The following Case Briefs cite specific and concrete evidence on the judicial record showing how the wireless, electric, insurance and other industries are able to manipulate federal and State agencies and courts, community organizations, and even hate groups to retaliate against those who denounce the physical harm caused by radiation. The retaliation include concerned efforts to entrap and discredit the target, mobbing, harmful satellite tracking, road harassment, and even attempts to murder in a way that appears natural, accidental or self inflicted.
STATEMENT OF INTERESTED PARTIES
CASE BRIEFS
Jesus Mendoza, a parent of three children and other concerned parents submitted a request to make a risk evaluation of the levels of radiation found inside John Shary Elementary on the ground that high levels of radiation have been found inside the school and in close proximity to children. At first, School District Officials expressed a strong support for making a risk evaluation of the radiation found inside schools. Everything changed after they notified their insurance carrier.
On March 4, 2010, during a telephonic hearing, Mendoza presented to the Sharyland Independent School District evidence showing that our children are being exposed to levels of radiation more than twenty times the levels known to cause serious adverse health effects including physical and mental disabilities, leukemia including cancer. Evidence presented include a high number of children and teachers reporting illness. (1855 students and a high percentage of teachers have reported illness within a five month period. The student population is 700). The District’s Superintendent, Mr. Scott Owings claimed that flue was causing the high number of sickness, claimed that harm by radiation is imaginary adopting the statements of a scientist in the payroll of the wireless industry who has been accused of research fraud to conceal the real effects of exposure to radiation, and introduced as evidence excerpts of Case Briefs cited below to discredit the legitimacy of the Grievance. Hearing Officer Yasmine Nye attempted to exclude scientific studies showing the high risk taken by our children when exposed to radiation found inside schools, did not allow further measurements of radiation inside the school, did not allow testimony of expert witnesses, declined to notify parents of students with medical problems, and adopted the statements of Mr. Owings to deny the relief requested. (Evidence introduced in response to Mr. Owings claims include evidence showing that the radiation used inside the schools is the same type of radiation blamed for causing severe physical harm to police officers, firemen, electrical worker, and soldiers).
See copy of Flyer below
Jesus Mendoza suffers of a debilitating and painful health condition somehow similar to the health condition suffered by the kid on the movie the “Bubble Boy.” Mendoza is highly sensitive to electricity. Electrical sensitivity is a debilitating and painful health condition caused by overexposure to radiation that is reaching epidemic proportions. See the Physician’s Statement of Disability issued by the Texas Aging and Disability Services which describes some of the limitations caused by electrical sensitivity. Exhibit “1" to Request ot Appear by Teleconference. See excerpts to The Electrical Sensitive Handbook, Exhibit “6" to Request ot Appear by Teleconference. See Section 1 tot he Bioinitiative Report Exhibit “1" to Supplement to Grievance 1. Mendoza’s immune system lost the ability to tolerate electricity on the environment. Exposure to radiation emitting devices including power lines, flourescent lights, electrical motors, and wireless devices cause among other things, pain, swelling of vital organs, breathing problems, concentration and speech problems. Exhibit “2" to Request ot Appear by Teleconference shows loss of skin and how swelling inside the skull is pushing one eye out of place. Among other things, Mendoza’s ability to work, to travel long distances and to be inside buildings have been substantially impaired. Mendoza has been violently ill several times, Mendoza is in pain all the time Exhibit “3" is a Decision of the Social Security Administration finding Mendoza’s electromagnetic sensitivity a severe impairment. Exhibit “4" to Request ot Appear by Teleconference shows life threatening swelling of heart after Mendoza stayed inside a building for extended period of time. Exhibit “6" is a Motion and Order by a State District Judge allowing Mendoza to Appear by Teleconference to Judicial Proceedings as an accommodation to his electrical sensitivity. Exhibit “7" to Request ot Appear by Teleconference are excerpts of an interview of the former President of the World Health Organization describing symptoms of her sensitivity to electricity.
Jesus Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity was caused by malicious overexposure to radiation as retaliation for denouncing judicial corruption.
