatedly
solicit the attentions and presence of an attractive young married lady
with the same first name as his wife – Timothy Hume. AND, when this
pastor’s practices were brought to the attention of his governing
organization (the Assemblies of God) which proclaims publicly the
inerrancy of the Bible which specifically condemns all of these practices
of Timothy Hume, what did they do – NOTHING! Again, when this was brought
to their attention a second time in the manner they requested, what did
they do – NOTHING? Since there is no reason to believe the Assemblies of
God have established a behavior pattern peculiar to this case, Timothy
Hume could rest secure in his knowledge that the Assemblies of God would,
in fact, protect him from the just Scriptural, professional, moral, and
legal consequences of his actions: actions which directly fomented and
environment encouraging the abuse of and by Cynthia Chaney Durrstein.
Actions which encouraged the illegal behavior of others in his spiritual
care including Rebecca Jo Bean, Mark Bean, Jeff Seymour, and Marilyn
Seymour. So we have pastor Timothy Hume, with the full support of the
Assemblies of God, has condoned, encouraged, supported, aided, and abetted
the immoral and criminal activities of these persons: activities which
include: abuse of spouses (by Cynthia Chaney Durrstein and Jeff Seymour),
abuse of children (by Betty Chaney), perjury, abuse of legal processes,
the illegal use of prescription drugs, the illegal trafficking in
prescription drugs. abuse of parents (by Rebecca Jo Bean and Mark Bean)
whose evil and manipulative lies were solicited and encouraged by Timothy
Hume and the Gospel Temple Assembly of God. What pastor would conceal from
his congregation and leaders matters such as this? Timothy Hume.
Therefore, it will be necessary to subpoena all records from Assemblies of
God, Gospel Temple Assembly of God, and Timothy Hume all documentation of
the process for reporting, investigating, and dealing with rogue
ministers, all records relating to sources of gossip or defamation of the
Plaintiff since this has been revealed by Timothy Hume and Cynthia Chaney
Durrstein to third parties and is no longer protected information.
- The following narrative includes by the very reference all
public and court records and all information in the files of any agency or
employee of that agency in total as though enclosed herein and places them
on notice to locate, preserve, and protect said information. The case of
Beavercreek Acres Neighborhood Association sv. Cox Brothers Construction
Company in Greene County Court of Common Pleas in 1979 or 1980 will serves
to demonstrate the continuing corruption of the court in even the simplest
of cases. Judge Edward Kimmel attempted to foil the cause of justice and
in so doing forced expense and other hardships on an entire group of
citizens for the benefit of a commercial ally of the City of Beavercreek
government as further evidenced by the appearance of the City of
Beavercreek attorney with and on the behalf of Cox with no warning to the
citizens of the community and further evidenced by the City of Beavercreek
offering to use tax funds to pay damages done by Cox. The ultimate
decision by Kimmel to offer only the least possible justice was political
rather than legal as the judge realized that he and Cox could not outlast
the determination of a growing group of voter. Then in case 81-DR-376
previously brought to this court’s attention wherein Judge Judson Shattuck
made his infamous endorsement of perjury and rewarded the criminal
activity of Paul B. Roderer and Marjorie (Durrstein) Kavanaugh. Judge
Shattuck permitted the use of illegal wiretaps, rewarded embezzlement, and
tolerated to the point of entering into complicity to commit child abuse
of Plaintiff’s children. Later in this case, Judge Shattuck removed a
motion from the file when a visiting judge was to hold a hearing. Even
later, Judge Shattuck’s court altered years later a decision in order to
justify the court’s action which was not in accord with the decision.
