It looks like Little Valley Town Court Clerk Jillian Koch and the RICO criminal cabal she is a member of is at it again. On July 13th, 2016 the Pro-Se ‘visited’ the Little Valley Town Court to review the case file in which all charges were dismissed against him on April 6th, 2016 do to the criminal conduct of Baby Faced Finster, AKA William Preston Marshall, his criminally minded wife and the other criminal’s Elizabeth Noelle Ensell and Koch concerning his case and to obtain copies of documents therein. He was informed by the Judge that the state attorney general is now investigating the matter and therefore he was no longer allowed access to anything and that he had to contact the lawyer for the town Matthew Swenson, of Brady and Swenson. The Brady part is the former Attorney for Cattaraugus County Thomas Brady who since retired. See how everything connects. We wonder if there is some marriages involved to.
Just a refresher, it was Matthew Swenson who attempted to coverup the criminal conduct of the Town of Little Valley Clerk Susan Koch (Jillian’s Mother) when she allowed for the destruction of a video tape concerning a hearing the Pro-Se was forced to attend. Here are excerpts of an audio of Susan Koch admitting to the existence of the video tape when Swenson claimed it did not exist;
Here is the copy of the letter where Swenson claimed the video did not exist.
We don’t believe that the attorney general locked down the file because of an investigation. Judiciary Law 255 does not allow a file to be locked down and is available to any citizen to review if it is not sealed, If it is sealed the person the case concerns is still allowed access and no one needs a lawyer to review it or demand copies. The judge seemed very sincere when making the statements to the Pro-Se so we have no doubt that these criminals would stoop to the level of calling the judge stating they were from the AG’s Office or have someone do it for them. We do not believe that someone from the Attorney Generals Office did call him and tell him that the pro-se was not allowed access to his file in violation of the law.
Notice how the letter from the judge focuses around the criminal Jillian Koch. There is nothing in it that mentions the Attorney General whatsoever. The letter claims that because the Pro Se is suing Jillian (and others, but that is a different article) she can’t do anything, so the Pro-Se can’t review his file and get copies. If she can’t then the judge can, however the judge was allegedly told by the ‘attorney general’ to lock down the file so he could not help the Pro-se. If the attorney general ordered the file locked down based on the accusations concerning the tampering and falsification and/or destruction of evidence by court personal do you really think the Attorney General would be stupid enough to leave the very file and other evidence in the hands of the very individual’s accused of tampering with it? We think not. This is simply and attempt by these criminals to deny the Pro-Se access to documents he is clearly allowed by law to have and at a minimum another act of official misconduct by them, not to mention the destruction of more evidence and more liability. Looks like the criminals are in panic cover-up mode.
Further you will notice the statement “Please be advised that prior to July 05, 2016 you had been grated permission to inspect the court file number 15030001…” WRONG! The court, nor the clerks nor anyone for that matter can deny access to a court file pursuant to Judiciary Law 255 PERIOD.
Further after the Pro-se was sent to the Jack Nicholson Suite in Elmira Psychiatric Center which Baby Faced Finster thought would be at least ninety days, the real professionals in Elmira saw right through Finster’s lies and criminal conduct and the Pro-Se was released within 24 hours.
Baby Face Finster originally tried the same thing back in February 2016 in which the Pro-Se was kidnapped and threatened with up to 90 days of incarceration and then taken to ECMC CPEP where the professionals there released him within 16 hours and admonished the judge for even sending him there. In the report of the Doctor of Record the Judge admitted that the victim of “DA” Rieman, and “ADA’s” Marshall Balcom, Ensell, Koch and others had a “impressive understanding and familiarity with the law” The Doctor’s own impression of the victim was that his “intellectual functioning is clearly well above average”.
But lets get back to the issue of “being granted access…” Jillian would start to claim both the Pro-Se and his lawyer were harassing and argumentative with her. The Pro-Se has kept all communications with her, which will be used as evidence against her and others and further there is no evidence of any type of harassment and arguing. She, nor the court has any lawful authority to deny access to public records. It boils down to the fact that Jillian is a little spoiled brat who doesn’t like it when you ask her to do her job.
So Jillian would start to severely limit her victims ability to access his public records. She would use her bogus claims of harassing and being argumentative in an attempt to force the victim to use the most time consuming and costly method to attempt to get access to the court file. He would be force to send her a written letter and she would give him a specific date for him to show up to inspect his record, not a series of dates, but just one. He was not allowed to use any other methods like e-mail or phone conversations like everyone else. In other words if the victim could not make the one date he would have to do the process all over again. Further this was her Little Valley Town Court Clerk position which was part time, so she could use this as a delaying method to respond so it could take up to a month to anything back from her, which she took full advantage of.