On May of 1995, Jesus Mendoza started to study law at the second largest law school in the country at The Thomas M. Cooley Law School in Lansing, Michigan. Mendoza made the Dean’s list and was elected President of the Hispanic Law Society for one term. During Mendoza’s second year of law school, Mendoza presented to the Dean of the law school, Don Leduc, a former attorney for the US Dept. of Justice concrete and specific evidence showing how the President of the law school and former Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court Thomas E. Brennan and Michigan Court of Appeals Roman S. Briggs were using the school to defraud students of their federal loans while giving away law degrees to those affiliated with government agencies. Neither Judge Brennan, nor Judge Briggs denied or engaged the evidence of fraud. Instead, Mendoza was the subject of pervasive harassment, illegal searches, attempts of entrapment, and attempts to run over. On October of 1997, Mendoza was found with unexplained swollen heart at the emergency room. On July 13, of 1998 two individuals were trying to brake into Mendoza’s apartment around 3:00 am. The same day, Mendoza left the state and returned home, Mission, Texas. Mendoza left the law school in full compliance with the Honor Code and in good academic standing. See
Exhibit “8" is a Letter of a State legislator asking colleagues and friends to help victims of organized stalking and electronic aggression. See http://www.freedomfchs.com/repjimguestltr.pdf
Organized Stalking is a concerted effort to retaliate against those who denounce injustice. Members of these vigilant hate groups can be found on schools, universities, hospitals, congregations and even on the courts, and disguise themselves as members of Concerned Citizens Groups, Neighborhood Watch, Community Organizations, etc. See http://www.multistalkervictims.org/terstalk.htm
On February of 1999, Jesus Mendoza filed a law suit in the Southern District of Texas, Mcallen Division against the law school officials and named and unnamed government agents seeking redress for the injuries caused by the retaliation. The late US District Judge Filemon Vela assigned US Magistrate Judge Dorina Ramos to the case. Judge Ramos ordered the transfer of the case from Mcallen Texas, to the US District Court in Grand Rapids, Michigan, despite conclusive evidence on the record showing that the Defendants had committed fraud and retaliation within the state of Texas; despite conclusive evidence on the record showing that the law school Defendants had made false statements on their filings to remove the case to the state of Michigan; and despite medical evidence showing that the injuries caused by the Defendants’ retaliation had impaired Mendoza’s ability to travel long distances.
After a Motion for Summary Judgment established the Defendants fraud and retaliation, the Defendants took advantage of Mendoza’s aggravated health condition by scheduling a deposition that Mendoza could not attend. US District Judge Robert Holmes Bell declined to consider concrete, specific and conclusive evidence on the record of the fraudulent conduct of Judge Brennan and Judge Briggs and dismissed the case as a sanction for Mendoza’s failure to attend the deposition. Jesus Mendoza Maldonado v. The Thomas M. Cooley Law School, et al, Southern Dist. of Texas US Dist. of TX, Mcallen, Division, Case M-99-77; Jesus Mendoza Maldonado v. The Thomas M. Cooley Law School, et al, US Dist. Court for the Western. Dist. MI., Case No. 5: 01cv93.
Mendoza was displaced from his home after power lines and transformer placed a few feet from his home were aggravating Mendoza’s health condition. After diagnosing Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity, Dr. William Rea did not respond to Mendoza’s requests for further evaluations and treatment. Mendoza filed a law suit against Dr. Rea and against Central Power and Light, CPL after CPL refused to make an inexpensive relocation of the power lines and transformer claiming that removal would set a precedent. The case was assigned to State District Judge Leticia Lopez. Judge Lopez advised Mendoza to dismiss the case if Mendoza could not appear in person to court. Mendoza’s health condition aggravated and dismissed the case. Jesus Mendoza v. William Rea et. al. Hidalgo County 389th District Court, Cause No. C-1615 - 02-H.
At that time, an appeal of the dismissal of the case against Judge Brennan and Judge Briggs was pending before the federal court of appeals in Cincinnati, Ohio. Documents submitted by Judge Brennan and Judge Briggs in response to Mendoza’s appeal include documents filed by Mendoza on the law suit against Central Power and Light in Texas State District Court. The documents were fax stamped by the office of CPL’s counsel in Harlingen, Texas. On 2003, a Panel of the Federal Court of Appeals for the Six Circuit, composed of Judge Boggs, and Daughtrey, and Oberdorfer, District Judge declined to consider conclusive evidence on the record of fraud on the courts by Judge Brennan and Judge Briggs. Jesus Mendoza Maldonado v. The Thomas M. Cooley Law School, et al, US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, Case No. 02-2095.
(On the year 2008, despite Mendoza’s opposition, American Electric Power, the successor of CPL placed another set of power lines and a humming transformer less than five feet away from Mendoza’s place).
A Newsletter of Environmental Health Center-Dallas dated April 2008 states in part: “For the past three years, the Texas Medical Board, acting under pressure from the insurance companies, is trying to disallow the practice of Environmental Medicine by relentless attacking the integrity and professional knowledge of Dr. Rea. And now, that of many other physicians who also offer Environmental Medical treatment.”
On the year 2003, Mendoza filed a law suit against the US Attorney General John Ashcroft seeking an order to cease and desist from subjecting Mendoza and his family to electronic surveillance after Mendoza saw his children with seizure and convulsions in the middle of the night while meters showed high intensities of radiation inside the home. Maldonado v Ashcroft, US Dist. Court for the Southern Dist. of Texas, Mcallen Division, Case No. M 03-038). US District Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa assigned US Magistrate Judge Dorina Ramos to the case. Judge Ramos impaired Mendoza’s ability to present expert witnesses on a hearing on Mendoza’s application for a Temporary Restraining Order against the US Attorney General. Judge Ramos recused herself in response to a motion to recuse citing concrete and specific evidence on the record of her judicial misconduct to benefit Judge Brennan and Judge Briggs. US District Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa reassigned Judge Ramos to the case.
