COMPLAINT FORM
JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT AND DISABILITY
MAIL THIS FORM TO THE CLERK, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, P.O.
BOX 193939, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94119-3939/tdc. MARK THE
ENVELOPE "JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT COMPLAINT" OR "JUDICIAL DISABILITY
COMPLAINT". DO NOT PUT THE NAME OF THE JUDGE OR MAGISTRATE ON
THE ENVELOPE.
SEE RULE 2(e) FOR THE NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED FOR FILING.
1. Complainant's name: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Address: c/o 2509 North Campbell Avenue, #1776
Tucson [zip code exempt]
ARIZONA STATE
Daytime telephone: [redacted]
2. Judge or magistrate complained about:
Name: John M. Roll [sic]
United States District Judge [sic]
Court: United States District Court
Tucson, Arizona state
3. Does this complaint concern the behavior of the judge or
magistrate in a particular lawsuit or lawsuits?
( X ) Yes ( ) No
If "yes" give the following information about each lawsuit
(use the reverse side if there is more than one):
Court: United States District Court
Docket Number: GJ-95-1-6 (JMR)
Are (were) you a party or lawyer in the lawsuit?
( X ) Party ( X ) Counsel ( ) Neither
If party, give the name, address, and telephone number of
your Counsel:
n/a
Judicial Complaint Against John M. Roll:
Page 1 of 3
Docket numbers of any appeals to the Ninth Circuit:
Ninth Circuit No. 96-16145
(case file is incorporated by reference
as if set forth fully herein)
4. Have you filed any lawsuits against the judge or magistrate?
( ) Yes ( X ) No (not yet)
If yes, give the following information about each lawsuit
(use the reverse side if there is more than one):
Court: n/a
Present status of suit: n/a
Name, address, and telephone number of your Counsel:
n/a
Court to which any appeal has been taken:
(see above)
Docket number of appeal:
(see above)
Present status of appeal:
dismissed by 3-judge panel on June 28, 1996,
by Order of Circuit Judges Noonan, Leavy and Tashima
5. On separate sheets of paper, no larger than the paper this
form is printed on, describe the conduct or the evidence of
disability that is the subject of this complaint. See rule
2(b) and 2(d). Do not use more than 5 pages (5 sides).
Most complaints do not require that much.
see attached letter to Federal Bureau of Investigation
(incorporated by reference as if set forth fully)
6. You should either:
(1) check the first box below and sign this form in
the presence of a notary public; or
(2) check the second box and sign the form. You do
not need a notary public if you check the second
box.
( ) I swear (affirm) that --
Judicial Complaint Against John M. Roll:
Page 2 of 3
(X) I declare under penalty of perjury --
I have read rules 1 and 2 of the Rules of the
Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit Governing
Complaints of Judicial Misconduct or Disability,
and the statement made in this complaint is true
and correct to the best of my knowledge.
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
________________________________________________
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness,
Counselor at Law, and Vice President for Legal Affairs,
New Life Health Center Company
All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice
Executed on: November 30, 1996
Note: Complainant was never terminated from his position as Vice
President for Legal Affairs of New Life Health Center Company, a
pure trust, by lawful action of a Trustee authorized to do so,
and therefore He continues to assert His lawful claim to that
office, protestations by Dr. Eugene A. Burns to the contrary
notwithstanding.
email: supremelawfirm@altavista.net
website: http://supremelaw.com
copies: Judge Alex Kozinski, Ninth Circuit
Kenneth Starr, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.
U.S. Marshals, Tucson, Arizona
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Tucson, Arizona
Attorney General, State of Arizona
Governor Fife Symington, State of Arizona
Speaker, Arizona House of Representatives
President, Arizona State Senate
Judicial Complaint Against John M. Roll:
Page 3 of 3
# # #
c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
Tucson [zip code exempt]
ARIZONA STATE
September 13, 1996
Mr. Thomas H. Basham
Supervisory Senior Resident Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation
U.S. Department of Justice
201 East Indianola
Phoenix, Arizona 85012/tdc
Subject: Criminal Misconduct by John M. Roll,
United States District Court, Tucson
Dear Mr. Basham:
Thank you very much for your letter to Me, dated September
9, 1996, concerning alleged criminal misconduct by a Federal
District Court Judge in Tucson, Arizona.
