Thursday, February 10, 2011

New Jersey a Police State Ruled by R R F & S

The undersigned after 3 years of fighting with the Court system of New Jersey has given up all the hopes of getting any justice from Gangsters Ruling NJ in a case of Racial Discrimination, Racial Profiling and Selective Enforcement of Law. The case was tossed from one Municipal Court to another than in Union County Superior Court and finally in Superior Court of NJ, Appellate Division.

The undersigned has suffered mentally, emotionally, financially and physically including 2 illegal arrest warrants and illegal threat of suspending his driver license if he does not give up his quest for Racial Equality and Equal Justice at the hands of so called custodians of law.
The last letter was written to the following on Feb. 9, 2011 and producing the last paragraph of that letter for which I do not expect any reply from the Gangsters Ruling New Jersey.

Hon. Dorothea O’C Wefing, P.J.A.D.
Superior Court of New Jersey (Appellate Division)
Fax: 609 392 3498

RE: State of New Jersey v. Devendra Makkar & your order dated Jan. 20, 2011
       Appellate # A-4610-08T4 Municipal Appeal # 5904

Hon. Judge Weffing your biased orders of 1-20-11 is nothing but a dishonest exercise to save the various state actors from exposure and embarrassment for running an illegal racket of Traffic Summons Quota for minorities. These orders further confirms to Appellant’s believes that New Jersey is Governed by Unionized Gangs posing as Politicians, Bureaucrats, Law Enforcement and Judiciary. Especially when the victim has very limited resources and do not belong to any of the preferred minority community like Jews; justice is an illusion for people like the Appellant. The biased and unethical order in the above referred matters is gross injustice to the Appellant and mockery of our justice system. Illegal Traffic Summons Quota for minorities is a public interest matter and Judge should have considered the above matters as Public Interest Litigation.

“I do not believe there is a shred of decency, honesty, morality or Constitutional rights in the courts and corridors of powers in New Jersey. In my opinion, we now live in a police state. Judges are free to do absolutely anything they want. Our laws are meaningless. Your life savings can be stolen by pimps posing as Attorneys assuring you of justice but working for the benefit of Unionized Quasi criminals posing as Politicians, Judges, Law enforcement and bureaucracy and no one has any risk in violating every law in the books. That is the reason New Jersey is the only state in the entire world where in 8,000 sq miles there are 588 governments in 566 racially segregated towns with over 9,000 elected scoundrels and over 466,000 employees appointed for political reasons with little or no work. This state is legally corrupt and legally racist. In New Jersey Power is in the hands of rascals, rogues, freebooter’s, persons of low caliber & men of straw. Surprisingly all of them have sweet tongues & silly hearts. A day would come when even air & water would also be taxed when money raised from illegal Traffic Summons Quota meant for minorities will not be enough to feed the Scoundrels governing New Jersey.”

Very truly yours,
Devendra Makkar (Appellant Pro Se)

cc:
Governor of New Jersey
Lt. Governor of New Jersey

Attorney General of New Jersey
Prosecutor’s Office, Union County,
Hon. Judge Piem (Union County Court)
Hon. Judge Angello (Roselle Park)
NJ Hon. Judge Kelly Waters (Union)
Mayor & Council Members of Union TWP

Superior Court Appellate, County & Municipal Court Judges in cahoots in the illegal Traffic Ticket Quota Racket in Union County


Officer Anthony Cavallo of Union Police is a liar and a serial exaggerator for concocting a story about the Defendant that he jumped Red Light out of whole cloth. Under oath he repeatedly said he was Parked on the other side of the intersection by the Chase Bank and at the same time kept on denying he was not parked in the Handicapped Parking!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3444356713/

Second time Officer Cavallo followed the Defendant for more than 15 minutes and gave him a parking ticket with his blinkers still on without issuing any Summons to other vehicles belonging to Whites parked there for hours eating inside the bakery. Defendant was still outside the Blue Ribbon Bakery holding its door to get in just to pick up a big pie kept ready for him. When the Defendant took pictures of other parked vehicles in loading zone Cavallo made an obscene gesture to the Defendant F*** You.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3445193170/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3445188548/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3445183928/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3444360969/

Judge Stuart Piem of Superior Court of Union County & Judge Jeffery Angelo of Roselle Park both found Officer Cavallo very credible who had all the help of a Racist Prosecutor Robert Donovan who made the remarks inside the Court room, “It is a free country you can raise the issue of Racial Profiling or Racial Bias at any place but not in my Court. Every one with traffic violation ticket raises these questions. I am not concerned what happened to you or in the case in the last 1 year.