Plaintiff and his two minor children were ordered our of Prosecutor
Schenck’s offices when they attempted to report child abuse. Prosecutor
Schenck later refused to respond to requests for how to report child abuse
and then advised Plaintiff improperly on how to report child abuse. When
Plaintiff made an appointment with Mr. Schenck in Mr. Schenck’s about such
matters, Mr. Schenck, while in his office and available, refused to honor
the appointment he had personally made. A letter to the editor of the
Xenia Gazette was later refused publication with the Gazette editor (named
Bob) specifically advising Plaintiff that the legal expenses that the Greene County legal community would force on the
Gazette prevented the Gazette from publishing the truthful and documented
letter. Thus, the Bar Association and the Courts of this area violate
Plaintiff’s and all citizen’s rights to a free press under the United
States Constitution. Judge Shattuck, the FBI, and local US Attorney
General were aware of the wiretapping and bank embezzlement, yet refused
to perform their sworn duties to the detriment and expense of the
Plaintiff and his two abused minor children. Judge Shattuck ignored the
reports of the tow minor children’s psychologist and even his own court
appointed psychologist and thus contributed to the abuse of the minor
children. Plaintiff’s minor children were subjected yet another review by
a Dr. Cherry who sold his opinion and not his service. For the sake of
greed, Dr. Cherry was willing to sacrifice to and participate in the abuse
of Plaintiff’s two minor children. Reports to the local Association of Dr.
Cherry’s misconduct were, as with all other such organizations in Ohio including the Bar, whitewashed. This
contributes to the body of public knowledge and experiential evidence that
the all such professional medical and legal associations will protect
their corrupt members at the expense of legal and ethical protection of
the public from corrupt or incompetent members. Thus, it is appropriate
for Dr. Russell to remain a Defendant as the established system may
realistically be considered a part of the problem and not a legal or
ethical potential for addressing Dr. Russell’s unethical and
unprofessional conduct in this matter. Further evidence of the negligence
of the state and associations is found in the licensing as a ‘family
counselor’ of Marjorie (Durrstein) Kavanaugh. With decades of history of
unresolved sociopathic behavior, the State of Ohio licensed her in spite of her record of
unsuccessful treatment in state institutions and other state programs. In
addition, the failure of the professional organizations and state to
implement and enforce the requirements to report child abuse allowed
Kavanaugh permit her to continue to abuse to this day her natural children
and grandchildren. In mid-1982, in Beavercreek, Plaintiff’s 12 year old son found his
best friend, Robby Johnson, hanging in a closet. The Beavercreek Police
Department was immediately advised of the involvement of Kavanaugh by at
least two parties, yet the death scene was not properly investigated. The Greene County coroner Krause, in a desire for
professional aggrandizement by hoping to write a paper on pre-teenage
sexual asphyxia, promptly sent the boy’s shorts off for assessment. When
the shorts came back clean, the Coroner and the Beavercreek Police
Department had a problem with a suspicious death, no evidence due to their
failure to properly preserve and investigate the death scene, and no real
suspects. The resolution was for Prosecutor Schenck to (mis)use his
official position to go behind Plaintiff’s back and solicit the
cooperation of Plaintiff’s attorney to have Plaintiff’s 12 year old son,
known to be in the midst of a traumatic custody battle, subjected to
probing mental examination under the chemical influence of sodium
pentathol, a procedure risking massive damage to a child to help political
cronies escape the consequences of their negligence. To his immense
credit, Gary Leppla, immediately contacted psychological authorities to
protect Plaintiff’s children (for which Plaintiff is eternally grateful)
from the evil practice of Mr. Schenck. Failing in their attempt to
cold-bloodedly risk the well-being of a child to protect themselves and in
spite of a polygraph years later clearing Plaintiff’s son of any
involvement, the Prosecutor Schenck and the Beavercreek Police Department
use their "official" power to (leak to) advise the Johnson
family that Plaintiff’s son had been responsible for the death of his best
friend, Robby. As Plaintiff has since learned, Kavanaugh was had been form
some time forcing (removed
to protect the innocent child) to have sex
with her. (Without the refusal of the authorities and Schenck to act upon
initial reports of child abuse, this situation could not have existed at
this time nor would she later have been able to obtain a license as a
professional family counselor.) Although the Beavercreek Police Department