At the hearing on Mendoza’s application for a Temporary Restraining Order, Mendoza’s wife testified as to how her children scream in pain when detection equipment indicates high levels of radiation inside the home, and how the readings on radiation meters decrease when Mendoza attempted to record the occurrence on a video camera. Mendoza’s wife, brother and oldest daughter testified to Mendoza’s law abiding and mental stability. Judge Ramos altered the testimony of Mendoza’s wife to discredit evidence of the electronic aggression and to imply that Mendoza is delusional. On July 15, 2003, on a Report and Recommendation to dismiss the case Judge Ramos stated: “Silvia Mendoza, who is Plaintiff’s wife, testified that Plaintiff’s has trouble breathing, among other things. She also testifed that Plaintiff’s difficulty seems to subside when he operates a camera.” Judge Hinojosa declined to consider specific and concrete evidence on the record of Judge Ramos’ alteration of testimony and dismissed the case. Docket 29, Docket No. 32, at 5; Statement of Evidence, and Affidavit in which Mendoza’s wife denies giving that testimony, Docket No. 40; (Maldonado v Ashcroft, US Dist. Court for the Southern Dist. of Texas, Mcallen Division, Case No. M 03-038).
During the litigation, the US Attorney General did not engage or opposed evidence on the record of the judicial misconduct of Judge Ramos and Judge Hinojosa; did not deny the fact that Mendoza was the subject of an investigation; claimed that everybody is exposed to radiation; did not engage or oppose an Affidavit of a former government agent who was sent to the emergency room with internal bleeding every time he offered to testify in court to Mendoza’s claim of electronic aggression and mental stability; did not engage or oppose evidence showing how three agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Mark Miller, Michael Rodriguez, and Jeffrey Schrimer, were caught harassing Mendoza on a restricted area at Mendoza’s workplace, an elementary school, a day after Mendoza attempted to file a criminal complaint against officers of the Thomas M. Cooley Law School; did not engage or oppose video tape evidence showing radiation directed into Mendoza’s home and the pain and suffering caused on Mendoza and his children. During the litigation counsel for the US Attorney General, David L Guerra claimed that ionizing radiation can be used for surveillance of homes despite evidence that the radiation was causing harm to children and did not engage or oppose evidence on the record showing how federal agencies are using radiation surveillance technologies otherwise reserved for the military and national security to retaliate against those who denounce injustice.
On appeal, a panel composed by US Circuit Judges Reavley, Wiener, and Benavides recognized Mendoza’s sensitivity to electricity, the harm caused to Mendoza by the malicious overexposure to radiation. However, the panel declined to address the misconduct of Judge Hinojosa and Judge Ramos and affirmed the dismissal because the evidence could not connect Mendoza’s injuries to the US Attorney General. The same panel denied the Petition for Rehearing in Banc. The US Supreme Court declined to intervene. Maldonado v Ashcroft, US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Case No. 04-40095. Jesus Mendoza Maldonado v Alberto R. Gonzales, U.S. S. Ct., Case No. 04-9908.
Mendoza filed Complaints of Judicial Misconduct against Judge Ramos and Judge Hinojosa. The Chief Judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Carolyn Dineen King, declined to consider specific and concrete and conclusive evidence on the federal record of the judicial misconduct of Judge Ramos and Judge Hinojosa. On October of 2004, Judge E. Grady Jolly signed an Order affirming the dismissal of the Complaints of Judicial Misconduct against Judge Ramos and Judge Hinojosa. (Complaints of Judicial Misconduct Nos. 04-05-372-0089 and 90).
On 2006, after examining video tapes, an investigator of the City of Mission Police Department concluded that Mendoza and his children had been victims of an electronic aggression. Another investigator notified Mendoza that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had directed the City of Mission Police Department no to intervene because Mendoza was the subject of an investigation by the Central Intelligence Agency. Based on these facts, and the facts established by the litigation against the US Attorney General, Mendoza filed a lawsuit in Washington, D.C. The lawsuit sought an Order to compel the Defendants to cease and desist from using radiation surveillance during any investigation of Mendoza’s activities, and to show cause for the investigation. Evidence to the Original Complaint included pictures of detection equipment showing high intensities of radiation and the pain and suffering caused on Mendoza’s children. See Maldonado v Alexander et al, Supreme Court of the United States Case No. 06-9569 Exhibit “1" at http://jesusmendozza.blogspot.com/
Without a hearing, and without allowing the Defendants to respond, US District Judge Richard W. Roberts, dismissed the Complaint as delusional or fantastic.
On November 21, 2006, Ginsburg, Chief Judge, and Randolph and Tatel, Circuit Judges denied the Petition for Rehearing. The same day, Ginsburg Chief Judge, and Sentelle, Henderson, Randolph, Rogers, Tatel, Garland, Brown, and Kavanaugh, denied the Petition for Rehearing in Banc. (Judge Brett Kavanaugh, while working as White House aid, was involved in crafting strategies to conceal from Congress the harmful use of directed radiation for domestic surveillance programs. Judge Kavanaughd has been the subject of an investigation to determine if he deceived a Congressional Committee during confirmation hearings). On June 21, of 2007 the US Supreme Court declined to get involved in the case.
Jesus Mendoza Maldonado v Keith Alexander, in his official capacity as director of the National Security Agency, Michael Hayden, in his official capacity as Director of the Central intelligence Agency, and George W. Bush in his official capacity as President of the United states of America, US Court Supreme Court, Case No. 06-9569.