In your letter, you stated that My letter to the FBI does
not contain sufficient detail to determine whether a criminal
investigation is warranted. You also requested that I submit, to
the Tucson office of the FBI, further documentation of the
alleged misconduct, to include names, dates, and any other facts
that may be pertinent. To this end, enclosed please find all the
pertinent materials currently in My possession and control.
The thread of evidence you should follow concerns the events
which occurred immediately after a federal grand jury subpoena
was first served on New Life Health Center Company in Tucson,
Arizona state ("New Life"). Pay particular attention to the fate
of all the U.S. Mail which We transmitted directly to the grand
jury Foreperson in response to their subpoena.
I was retained by New Life at that time to answer the
subpoena (see enclosed PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, dated March 20,
1996) and to assist New Life with their civil defense. This
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION was mailed to the Grand Jury Foreperson
via Registered U.S. Mail, return receipt and restricted delivery
both requested. The enclosed evidence will show that this
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION was illegally intercepted by John M.
Roll, who handed it to Robert L. Miskell in the office of the
United States Attorney in Tucson.
After investigating on Our own, and with the able assistance
of the Postmaster, We decided to prepare and mail a FORMAL
REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION to the same federal grand jury. This
request was mailed to the Foreperson on April 28, 1996 (see
enclosed). This FORMAL REQUEST was also intercepted by John M.
Roll, who also handed it to Robert L. Miskell. We have reason to
believe that the federal grand jury never saw this FORMAL REQUEST
either.
At a subsequent hearing on the matter, John M. Roll
admitted, on the official court record, that he had intercepted
this FORMAL REQUEST. He also said that he had not opened it, but
that he had given it to Robert L. Miskell. At that same hearing,
Robert L. Miskell admitted, on record, that he had received this
FORMAL REQUEST from John M. Roll, and that the mail in question
simply contained a formal request that the federal grand jury
investigate possible violations of federal law by Robert L.
Miskell. We inferred from Miskell's comments that he had,
indeed, opened this mail, because he was correct about its
contents.
At this point, We felt it was necessary to place the
Foreperson of the federal grand jury on the Proof of Service list
for all subsequent pleadings which We planned to file in that
case. All together, some twenty-five (25) different pleadings
were then filed under My signature, or under signatures of Mine
and Dr. Eugene A. Burns. Some of these pleadings are affidavits.
All pleadings currently in My possession and control are
enclosed, for your review.
Counting all 25 pleadings, the PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
(26), and the FORMAL REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION (27), none of
which were ever delivered to the federal grand jury Foreperson to
whom they were mailed, We count 27 counts of mail fraud, 27
counts of jury tampering, 27 counts of obstruction of justice,
and 27 counts of conspiracy to commit all of the above, committed
by a conspiracy of persons including, but not limited to, John M.
Roll, Janet Napolitano, Robert L. Miskell, and Evangelina
Cardenas. Other likely accessories to these crimes include
Robert A. Johnson, Richard H. Weare, and William M. McCool.
At another hearing on the matter, John M. Roll complained
that he had some 14 inches of pleadings to read in this case.
But then, he immediately called a recess, and huddled for quite
some time with his staff, both inside and outside the courtroom.
When he came back into session, John M. Roll qualified his
earlier statement by saying that he really had only 6 or 7 inches
of pleadings in this case, but that he guaranteed, if We had
filed them, he had read them. This statement was witnessed by Me
and by My assistant Counsel, Neil Thomas Nordbrock, who is also a
federal witness to perjury of oath by Robert L. Miskell in
another case. Neil Nordbrock and I took his qualification to
mean that John M. Roll had, in fact, intercepted all 25 pleadings
which We had mailed to the grand jury Foreperson. You can
measure their thickness yourself.