This Prosecutor Donovan intentionally created commotion and havoc in the Court of Judge Angelo by taking away his Copy of Motion & Photographs as well as of the Defendant despite the fact he had his own copy of the Motion and Photographs. The Court Transcripts are proof of this commotion & havoc by Racist Robert Donovan. Then he tried to create confusion that Defendant was not able to see the Traffic Light & Officer Cavallo parked in the handicapped parking where as the facts are totally against his fraud assertions.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3445165054/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37407895@N02/3444343881/

Under Home Rule of NJ rather Gang Rule Judge Stuart Piem also denied oral arguments to the defendant. Judge Piem & Angelo both found the testimony of a liar Anthony Cavallo credible and found nothing wrong in his making F*** You gesture to the victim of Racial Profiling & Selective Enforcement of Law.

Judge Kelly Waters of Union Municipal Court is actively involved in legalizing an illegal Traffic Summons Quota Racket run by Union PD & Union Twp. In the matters of Summons # UNN 637580 & 638639 issued under Racial Profiling and Selective Enforcement of Law under an illegal Traffic Summons Quota by Union PD Judge Waters transferred the case to Roselle Park after more than 9 months without addressing the issues raised by the Defendant and without providing any Discoveries requested going back to Nov. 2007. Twice she issued arrest warrants of the defendant on fabricated grounds to muzzle his voice. Then Judge Waters/Union Municipal Court itself failed to provide discoveries and is a co-accused along with Union Twp & its PD to cover up the issue of Racial Profiling and illegal Traffic Summons Quota practiced by Union Police against minorities.

It looks like Judge Piem, Judge Angelo, Judge Waters and Prosecutor Donovan are still living in the past and do not understood the meaning of the comments made by our first African American Attorney General Eric Holder, “We are a nation of cowards when it comes to race matters”. Judge Piem, Angelo & Waters have failed in their legal duties in addressing the issue of Racial Discrimination, Selective Enforcement of Law and illegal Traffic Summons Quota practiced by Union Police initiated by Union Twp & legalized by Union Municipal Court with the blessings of the Superior Court of the Union County .
SUPERIOR COURT OF NJ APPELLATE DIVISION: To Hon. Judge Weffing: your biased orders of 1-20-11 is nothing but a dishonest exercise to save the various state actors from exposure and embarrassment for running an illegal racket of Traffic Summons Quota for minorities. These orders further confirms to Appellant’s believes that New Jersey is Governed by Unionized Gangs posing as Politicians, Bureaucrats, Law Enforcement and Judiciary.  Especially when the victim has very limited resources and do not belong to any of the preferred minority community like Jews; justice is an illusion for people like the Appellant. The biased and unethical order in the above referred matters is gross injustice to the Appellant and mockery of our justice system. Illegal Traffic Summons Quota for minorities is a public interest matter and Judge should have considered the above matters as Public Interest Litigation.

Home Rule=GANG RULE Superior Court Appellate Division and County Superior Courts are in cahoots with Municipal Courts in legalizing Traffic Summons Quota, Racial Profiling & Selective Enforcement of Law initiated by Politicians to raise revenue for the comforts of largest elected more than 1 scoundrel & over 50 employees per square mile in the world in Banana Republic of New Jersey. To protect them there are more than 10 Pimps/Attorneys per square miles majority of the times with Tax Payers money.


Important Statements made by Union PD, Twp Officers

Officer Rad Sangster while parked illegally in the presence of a Petrol Car # 224 outside Marina News he made a remark, “they are under pressure to write Summons because they have to fill their Traffic Summons Quota”.