immediately knew of Kavanaugh’s involvement with Robby Johnson, they failed
to properly perform a death scene investigation. Later covering their
failure with a child abusing leak, Prosecutor Schenck and the Beavercreek
Police Department caused Plaintiff’s son to go through his pre-teen and
teen years taunted by his peers with the false blame for causing the death
of his best friend. Such is the unfettered evil and corruption of the law
enforcement and legal agencies and courts of the state of Ohio. They
willingly and cruelly will sacrifice even children for their own and their
cronies corruption, forcing thousands of dollars of expense upon a parent
trying to protect his children from those very persons sworn to protect
his children. In 1990 or 1991 Divorce case involving Plaintiff’s second
marriage, Plaintiff reported her attorney lying to her in order to conceal
his actions in court, and this was found acceptable by the Bar. Plaintiff
reported her second attorney for negligence which cost both parties
significant monies, yet this too was found acceptable professional
behavior. Other reports of unethical attorney behavior have met with
similar rejection, leading to the inescapable conclusion that the intent
of the various ethics committees at all levels of the legal profession in
Ohio is to discourage the reporting of unethical and corrupt attorneys,
protect corrupt and unethical attorneys, and intimidate honest attorneys
to the extent that honest citizens are prevented from access to the
concept of justice. As related to Plaintiff by Cynthia Chaney Durrstein,
all save one of her generation were abused and beaten and neglected, and
she was repeatedly raped by her father, all with the knowledge of her
mother who still abuses Cynthia Chaney Durrstein. This abuse occurred to
the extend that Cynthia’s brother David was removed from the home by the
local authorities who said they would remove all children form Betty
Chaney if Betty Chaney did not divorce her child abusing husband. Although
Betty divorced her husband, she still had him visit and reside with her
and the abuse continued unabated on Carmen Ave in old Drexel. Appropriate
records should be available to verify this information as well as
testimony from neighbors who observed the frequent public beating of the
Chaney children. That Cynthia Chaney Durrstein is codependent upon and will
defend her mother and may publicly deny the abuse does not ratify the
abuse. Such abuse would have stopped had not the agency charged with
protecting the Chaney children not been negligent in following the case to
assure these children were protected form the abuse by both the father and
mother. Betty Chaney deliberately sacrificed all her children, but
especially heinous is her knowing pimping of her child daughter to keep
her (ex)husband available for Betty Chaney’s own lust. As if this were not
enough, Betty Chaney did not console her daughter, but forced Cynthia
Chaney Durrstein into the role of her supporter and consoler, further
depriving Cynthia Chaney Durrstein of innocence and a childhood. Although
Cynthia discusses this with great logic and intellectual understanding,
her heart and emotions remain dependent upon her abusers who can lift her
to elation or drive her into despair without even a word. In
acknowledgement of her own lack of parental approval, Cynthia is driven to
approve of and declare "good" her children no matter how evil
that actually are. Her daughter, Rebecca Jo Bean, has declared how
diligently she has tried to force Cynthia to get rid of Plaintiff as a
husband. Her son, Mark Bean, has gleefully pointed out how much he loves
causing his mother emotional torment. Cynthia in her codependency on these
abusers is unable to break the cycle of their abuse and could not accept
the shelter of Plaintiff to protect her. In fact, Plaintiff’s attempts to
stop the abuse aroused the wrath of Betty Chaney, Rebecca Jo Bean, and
Mark Bean to unite in a (successful) emotional war on their own
daughter/mother to destroy Cynthia’s Christian marriage so they could have
Cynthia for their own purposes. The fact that Cynthia remains abused is in
no small part due to the negligence of Dr. Michelle Russell and her
associates in medical practice. Cynthia’s CHOICE to remain
codependent and in abusive family relationships is tragic, but that does
not ratify their abuse of her. Cynthia’s CHOICE to become an abuser
and abuse the love, care, and support of a Christian husband is also
lamentable, but the fact that she has chosen to join her family in abusing
Plaintiff is still clearly illegal. The gender and generation bias evident
in above endorsing abuse by ALL parties and agencies charged with
protecting the abused is neither legal, moral, nor Constitutional. It is
time for this cycle to stop. Even Richard Arthur abuses his own client as
he knowlingly helps her to remain locked in an abusive environment and
deliberately participates in the abuse of Plaintiff. Truly greed is his
god.