The victim’s first letter went out and between that and the response the victim had other legal issues to attend which required him to visit the county clerks office where Jillian worked also. Further a close family member was having a major surgical operation around the same time which required the victim to assist the family member adding further stress to the situation. On this visit to the county court clerks office the victim asked for a delay in the legal matter because of the additional family related responsibilities and stresses he was presently going through which the court granted, however Koch was present when her victim was asking for the delay and the victim stated why he was seeking the delay in front of her. A letter from the criminal Koch arrives, in it she states that he is only allowed to visit on the week of the additional stressors, how nice of her. Further the victim already had something scheduled that very same day that he could not avoid.
This wasn’t the first time this she engaged in this pattern and practice. When the first judge in the Little Valley Court was attempting to set up a trial date for the bogus charges Koch suggested July 1st, one day before the victims birthday. She how she works? That’s not the end of it. The victim was forced to attend mental evaluations due to the criminal Marshall claiming the victim could not defend himself or assist his attorney. The victim had already won a DMV refusal hearing appeal which most lawyers have a hard time winning.
Further the victim was chosen to appear at a state level panel hearing in Buffalo on a specific time and date concerning the criminal conduct of the District Attorney. Guess which date the victim was required to attend one of the examinations? Why it was the same date as he was required to be at the hearing and what was even better is the victim received the notice of the examination only one day before the exam was to occur. Here is a copy of the envelope that was used to mail the alleged notice of exam. Boy, isn’t it professional! All hand written with no return address name. Notice how the Department of Community Services name is absent from the return address? Also notice the date when it was mailed, July 20, 2015?
Also notice the date of the letter itself. It’s dated June 30th, 2015. So the notice is dated about 20 days before it was mailed. Now why would they do that? They are so honest and trustworthy. NOT! So the Pro-Se received the letter ONE day before he was to show up at the first exam which the exam was on the same day he was to appear in Buffalo. We wonder if it was not supposed to show up until after the first exam so the judge could issue an arrest warrant. Marshall would attempt this same criminal tactic in 2016 when neither the victims lawyer or himself was made aware of a hearing that the scheduled which the Pro-Se was mandated to attend.
So the “Please be advised that prior to July 05, 2016 you had been grated permission to inspect the court file number 15030001…” was in effect a lie because Jillian would only let her victim see the file once after the April 6th hearing due to her delay tactics and the victim could not show up because of additional responsibilities and/or stressors for that specific date. So the victim sends out another letter this time demanding a series of dates and dear old Jillian sends him back a letter giving him the next date which falls on the same date of the DMV refusal hearing he was required to attend. She how she works, how demented and evil she really is?
Judiciary Law 255 is VERY CLEAR that ANYONE can review and have copies made documents of a court file and you don’t have to go to an Attorney to get it done, except of course in Cattaraugus County New York where the rule of law is on permanent vacation and justice goes to die. This is just adding to the further liability of the Town and once the Pro-Se gets to the bottom of it other individuals as well.
The other important distinction in the letter is the term “audio material”. however the letter states it cover’s all documentation, which would include any “audio material”. So why was that specifically point out? It’s simple, see the criminal Jillian Koch had illegally edited out the objections in the April 6th, 2016 audio file which the transcript would be created from. The victims lawyer’s objected to the amount of law enforcement criminals who showed up that evening, which there were six total (at the prior February action four showed up) which was for the purpose of intimidation, harassment and the intentional and reckless infliction of emotional duress in the hopes their intended victim would conduct himself in a matter that they could interpret as criminal in nature or provide evidence he had a mental problem or just stop exercising his rights. Anytime the Pro-Se would show up in court he would always be surrounded by criminally minded cops or sheriffs in an act of intimidation, harassment, and intentional and reckless infliction of emotional duress and almost always the actions would be conducted in the atmosphere of a secret star-chamber kangaroo court proceedings in which no other actions were scheduled and the rule of law is cast out the window. Mid Evil England, right here in Cattaraugus County, ain’t it great folks.