Sgt. Fenton of Springfield PD while processing Bail Papers for arrest warrants issued & executed in 5 days by Union MC on fictitious grounds, “Although we are not supposed to have it but Springfield also has a Traffic Summons Quota.”

Sgt. Elliott: it has been a long time since any Cultural or Racial Sensitivity Training has been conducted for Union PD. Officer Cavallo who is in the force for last 31/2 yrs only never had any such training!

Officer Jovic’s unprovoked voluntary statement after writing a Summons on the intersection knowingly that NJDOT has made it unsafe & inconvenient, “Do not pay the fine, make sure you come to court on Oct. 23rd & talk to the prosecutor. If you send the fine you will have 1 point on your license. We hate to do what we are doing but we are being forced by our Bosses to do it.”http://www.flickr.com/photos/28501071@N07/3023752464/

Town Administrator James Bradley: “it has been the position of the township since reconfiguration of the intersection, that the State of New Jersey returns the intersection to its original design.” The complainant should take up this matter with NJDOT. He further added, “We will forward a copy of your letter and concerns to NJDOT so that they may take your recommendations into considerations.”

Sgt. Rego of Union PD while conducting a sham internal affair investigation without any complaint, “I know that it is a bad system and traffic is backing up to Springfield . City was against it and still the State implemented it. State can do whatever they want to do. NJDOT I believe is going to make changes to this pattern. You know how the State works; it will take a while for them to do any thing.”

NJDOT: never replied to various correspondences some sent under certified mail & e-mail. Finally on 3-30-09 they rectified the problems on the intersection which has become a Financial Bonanza for the Union Twp & its Police Department meeting its illegal Traffic Summons Quota may be to get more over time pay!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28501071@N07/3022944855/

New Jersey Attorney General’s office: Attorney General Ann Miligram to Paula Dow with 586 Dumb, Deaf & Blind Assistant Attorney Generals besides thousands of Junior Attorneys since Nov. 2007 has not replied to any of the correspondences some sent under Certified Mail R R concerning Racial Profiling, Selective Enforcement of Law & illegal Traffic Summons Quota practiced by Union Police on behalf of the Union Twp and legalized by Union Municipal Court with the blessings of the Superior Court of the Union County.

http://http://www.trafficticketquota.blogspot.com/

http://attorney-judge-corruption.blogspot.com/
http://http://www.citizensfordemocracynj.org/
Devendra Makkar, Defendant (Pro Se)
568 Ashwood Rd., Springfield, NJ 07081
973 416 1600 Fax: 973 416 1500


SUMMARY FROM BRIEF TO SUPERIOR COURT APPELLATE DIVISION
Please accept this letter in lieu of a formal brief in reply to government’s opposition letter.

POINT I
MUNICIPAL JUDGE INCORRECTLY FAILED TO CONSIDER THE DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE
The Prosecutor has asked the Court to give deference to the municipal judge that adjudicated this matter. However, Judge D’Angelo refused to pay attention to the Defendant’s testimony and seemed to just want the matter swept away quickly as a simple parking ticket case. With respect to the summons regarding crossing a red light, the Defendant’s pictures demonstrate that the Defendant could clearly see the red light and Officer Cavallo. See Exhibit 1 and 2. There was no reason why he would have crossed the red light especially since the traffic was moving extremely slowly at 15 miles an hour. It makes no sense. Furthermore, the Court should not give deference to Officer Cavallo’s statements and Judge D’Angelo’s reliance on such statements because Officer Cavallo blatantly misrepresented where he was parked. The Defendant has repeatedly stated that Officer Cavallo was parked in the handicap parking on the corner in front of Chase Bank. Officer Cavallo denied this in court. However, as the photograph clearly demonstrates, the only place that Officer Cavallo could have had a clear unobstructed view from the corner was the handicap parking spot. See Exhibit 1. The fact that Officer Cavallo lied about this issue makes all his statements suspect. In addition, as discussed below in this Brief, the issue at hand is that Officer Cavallo subjected the Defendant to selective enforcement and racial profiling due to the fact that the Defendant is an Indian- American.