Mendoza became a victim of pervasive harassment and vigilantism as retaliation for denouncing judicial corruption, including death threats, a drive-by- shooting and attempts to run over Mendoza and his children. Speeding vehicles yelled at Mendoza among other things that Mendoza is a child molester, a spy, and mentally insane. Mendoza filed a federal law suit in Houston, Texas against some of the identified perpetrators, Michael James Lindquist, a self proclaimed Apostle, Diane K. Smedley, a teacher at Sharyland High School, Ruth Watkins, the wife of a teacher at Sharlyland High School, and Christopher T. Lohden a pilot for a local bank. Although, some of the defendants did not answer the Complaint or oppose the evidence of retaliation, US District Judge Lynn N. Hughes, dismissed the case without a hearing.
The defendants did not oppose the appeal or the evidence of their participation on the retaliation. On September of 2006, a panel composed of Chief Judge Jones, Judge King and Judge Dennis found the appeal frivolous and issued a warning of sanctions against Mendoza. Maldonado v Lindquist, et al, US District Court Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, Case N0. H-05-97. (US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Case No. 05-20257. (Chief Judge Carolyn Dineen King had declined to consider conclusive evidence on the record of the fraud on the court by US District Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa and US Magistrate Dorina Ramos).
On June of 2000, Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity was diagnosed at the Environmental Health Center in Dallas Texas by Dr. William Rea and Dr. Cyril Smith. On March 2003, Mendoza was involuntarily committed in error to a State Hospital after Mendoza’s mother was persuaded to believe that Mendoza was neglecting medical care for his swelling, and that a State Hospital was able to treat Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity. The stay inside the building caused Mendoza pain and breathing difficulties. Mendoza spent the night on the emergency room. The records released by the ER indicate a progressive swelling of heart and a high risk of death within a short period. Mendoza was evaluated by Dr. David Moron. Mendoza presented Dr. Moron with medical evaluations showing that Mendoza was sensitive to electricity. Dr. Moron claimed to be unfamiliar with electrical sensitivities, and claimed that Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity was delusional. Mendoza was subjected to a second evaluation by a doctor with expertise on electrical sensitivities, Dr. Cannelus Caralampus. Dr. Caralampus concluded that the only problem Mendoza had was the difficulty to explain to others that electricity causes harm to Mendoza. Mendoza was released immediately afterwards. Dr. Moron refused to include the findings of Dr. Caralampus on Mendoza’s medical records.
Mendoza had applied for rehabilitative technology with the Texas Dept. of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services, DARS. During a hearing before the office of Texas State Representative Ismael “Kino”Flores, Mr. Antonio Ocanas a supervisor for DARS promised to provide Mendoza rehabilitation technology including a shielding room as soon as another doctor confirmed Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity. After Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity was confirmed by another doctor. Mrs. Nancy Murray a counselor for DARS removed from the record documents supporting the legitimacy of Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity and mental stability and attempted to certify Mendoza on a mental disability. Some of the documents removed from the record included a Decision of the Social Security Administration finding Mendoza’s electromagnetic sensitivity a severe impairment; Exhibit 3, Affidavits of persons attesting to Mendoza’s mental stability and health condition; See Exhibits 13, 14, and 15, pictures of the swelling that occur when Mendoza is exposed to electricity, and excerpts from an interview in which the President of the World Health Organization declares her sensitivity to electricity. Exhibit “7." Mrs. Murray denied Mendoza’s application for rehabilitative technology. During the Administrative hearing Mrs. Murray could not account for her case notes that supported a disability on a mental disability, did not deny the removal of material and relevant documents from the record claiming that DARS’ counsel Mr. William Glenn had helped to prepare the record. Although Mendoza’s mother and wife testified to the legitimacy of Mendoza’s health condition and mental stability, Mr. Steve Aleman, the Impartial Hearing Officer denied the application for rehabilitative technology. Mendoza appealed to state district court and DARS removed the case to federal court.
On a hearing before US District Judge Randy Crane, Mendoza introduced as evidence some of the documents which Mrs. Murray and Mr. Glenn had removed from the administrative record to discredit the legitimacy of Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity. During the hearing, Mendoza pointed to the Court the false statements made on the motion to dismiss by DARS counsel, the Texas Attorney General, Gregg Abbot. Abbot did not engage or oppose the evidence of fraud. Judge Crane disregarded the evidence of fraud and dismissed the case claiming that those who are not receiving disability benefits are not disabled, abrogating well established disability definitions under the American with Disabilities Act and under the Rehabilitation Act. Although Dr. Moron admitted the fact that Mendoza had a right to amend medical records under state law, Judge Crane concluded that no such right exists in the State of Texas.
Mendoza filed a motion to recuse Judge Crane pointing to specific and concrete evidence of disqualification. Judge Crane did not engage or deny the evidence of judicial misconduct, claiming instead that those without an attorney are not entitled to an impartial judge, abrogating federal recusal statutes and well established precedent.
On June of 2007, US Circuit Judges Jolly, Dennis, and Clement, declined to consider evidence of Judge Crane judicial misconduct and issued another warning of sanctions. Jesus Mendoza v Dr. David Moron, et al, US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Mcallen Division, Case No. 7 05-CV-184; US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Case No. 06-40671. (Circuit Judges Jolly and Dennis had declined to consider evidence of fraud on the court by Judge Hinojosa and Judge Ramos).