- Plaintiff states that the list of actions is both
representative of reality in Ohio and very incomplete.
- Perhaps one of the hidden motivations in the refusal of the
authorities to investigate and prosecute perjury would be the need for
them to avoid using perjury as a tool in their investigations and
prosecutions. Joe Fodal in his role of prosecuting attorney in the dog at
large case leading to the unconstitutional imprisonment of Plaintiff used
blatant perjury to buttress his groundless case. In this mess, is not the
worst perjury of all the public capital condemnation of an innocent child
so that the authorities could conceal their own negligence?
- The time has come for this situation to be remedied. This
court has the power to begin that process. Either way, this court will
never again be on the fence, it will be either a part of the problem or a
part of the cure. Sadly, even tragically, this court seem determined to
remain part of the process. Given the precedents established in the cases
leading to the federal supervision of integration to meet federal law and
the US Constitution, has the time come for the United States Supreme Court
to establish an independent body to correct he heinous situation affecting
all of Ohio? In Durrstein v Wettlaufer, et al, the only reason Judge Rice
even gave the least possible consideration was not due to law or ethics,
but only out of the fear that the world would see at the US Supreme Court
just how absurdly he would protect his cronies. Even then, Judge Rice was
successful in protecting the wallets of his cronies and denying Plaintiff
just compensation.
- Further, Plaintiff contends that the system as revealed
through the actions of Defendants is an illegal and self-perpetuating tax.
By maintaining a breeding ground or environment of illegal activity, all
benefit from a greater demand for their profession and organizations.
Imagine the financial, social, and professional depression that would
occur were these parties to be truly professional, moral, and legal in
their activities. The attendant drop in illegal and unethical activities
and truthfulness in the courts would decimate the need for judges,
lawyers, staff, police, etc.
- The contention of Plaintiff is that the direct criminal
actions against Plaintiff could not have taken place without an
environment tolerating and even encouraging corruption and lawlessness.
That this lawless, illegal, and unconstitutional environment is a product
of the various Defendants and their associates and associations. The
agents and individuals perpetrating the breeding ground for the criminal
actions and violations of the United States Constitution are, in part, the
Bar Association(s) of the State of Ohio including the administration by
agency and direct action, the various professional associations such as
those chartered to oversee the conduct of physicians, psychologists, etc.,
the various law enforcement and prosecuting individuals and agencies in
Ohio including federal operations in Ohio.
Therefore Plaintiff files the
strongest possible objection to all the Courts recommendations and to all
motions for dismissal. At this time, Plaintiff realizes that this court has not
yet become sufficiently mature to pursue justice. No small part of this process
was to provide this court and other parties one last opportunity to
"commit justice."
Given this court’s blatantly
expressed intent to deny Plaintiff justice, Plaintiff requests the Court to
generate whatever procedural requirement is necessary to make this case
available to the appeals process. Realizing the previous involvement of the
Court of Appeals in acting in complicity with this Court, Plaintiff
acknowledges the necessity to bring this matter and the conduct of all parties
to the United States Supreme Court. Perhaps then, between the full exposure to
the ultimate legal authorities and the attendant exposure to the public of this
nation, the corruption that has made Ohio a state of lawyers when it should be
a state of laws.
Dated this
7th day of July, 2000
Robert V.
Durrstein, Plaintiff
Home