POINT II
DEFENDANT’S FIFTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE VIOLATED BY OFFICER CAVALLO
The Prosecutor’s brief is misleading and disingenuous because the Prosecutor fails to address the fact that the Defendant’s Fifth Amendment right to due process was violated by Officer Cavallo’s decision to only issue a summons for illegal parking to the Defendant who is Indian while to not issue summons to similarly situated persons who were white. The question is not whether the Defendant was illegally parked. Instead, the issue was whether Officer Cavallo violated the Defendant’s civil rights by subjecting him to racial profiling.
The Defendant did not base his case of racial profiling simply on a hand gesture. In addition, the Prosecutor’s assertion that the “Fuck you” hand gesture by Officer Cavallo was ambiguous is insulting to the Defendant. The Prosecutor’s Brief fails to address the fact that Officer Cavallo decided not to issue tickets to similarly situated non-Indians. Officer Cavallo was aware that the drivers of the other illegally parked cars were white because he watched as the Defendant took photographs of the other illegally parked cars and their white drivers (as they were entering their respective cars). These other illegally parked cars were next to or near the Defendant’s car and were parked for considerably longer periods. However, Officer Cavallo did not write them any summons. The photographs taken by the Defendant clearly illustrate that the drivers’ of the other illegally parked cars were white/Caucasian. Officer Cavallo watched from his car while the Defendant took photographs of the other illegally parked cars and their drivers.
Under the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause, the decision whether to prosecute may not be based on an arbitrary classification such as race or religion. Oyler v. Boles, 368 U.S. 448, 456 (1962). Officer Cavallo’s decision can only be reasonably explained as resulting from racial profiling and selective enforcement of the law. The question is why Officer Cavallo decided to issue a summons to the Defendant while ignoring the other illegally parked cars. Thus, a reasonable person can conclude that the only reason Officer Cavallo issued a summons to the Defendant while not issuing one to the other illegally parked cars was due to racial profiling and bias.

Basically, the Defendant’s civil rights were violated by the Police Department’s implementation of a traffic summons quota. The Police Department is committing two wrongs: first, they have instituted a traffic summons quota and second, the police officers target minorities when they seek to fulfill their quota. Unfortunately, the Prosecutors’ Office has decided to fail in its responsibility to uphold the U.S. Constitution and to behave in a disingenuous manner by avoiding any of Defendant’s evidence or statements regarding the violation of civil rights and to instead focus on the narrow issue of whether the Defendant parked illegally. The Defendant has spent time and energy on this issue not to defend himself against a parking ticket but because he is disturbed by the blatant violation of civil rights by the very police officers who are supposed to uphold and defend the Constitution of this country.
POINT III
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY WAS IMPROPERLY DENIED.
The Defendant’s constitutional rights were violated when the RP Court ruled that the Defendant was not entitled to discovery regarding on his claim the Officer Cavallo singled him out for prosecution based on the color of his skin and his race. The Prosecutor’s Brief points to State v. Kennedy, 247 N/J/ Super. 21 (App. Div. 1991), a 1991 case from the Appellate Court of New Jersey. The Prosecutor’s Brief fails to mention United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996), which is not only more recent than Kennedy but also is a United States Supreme Court case and thus holds the highest precedential value. Armstrong held that “[f]or a defendant to be entitled to discovery on a claim that he was singled out for prosecution on the basis of his race, he must make a threshold showing that the Government declined to prosecute similarly situated suspects of other races”. Here, the Defendant met the standard established by the United States Supreme Court. The Defendant has clearly shown that Officer Cavallo declined to issue summons to similarly situated suspects of other races by providing photographs of other cars that were illegally parked at the same time and place as the Defendant. There is colorable basis for the claim of selective enforcement of law. Thus, pursuant to the United States Supreme Court and New Jersey courts, the Defendant was entitled to discovery regarding the claim of selective enforcement of law.