On 2009, In light of the aggravation of his health condition, Mendoza filed another application for assistive technology with DARS submitting further evidence of the legitimacy of his electrical sensitivity. See Exhibits 1 and 2. The case was assigned to Francisco Coronado, a counselor for DARS. On the initial interview Mr. Coronado claimed that the application was to be denied because DARS does not recognize electrical sensitivities as a disability. Without more, Mr. Coronado denied Mendoza’s application, and Mendoza filed an administrative appeal. In response to a request to produce the record, Mr. Coronado submitted what purports to be a record including a sworn Affidavit claiming that Mendoza had refused to see other doctors and a psychiatrist. Mendoza submitted evidence showing that the statements that Mr. Coronado claimed on his Affidavit were his case notes, were in fact statements copied by Mr. Coronado from a doctor’s letter sent to Mrs. Murray on the year 2002. See Exhibits 9, 10.
On a hearing before the Impartial Hearing Officer Mr. John Buffington. Mr. William Glenn counsel for DARS did not oppose or engage evidence showing that Mr. Glenn had participated with Mr. Murray in malicious exclusion of evidence from the record to discredit the legitimacy of Mendoza’s disability and mental stability did not oppose or engage evidence on the record of Mr. Coronado’s perjury to discredit the legitimacy of Mendoza’s disability and mental stability, claiming instead without offering any evidence that DARS does not recognize electrical sensitivities as a disability, that Mendoza’s claim was barred by the previous court ruling, and that Mendoza has a mental problem. Mr. Buffington rejected DARS’s claims and scheduled a Due Process Hearing. Mr. Buffington declined to recuse Mr. Glenn from the case.
Before the Due Process Hearing Mr. Glenn offered Mendoza to provide the necessary technology for rehabilitation if Mendoza agreed to remand the case to an impartial counselor and to be evaluated by another doctor with expertise in electrical sensitivities. Mendoza refused the offer after the offer in writing did not include the terms offered by Mr. Glenn. After Mendoza rejected the offer for a voluntary remand, Mr. Glenn called Mendoza saying that the case was to be remanded to Mr. Coronado where Mendoza was to subjected to a series of physical and mental examinations by doctors unfamiliar with electrical sensitivities. Mr. Glenn submitted a motion to remand the case back to Mr. Coronado. Without a Due Process Hearing, Mr. Buffington remanded the case to Mr. Coronado, and Mendoza appealed to state court.
On a hearing before state district judge Gus Strauss, counsel for Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott did not engage or deny the evidence of perjury by Mr. Coronado to discredit the legitimacy of Mendoza’s health condition and mental stability. See Exhibits 9, 10. During the hearing, counsel for DARS made several statements which falsity can be verified by the record itself, including a claim that Mendoza had not filed the law suit on a timely manner. Judge Strauss adopted Abbott’s statements and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. Mendoza filed a motion to recuse Judge Strauss. The Texas Attorney General did not oppose the motion to recuse or engaged the evidence of fraud on the court. Judge Strauss did not recuse or refer the motion to an administrative judge as required by state law, and instead reassigned the case to another judge. On a hearing before State district Judge Rhonda Hurley, the Texas Attorney General did not engage or oppose the evidence of the perjury committed by Mr. Coronado to discredit the legitimacy of Mendoza’s disability and mental stability, and did not engage or oppose evidence f the falsity of statements made to before Judge Strauss Court. Judge Hurley declined to consider the evidence of fraud on the court adopted the findings of Judge Strauss and declined to state the findings of fact that support a dismissal of the case. An appeal is pending. Jesus Mendoza v. the Texas Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services, 345th District Court, Travis County, Texas CAUSE No. D-1-GN-09-002538.
Dr. Pedro S. Montano, a doctor familiar with Mendoza’s health condition filed a law suit against Mendoza claiming that rats had damaged the interior of a vehicle that Dr. Montano had left at Mendoza’s property for more than five years breaching a promise to supply the necessary parts for repair. Before filing the law suit, Dr. Montano’s counsel, Carlos Ortegon, a municipal judge in Alton, Texas admitted that there was no basis for the law suit. Both, Judge Ortegon and Dr. Montano claimed an ability to manipulate the courts. Justice of the Peace Jose Ismael “Melo” Ochoa compelled Mendoza’s attendance to trial in person under penalty of arrest despite medical documentation showing that a stay inside the building was to cause severe physical harm to Mendoza. At trial, Judge Ochoa allowed counsel for Dr. Montano to select as jurors persons that had declared their inability to render a fair verdict. Dr. Daniel Charles Brown claimed to be a friend of Dr. Montano, and Maria Lourdes Gonzalez claimed that she had been involved in repossession of a car by mechanics. At trial Dr. Montano failed to produce any evidence of damage caused to the vehicle by rats, Judge Ochoa refused to submit Mendoza’s counterclaim to the jury and signed a judgement in favor of Dr. Montano for more than four thousand dollars. Pedro S. Montano MD. v Jesus Mendoza, Justice of the Peace Court, Pct. 3 Pl. 2, Hidalgo County Texas Case No. C-06-095MO.