I hope this response to your letter is satisfactory. If you
should need any additional information, permit Me to recommend
that you first contact Dr. Eugene A. Burns, Managing Director of
New Life Health Center Company, 4500 East Speedway, Suite 27,
Tucson, Arizona state. As of the moment I vacated the premises
at New Life, Dr. Burns was in possession and control of all the
documentary exhibits which were attached to the enclosed
pleadings. These documentary exhibits include, for example, the
Postmaster's response to our FOIA request for a certified copy of
the Standing Delivery Order (USPS Form 3801) signed by the
federal grand jury Foreperson in the New Life case. This
response stated that there was no such document in existence,
proving that the Foreperson had never authorized anyone else to
accept or sign for U.S. Mail addressed to him/her.
Thank you very much for your consideration.
VERIFICATION
I, Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Citizen of Arizona
state and federal witness, hereby verify, under penalty of
perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without
the "United States," that the above statements of fact are true,
correct, complete, and not misleading, to the best of My current
information, knowledge, and belief, so help Me God, pursuant to
28 U.S.C. 1746(1).
Further Affiant sayeth naught.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state and federal witness
attachments: to FBI, Tucson
email: supremelawfirm@altavista.net
website: http://supremelaw.com
copy: Bruce J. Gebhardt
Special Agent in Charge
copy: Thomas H. Basham
Supervisory Senior Resident Agent
c/o Federal Bureau of Investigation
1 South Church Avenue, Suite 600
Tucson, Arizona state 85701/tdc
copy: Postmaster
U.S. Post Office
Downtown Station
Tucson, Arizona
# # #
MEMO
TO: Cathy A. Catterson
Office of the Clerk
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
c/o P.O. Box 193939
San Francisco, California state
Postal Zone 94119-3939/tdc
FROM: Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law
DATE: December 20, 1996
SUBJECT: Complaint of Judicial Misconduct No. 96-80380
Thank you very much, Ms. Catterson, for your letter to Me, dated
December 16, 1996, confirming the Ninth Circuit docket number
#96-80380 now assigned to My previously filed Complaint of
Judicial Misconduct by United States District Judge John M. Roll.
I was a bit puzzled by your references to "Chief Judge Hug" and
"Chief Judge Broomfield." I was of the understanding that there
is only one Chief Judge at any moment in time. Am I mistaken?
Also, for the convenience of future clients, I have taken the
liberty of entering the names of all judges currently presiding
on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. May I impose upon you to
check the spelling of their names on the attached proof sheet,
and return any corrections in the SASE enclosed?
Thanks very much, Cathy, and please have a wonderful Holiday
Season! I will look forward to meeting you some day.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state
Postal Zone 85719/tdc
email: supremelawfirm@altavista.net
website: http://supremelaw.com
# # #
MEMO
TO: Cathy A. Catterson
Office of the Clerk
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
c/o P.O. Box 193939
San Francisco, California state
Postal Zone 94119-3939/tdc
FROM: Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law
DATE: February 25, 1997
SUBJECT: Complaint of Judicial Misconduct No. 96-80380
I have been reviewing the Rules of the Judicial Council of the
Ninth Circuit Governing Complaints of Judicial Misconduct or
Disability. My review led Me to the section entitled "Commentary
on Rule 4: Expeditious Review." Quoting now:
The statute requires the chief judge to review a complaint
"expeditiously." It should be a rare case in which more
than a month is permitted to elapse from the filing of the
complaint to the chief judge's action on it.
Your original correspondence to Me in this matter assigned the
above docket number on December 16, 1996. My original complaint
was dated and mailed on November 30, 1996. Thus, almost three
(3) months have elapsed and, with the sole exception of your
December 16 letter, I have heard nothing from you, or from the
chief judge, in the matter of the criminal misconduct of United
States District Judge John M. Roll of which I have complained.
I respectfully request immediate review of My complaint by the
chief judge, as outlined in Rule 4: Review by the Chief Judge.
Thank you very much for your prompt consideration.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
c/o 2509 N. Campbell Avenue, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state
Postal Zone 85719/tdc
email: supremelawfirm@altavista.net
website: http://supremelaw.com
copy: Procter Hug, Chief Judge, Ninth Circuit
# # #