The Defendant’s discovery requests were all narrowly tailored and of probative value in that he requested information regarding the number of tickets given for the exact crime he was charged with, the copy of the internal affairs investigation, and information about the sensitivity training given to the police officers. All the information requested would have been useful in determining whether the police agency officially sanctioned selective enforcement of minorities or had a de facto policy in place. Since the Prosecutors Office and the Police Department repeatedly stated either that they would not comply or did not have the requested documents and the Defendant was entitled to discovery pursuant to Armstrong, the Municipal Court should have dismissed the case against the Defendant.
In addition, the Municipal Court has specifically informed the Defendant that “I am required to send it directly to Union County Prosecutor’s Office. So this case will be sent to UCPO. They will then investigate the allegations of racial profiling.” However, as per the Defendant’s knowledge, the UCPO has failed to conduct any investigation. Since the UCPO has failed to timely investigate this matter, the matter should have been transferred to the Attorney General’s office as per the Municipal Court.

POINT IV
DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN RECEIVED HIS BAIL AMOUNT ONCE IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE ORIGINAL ARREST WARRANT WAS ERRONEOUS
The Municipal Court’ failure to return the bail on January 22, 2008 violated the Fifth Amendment, otherwise known as the Takings Clause, and was an improper use of judicial authority. Once the Municipal Court was aware that the arrest warrant against the Defendant was erroneously issued, the bail amount should have been returned to the Defendant since it was a direct result of the erroneously issued arrest warrant. The Prosecutor’s Brief fails to address this issue.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons outlined above, the Defendant humbly requests this Court to overturn the Defendant’s conviction.

REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
The Defendant would like to request that this Court reinstate oral arguments in this case since the matter concerns violations of the Defendant’s constitutional rights.

Sincerely,

Devendra Makkar

cc: Hon. Anne Milgram, Office of the Attorney General
Brent Bramnick, Esq. Assistant Prosecutor Union County
Maryann Harrington, Criminal Case Management

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE WITH 586 Dumb, Deaf & Blind ASSISTANT AG'S BESIDES THOUSANDS OF JUNIOR ATTORNEYS SINCE NOV. 2007 HAS NOT REPLIED TO VARIOUS CORRESPONDENSES INCLUDING ILLEGAL TRAFFIC SUMMONS QUOTA PRACTISED BY UNION PD, INITIATED BY UNION TOWNSHIP & LEGALIZED BY UNION MUNICIPAL COURT WITH THE BLESSINGS OF UNION COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT.



State of New Jersey v. Devendra Makkar

Appellate # A-4610-08T4 Municipal Appeal # 5904

ORDER DENYIG THE MOTION TO FILE BRIEF AS IS & DISMISSING ON FRIVOLOUS GROUNDS IS MOCKERY OF JUSTICE SYSTEM.

Honorable Judges:

How can the Honorable Court deny these visible merits for which the Honorable Judges does not have to read the Full Brief:

1. The very important Merit Court is ignoring Appellant is not looking for any kind of financial or other compensation. He is only demanding Justice and Equality which is his constitutional right.

2. Appellant is fighting against gross injustice, humiliation, mental & physical torture along with illegal arrest warrants for more than 2 years since Nov. 2007 and has spent substantial amount of time and money in his quest to get Justice and Equality from the Mob Rulers of NJ.

3. It looks like Honorable Court never read any of the Appellant’s Motions on the issue of incompetence, corruption and racist behavior of Municipal Judges Waters and Angelo along with other actors to promote illegal Traffic Summons Quota by local Police which is primarily being used for racial profiling. Then they are also protecting equally corrupt, racist and incompetent County Prosecutor who is still the Prosecutor despite Appellants repeated request that this case must be prosecuted by State Attorney General’s Office.