On a new trial on County Court, Dr. Montano did not respond to discovery aimed to establish the fact that Dr. Montano’s law suit was fraudulent. County Court, Judge Jaime Palacios did not allow Mendoza to appear by telephonic conference on a Motion for Sanctions against Dr. Montano, and Mendoza filed a motion to recuse. Judge Palacios recused himself.
The case was assigned to County Court Judge Albert Garcia. Judge Garcia recused himself in response to a motion to recuse that included evidence of collusion with Dr. Montano to take advantage of Mendoza’s disability and to dismiss the case. Administrative Judge Manuel Banales assigned a visiting judge to the case. Dr. Montano dismissed his claim against Mendoza after defaulting on discovery and filed for bankruptcy in federal court staying a hearing on a motion for sanctions. Pedro S. Montano MD, v. Jesus Mendoza, County Court at Law 6, Hidalgo County, Texas Case No. CL-06-3256-F. See
Mendoza filed a law suit against Dr. Montano and against Judge Ochoa seeking redress for violations of Mendoza’s civil rights and aggravation of Mendoza’s health condition when he was compelled to stay inside a building at trial. After defaulting on discovery on County Court, Dr. Montano and Judge Ochoa filed a forged an “Agreed Motion to Dismiss.” The same day, State District Judge Noe Gonzalez dismissed the case. Mendoza filed a Motion to vacate the judgement and for sanctions, including a copy of the forged “Agreed Motion to Dismiss.” See Exhibits 11, 12. Neither Judge Ochoa nor Dr. Montano opposed the evidence of fraud on the court. Judge Gonzalez did not allow Mendoza to appear by teleconference on a hearing to vacate the dismissal and for sanctions against Dr. Montano and against Judge Ochoa, and Mendoza appealed. Neither Judge Ochoa nor Dr. Montano opposed the appeal or the evidence of fraud on the courts. However, Court of Appeals Justice Rose Vela declined to consider the specific, concrete and conclusive evidence on the record of Judge Ochoa and Dr. Montano’s fraud on the courts and dismissed the appeal. The Texas Supreme Court denied the Petition for Review. Jesus Mendoza v Pedro S. Montano MD, and JP Ismael Ochoa, 13th Court of Appeals,, Case No. 13-07-00146-CV.
On January 3, 2008 Mendoza filed a Petition to remove Justice of the Peace Ismael “Melo” Ochoa on the ground that specific, concrete and conclusive evidence on the record supported Mendoza’s claim that Judge Ochoa colluded with Dr. Montano to obtain a fraudulent judgement and then to file a forged “Agreed Motion to Dismiss” a cause of action brought by Mendoza against Judge Ochoa and Dr. Montano. Jesus Mendoza v. Justice of the Peace Ismael “Melo” Ochoa, 398th District Court, Hidalgo, Texas Cause No. C-013-08-I.
The Petition was assigned to the 398th District Court, presided by District Judge Aida Salinas Flores, who in turn reassigned the cause to the 370th District Court presided by District Judge Noe Gonzalez. Mendoza filed a Motion to recuse Judge Gonzalez from the case and to assign a visiting judge. Judge Gonzalez reassigned the Petition to the 398th District Court. Judge Flores did not allow Mendoza’s Motion to appear by telephonic conference to judicial proceedings. Mendoza filed a Motion to recuse Judge Flores. Judge Flores declined to recuse herself. On April 11, 2008 the Administrative Judge for the Fifth Region Manuel Banales recused Judge Flores and assigned District Judge Migdalia Lopez to the Petition.
Mendoza filed a Motion to recuse Judge Lopez afer Judge Lopez did not allow Mendoza to appear by teleconference to judicial proceedings. Before the hearing on the motion to recuse, Judge Lopez agreed to accommodate Mendoza’s disability. At the hearing before Judge Banales, Mendoza withdrew the motion to recuse, and Judge Lopez issued an Order allowing Mendoza to appear by teleconference to judicial proceedings as an accommodation to his disability. See Exhibit “6." Without a hearing Judge Lopez denied Mendoza’s Motion to issue citation on Mendoza’s Petition to remove Judge Ochoa from office and Mendoza filed a motion to recuse Judge Lopez. During the hearing to recuse Judge Lopez, Judge Ochoa did not engage or oppose the evidence of judicial misconduct, official oppression, and fraud on the courts, Judge Manuel Banales denied the motion to recuse Judge Lopez. Without a hearing Judge Lopez denied Mendoza’s motion for reconsideration of the Petition to remove from office Judge Ochoa.
The 13th Court of Appeals declined jurisdiction, and Mendoza, filed a Motion to recuse from the appeal Chief Judge Rogelio Valdez, Judge Linda Reyna Yanes, Judge Nelda V. Rodriguez, Judge Dori Contreras Garza, Judge Gina M. Benavides, and Judge Rose Vela on the ground that they had refused to consider specific, concrete, and conclusive evidence on the record of fraud on the lower courts. Judge Ochoa did not oppose the Motion to recuse nor engage the evidence of his fraud on the courts. The motion to recuse was denied. The Texas Supreme Court denied Mendoza’s Petition for Review. Jesus Mendoza v. Justice of the Peace Ismael “Melo” Ochoa, 398th District Court, Hidalgo, Texas Cause No. C-013-08-I; Court of Appeals Thirteen District of Texas Cause No. 13-08-00588-CV.