Further the victim, his lawyer and others in the court also objected when the criminally minded wife of “ADA” William Preston Marshall, one Bridget Marshall, appeared and took a seat right behind the Pro-Se and his lawyer where she could overhear the privileged conversations of the Pro-Se and his lawyer and report back to her criminal cohort William the criminal and the co-chair criminal Elizardbeth Ensell. She would in fact do so and she would also inappropriately and forcefully touch the Pro-se when he was in his seat right in front of her. The Victim objected, the victim’s lawyer object and so did others in the court and guess what dear old Jillian edited out also? That appears to be the reason why they are claiming he can’t get a copy, because the copy he demanded be in the original audio format of the recorder that is supplied by the Uniformed Court System of New York and the true, correct and complete one, which is un-edited version and will contain the objections.
So the Pro-Se faxes and e-mail’s a Notice and Demand requiring the Town Attorney Swenson to provide what law allowed him, the Town or the Court to override Judiciary Law 255. So Swenson goes running and crying to the Pro-Se’s former Attorney in the matter making outrageous accusations. There is no rule or law that you have to go through an attorney to review and get copies of public records. Anyone can do, except of course for the Pro-Se. Swenson claims he can overrule the law. In this letter he claims that court personal are under no legal obligation to create documents. Really Matty? Have you ever heard of Judiciary Law § 255?
“A clerk of a court must, upon request, and upon payment of, or offer to pay, the fees allowed by law, or, if no fees are expressly allowed by law, fees at the rate allowed to a county clerk for a similar service, diligently search the files, papers, records, and dockets in his office; and either make one or more transcripts or certificates of change therefrom, and certify to the correctness thereof, and to the search, or certify that a document or paper, of which the custody legally belongs to him, can not be found.“
Matty also claims the Pro-Se was making threats and such. Well Matty we reviewed that audio recordings of all the conversations the Pro-Se had with your office. This is clearly another lie by you that can be used as evidence.
Not to be outdone, Jillian’s mother Susan Koch appears to have allowed for the destruction of other videos in which the pro-se/victim appeared. The liability for these individuals is getting pretty heavy. The destruction of these records is in violation of Local Government Records Law ARTICLE 57-A, let’s start off with what is a “record” and if it applies to local government. Records Retention and Disposition Schedule MU-1 clearly states; “The MU-1 Records Retention and Disposition Schedule indicates the minimum length of time that officials of Cities, Towns, Villages and Fire Districts must retain their records before they may be disposed of legally.”
No records may be disposed of unless they are listed on this Schedule, or their disposition is covered by other state laws. The retention periods listed in this Schedule pertain to the information contained in records, regardless of physical form or characteristic (paper, microfilm, computer disk or tape, or other medium).
Records of this nature must be saved for a minimum of six years.
PL § 175.20 Tampering with public records in the second degree. Tampering with public records in the second degree. A person is guilty of tampering with public records in the second degree when, knowing that he does not have the authority of anyone entitled to grant it, he knowingly removes, mutilates, destroys, conceals, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any record or other written instrument filed with, deposited in, or otherwise constituting a record of a public office or public servant. Tampering with public records in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor.
This is at the state level. At the federal level it’s up to a twenty year sentence.
They were already caught destroying another video/record in 2015 and they were warned about it then, then they go off and destroy more video evidence. The criminal and civil liability of these Town of Little Valley employees has just increased dramatically because the the criminals employed there. This is a clear pattern and practice of criminal conduct.
Court records are not controlled by the FOIL act (Public Officers Law, 86), but by section 255 of the Judiciary Law, which is directed to the responsibilities of a clerk of a court. If that specific clerk can’t access it, then the judge sure can or they can ask for another court clerk to perform the task. However to date NO ONE has been able to come up with the law or a court cite that does not allow a court clerk or a judge for that matter to deny access to a court file when the clerk is being, or going to be sued.
The Pro-Se has filed a complaint with the Public Integrity Bureau of the state attorney generals office concerning the access to his file to get to the bottom of it. The Public Integrity Bureau (“PIB”) investigates and seeks to vindicate the public’s interest in honest government. When government actors, or private individuals acting in concert with them, engage in corruption, fraud or illegal behavior in the course of their public duties, the PIB may investigate or take enforcement action to restore the public’s interest in honest government and the integrity of government officials at the state and local level. Specifically, PIB handles complex investigations into government corruption, fraud and abuse of authority. Although PIB is part of the Criminal Division, PIB brings cases pursuant to both civil and criminal authority. The Bureau can also issue reports about its investigations and findings.