How can the Judge pass an order “Defendant must submit a brief that complies with the rules of the court” when 9 copies of the Brief were submitted as per the rule on Dec. 28, 2009? They may not confirm to the fancy cosmetics appearance as desired by the Judges who are least bothered about the mental, emotional, financial and physical sufferings of the appellant spanning over 2 years. Why Judge has ignored numerous request of the Appellant made since Jan. 7, 2010 to case Manager Ms Morales and various Motions to accept Brief As Is that all the 9 copies (5 to the Court and 2 each to State AG & County Prosecutor) must be returned to the Appellant so that cosmetics changes can be made according to the whims and fancies of Judges who are more concerned about Cosmetic Appearance of the Brief rather than dispensing justice in a Public Interest Litigation.

Appellant also wrote that he will pay for the mailing expanses for all the 9 copies of the Briefs mailed back to him so that he can fix the cosmetic appearance if the Court Clerk does not wish to fix the cosmetic appearance; why Judge has not addressed this?

When there is nothing missing in the Brief submitted other than cosmetic appearance why the Judge is reluctant to read it; especially when it is a Public Interest Litigation against the corrupt system of governance, illegal Traffic Summons Quota for minorities and racial profiling? How could Judge for her whims & fancies for cosmetic appearance of Brief submitted by a Pro Se Appellant can financially penalize the Appellant to prepare again the voluminous 9 copies of the Brief along with numerous photographs & transcripts to cover the various Municipal Court proceedings spanning over 11/2 year?

Respectfully submitted

_________________________________

Devendra Makkar (Appellant Pro Se)

cc:
Governor Chris Christie

Attorney General of New Jersey

Prosecutor’s Office, Union County, NJ.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

Union Police Director Post & Traffic Ticket Quota

Union Twp Committee Meeting Dec. 23, 2008

Good evening every one my name is Dave Makkar and I live at 568 Ashwood Rd Springfield. Although I don’t live here but Union Twp creating a post of a Police Director for Political reasons rather under pressure from its Police union very much affects me and others who do not have a Police Director in their towns. In principal creation of this post is wrong when there is a Police Chief, Dy Chief and Town administrator in the town. NJ is a Banana Republic here for 8.5 mil people there are almost 600 Police Chiefs and 500 Dy Chiefs where as NY City for 8 mil residents has only 1 Police Chief and poster boy of corruption for US Media; India’s state Capital Delhi for 14.6 mil people also has only 1 Chief & 8 Dy Chiefs. That proves a Lieutenant can run Union under the supervision of State Police Chief rather than having a Chief & Dy Chief costing more than $½ mill. every year. By creating the post of a Police Director, Union will become a guiding force for other towns in how to create a job for political reasons as well as how to dilute over sight & accountability in already corrupt & over staffed Police departments.

Twp of Union like rest of NJ’s 565 towns is governed by unionized individuals joined together below the hips posing as Democrats, Republicans, Judges, Attorneys, Law enforcement officers and bureaucrats working for the benefit of big businesses and media to loot the common residents. NJ is the only state in the world where in 8,000 sq miles for 8.5 mil residents there are over 9,000 elected scoundrels and 400,000 employees supported by 80,000 licensed attorneys who have made NJ legally corrupt and racist.

The creation of unnecessary post of Police Director is also inter linked to the illegal Traffic Summons Quota practiced by Union PD initiated by Politicians and made legal by Union Municipal Court to raise revenue to feed the unionized Rulers of Union. I remember in Nov. 2007 there were Media Reports of big fight between the Town administrator Mr. Bradley & Union PD officers over the over sight by a non-law enforcement guy called Bradley.

On 11-27-07 a mob of ferocious looking guys wearing T-shirts with Remove Bradley written on them were occupying this entire Committee Room rather jamming the hall ways, stairs and spilling outside the town hall into its parking lot. When I enquired who they are? Some one told me these are Police Officers! This kind of ludicrous and unruly behavior by Police officers I never saw in my 40 years stay in India. First of all in India like Army, Navy, Air Force & Intelligence officers; Police officers can not have a Union. In NJ besides having an unethical union the Police officers can legally fund through their Unions the elections of those very legislators who are supposed to supervise them. It looks like in 1 year every thing has been worked out amicably between Politicians and Police Union; Union PD will keep on raising money for the Twp with its illegal Traffic summons Quota created by Politicians & legalized by Union Municipal Court and in return they will have a Police Director from their own kith and kin so that they can avoid oversight and accountability by civilian town adm. Mr. Bradley.