An Administrative Law Judge for the Social Security Administration found Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity, a severe impairment. See Exhibit “3." However the Social Security Administration denied Mendoza’s application for disability benefits claiming that Mendoza could find employment on desolate and deserted areas of the country. Mendoza appealed to federal district court. US District Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa assigned the case to US Magistrate Judge Peter E. Ormsby.
On their Motion to dismiss, the Social Security Administration made several false statements including a claim that Mendoza had been working at the time when Mendoza’s health condition aggravated to the point that Mendoza could breath only by lying flat on the floor.
On a telephonic hearing on November 21, 2005, the Social Security Administration did not oppose evidence of the false statements made on their motion for summary judgement. Judge Ormsby expressed his sympathy for Mendoza’s case and implied that a favorable recommendation was to be issued soon. During the year 2006, the Clerk of the district court claimed that a Report and Recommendation had been issued but had not been entered, and then claimed that a Recommendation had not been issued.
Judge Ormsby declined to consider the findings of doctors that had examined and diagnosed Mendoza’s electrical sensitivity, adopted the findings of doctors unfamiliar with electrical sensitivities that never examined Mendoza’s health condition, and adopted the false statements of the Social Security Administration to issue a Recommendation to dismiss the case.
Mendoza filed objections to Judge Ormsby Recommendation. The next day Judge Hinojosa dismissed the case. Pending before the court is a an unopposed motion to recuse Judge Hinojosa and a Motion for Reconsideration. Jesus Mendoza Maldonado v The Social Security Administration, US Dist. Ct. S. Dist of TX., Mcallen Division, Case No. M-05-133).
Mendoza had been provided accommodations to his disability to do research on the library of the local university. The University of Texas Pan-American denied Mendoza access to the library after Mendoza filed a case against Dr. Moron and the Texas Dept. of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services. Mendoza sought redress in federal court. US District Judge Randy Crane dismissed the case claiming in essence that those who do not receive Social Security disability benefits are not entitled to disability accommodations on public places, abrogating the American with Disabilities Act and Rehabilitation Act. Judge Crane lifted procedural obstacles to appeal the case after Mendoza sough Congressional help. Mendoza sought certification that the appeal is not frivolous citing concrete and specific evidence on the record of judicial misconduct to benefit those committing fraud on the courts in order to avoid the possibility that sanctions would be imposed on appeal. The Clerk of the Court declined to present the Motion to the Court and Mendoza withdraw the appeal. Jesus Mendoza v. The University of Texas Pan-American, US Dist. Ct. S. Dist. of TX., Case No. M-05-408; US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, case No. 06-41453.
MAKE NO MISTAKE, EVERYDAY OUR CHILDREN ARE BEING EXPOSED INSIDE SCHOOLS TO THE SAME TYPES OF RADIATION BLAMED FOR CAUSING SEVERE PHYSICAL HARM TO POLICE OFFICERS, FIREMEN, ELECTRICAL WORKERS AND SOLDIERS. (May 2010) The levels of electromagnetic radiation on some areas inside schools can be many times the levels known to cause severe physical harm to adults. Symptoms caused by short term overexposure to radiation include flu and allergy symptoms, stuffy nose, sore throat, drowsiness, high blood pressure, headaches, ear infections, anxiety, hyperactivity, sleep disorders, aggressiveness, rage, and blood shot- spotted- glazed eyes. (The eye is one of the organs more sensible to radiation, and pictures without flash of children’s eyes can document the effects of daily exposure). According to experts, chronic exposure to radiation can cause severe physical harm to our children and to the children of our children including autism, severe learning, behavioral, and developing disabilities, internal swelling and bleeding, seizures, hearth attacks and childhood cancer including leukemia. Children suffering the effects of overexposure to radiation can be misdiagnosed, subjecting them to the devastating side effects of drugs compounded with daily exposure to high levels of radiation found inside schools. This is a serious and complex problem that requires our immediate attention.
Evidence indicates that exposure to radiation compounded with the use of medication may have contributed to the fatal collapse of a student inside a school. We are the voice of our children. They cannot defend themselves from this aggression.
Call Now you Superintendent and each member of the School Board. Request disclosure of the levels of radiation emitted by each frequency and the number of students getting sick. They have a duty to make an honest investigation and to tell you the truth. We have a right to know. Do not let skepticism or apathy take the best of our children.
FACTS A). “Hot Spots” of dangerous radiation have been found inside John H. Shary Elementary. The levels of radiation on these “Hot Spots” are many times above the levels known to cause severe physical harm on adults. B). The school operates a powerful Wi-Fi system which emits frequencies and levels of radiation that have been used by the military and which have been blamed for causing severe physical harm to police officers, firemen and soldiers. C). Everyday, children are seated below high voltage power lines and transformers, and powerful electric motors which radiation has been linked to the severe physical harm suffered by electrical workers. D). Other devices used in close proximity to children inside the schools include a high number of cell phones and walkie-talkies. Experts are urging parents to avoid exposure of children to even one cell phone. E). Everyday children are seated below powerful low-ceiling fluorescent lights. The State of Texas has banned the use of tanning beds on children because of cancer concerns. The compounded long term exposure of children to the radiation emitted by low ceiling fluorescent lights can exceed the radiation emitted by the banned tanning lamps. F). From August of 2009 to January of 2010, 1855 students have reported illness. The student population at John H. Shary is of about 700 students. A high percentage of teachers have reported illnesses. Other schools are reporting similar or higher number of sicknesses. G. A Petition signed by concerned parents to make a risk assessment of the levels of radiation inside the school and to remove children from radiation “hot spots” was submitted to the Sharyland Independent School District. H. The Petition include scientific evidence showing the severe physical harm caused on children by levels of radiation hundreds of times below the levels found inside John H. Shary Elementary, and a document in which thousands of doctors are urging parents not to expose their children to radiation emitted by the devices that can be found inside schools. I. At first, District officials expressed a strong support to make a risk evaluation inside the school. Everything changed after they notified their insurance carrier. J. The District has not allowed to make further measurements of radiation inside the school; attempted to exclude from the record statements of recognized scientists and doctors warning parents of the serious health effects caused by exposure to radiation, has not allowed the presentation of expert witnesses; has refused to allow attendance of parents to hearings and to notify parents about this problem. K. The Superintendent has claimed that the high number of children getting sick is caused by the flu and has claimed that harm by exposure to radiation is imaginary or physiological citing statements of a scientist on the payroll of the wireless industry that has been accused of committing research fraud to conceal from the public the devastating effects caused by exposure to radiation. A hearing on the Petition is bound to be set by the School Board. You make the call.
ACCORDING TO RESPECTED AND RECOGNIZED SCIENTISTS, EXPOSING CHILDREN TO THE NEAR-RANGE-CONCENTRATED RADIATION FOUND INSIDE SCHOOLS CAN BE WORST THAN PLACING OUR CHILDREN INSIDE A BUILDING FULL OF CIGARETTE SMOKE. The loss and destruction of lives on children caused by the wireless industry may exceed the destruction caused on adults by the tobacco industry. Other School Districts have passed measures to minimize exposure to radiation on children, and thousands of concerned doctors and scientists are testifying as to the devastating effects of cumulative, compounded exposure of children to radiation, and are calling for action NOW! See Analysis of Health and Environmental Effects of Proposed San Francisco Earthlink Wi-Fi Network (2207).
As was the case with cigarettes, the facts about dangerous radiation remains secret while our health is seriously being jeopardized. See Carleigh Cooper, “Cell Phones and the Dark Deception” Premier Advantage Publishing, 2009.
Government standards are not protecting us. Renowned researches advise us that the radiation from wireless technology can be related to: Allergies, Alzhemeirs’s ALS, ADD, ADHD, Asperger’s, Autism Spectrum Disorders, Cancer, Cataracts, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Depression, Dizziness, Electro-sensitivity, Headaches, Infertility, Immune Suppression, Mutiple Chemical Sensitivity, Parkinson’s, Sleep Disorders. K. Crofton, Ph.D., “Radiation Rescue”, iUniverse Inc. , (2009). Exposing children to radiation is not only risky, it could lead to an early, preventable death. “More Reasons Children May Be at Risk”, Microwave News, Vol. 22. No. 4 (July/August 2002). Placing wireless devices inside a school building equates as placing a cellular antenna inside the school. See Open Letter to Parents, Teachers, School Boards, Regarding Wi-Fi Networks in Schools, by Dr. Magda Havas at The EMR Policy Institute web site See Section 1 of the Bioinitiative Report.
What is unique about microwave radiation is its ability to deeply penetrate into tissues and cook or heat them up. The health consequences of continuous low level exposure to microwave radiation can be catastrophic. Microwaves radiation poses an extreme public health risk that may become fully realized in the next 5 to 7 years. The total exposure is cumulative; in essence there is no safe dose. Gerald Goldberg, M.D. “Would You Put Your Head In a Microwave Oven?” Authorhouse, 2006.
The human body is very limited in its ability to absorb environmental radiation. The brain, eyes, heart and lungs are specially vulnerable to exposure to radiation. “In radiation and health, an ounce of prevention is worth far more than a pound of cure!!” Daniel D. Brunda, DDG LFIBA MOIF IOM AdVSci “Power Line Radiation, Your Genes, Hereditary Diseases, The Unified Nature Of Electromagnetic Radiation Energy And control And The Radiation Limits Of Control And The Radiation Limits Of Human Beings,” Xlibris 2004. 18 legislators in the State of Maine supported a measure to compel the placing of a red warning label on cell phones to protect children against exposure to radiation. The wireless and insurance lobby defeated the measure. You make the call.
Jesus Mendoza is a concerned parent who has been diagnosed as highly sensitive to electricity and who has a visible reaction to exposure to radiation. Electrical sensitivity is a painful and debilitating health condition that is reaching epidemic proportions. Electrical sensitivity can be caused by the same types of radiation found inside schools. For questions or concerns call (956)519-7140 Email
Hello Jesus, Is there any update about your case?
ReplyDelete