Union Twp Comm. Meeting
Dec. 23, 2008

Since Nov. 2007 I have been Complaining on the issue of illegal Traffic Summons Quota and Racial Profiling practiced by Union PD. The Mayor & Police Chief who were under obligation to get this matter investigated by AG office or at least by Union County Prosecutor’s office; preferred to do sham internal affair investigations with close cooperation of its Municipal Court who issued my arrest warrants for raising the issue of Traffic Ticket Quota & Racial Profiling.

I want to make it very clear to my fellow Americans; that as a victim of Racial profiling and gross injustice by Union twp, I have continued to fight against it not because of the money at issue but because of my desire to combat racial discrimination and gross injustice. I have preferred to suffer harassment of all kinds; emotional, physical, mental and financial for over a year than to full fill the wishes of morally & ethically corrupt unionized Rulers of Union by paying them $159 in fines.

If I was less committed to justice and if my belief in the U.S. constitution and in the U.S. Judicial System was a bit less strong, I would have long ago quit. However, by the grace of God I have not submitted to apathy or disillusionment. Despite Racial Profiling by Officer Cavallo, erroneous arrest warrants issued by Judge Waters, sham investigations by Union PD Chief Kraemer under Twp Committee, wrong doings by Prosecutor Wittenberg, Cassidy & Donovan and Judge Waters & Jeffery’s failure to protect my rights for discoveries and Judge Jeffery’s failure to apply Armstrong case related to Racial Profiling and his refusal to follow Municipal, State & Federal precedents, still I have continued to fight because of my strong belief in God and in the United States of America that all people are equal, whether they are brown or white and that justice does ultimately prevail.

I will not hesitate to knock the doors of US Federal Courts for Justice but right now I am knocking the doors of my fellow Americans for justice by appealing them; please join me in this fight against Racial Discrimination and gross injustice done every day in broad day light by the unionized rulers of Union and other towns of New Jersey with their illegal Traffic Tickets Quota system to raise revenue to feed the world’s largest battalion of morally and ethically corrupt elected politicians, municipal court Judges, Prosecutors, defendants, Police Chiefs and other employees etc. in 8,000 sq miles.

God Bless you all & Merry Christmas

Dave Makkar
568 Ashwood Rd
Springfield, NJ 07081
973 416 1600 D

www.attorney-judge-corruption.blogspot.com

Saturday, May 24, 2008

President of America has less rights than NJ Patrolman

May 23, 2008
Office of the Attorney General
P. O. Box 080
Trenton, NJ 08625-0080

Re: Traffic Summons Quota for Minorities in Union & Springfield, Summons #
UNN638639 & 637580, my complaint dated 12-03-07, 12-15-08 & 3-29-08

Hon. Anne Milgram:

It is very disturbing that your office has not taken any action in more than 5 months in the above referred matters. Union Twp & Administrative Offices of the Courts have conducted 2 sham investigations; Internal Affair investigation by Union PD and other by Union County Municipal Division Manager. Now the Court has told me on 5-19-08 that there will be a 3rd investigation by the Union County Prosecutor’s office. When it is an established precedent that Mayor of Towns are under obligation to request a State or Federal investigation on the mere suggestion of Racial Bias, why Union Mayor opted for sham investigations to cover up Racial Profiling, Selective Enforcement of Law, Racial Bias by Patrolman Cavallo and the illegal Traffic Summons Quota in the Twp of Union?

Every one in government knows that Internal Affair investigations conducted by Police departments in all the 566 Towns of NJ are a public eye wash and waste of Tax Payers money. For those who don’t understand, it may be very hi-tech non-partisan investigations but the fact is; it is an insult to New Jerseyans. What interest an officer has to nail his own colleague with whom he had a cup of coffee in the morning, shared lunch in the afternoon and probably going to wine & dine together in the evening? What interest Politicians of the same Town have to nail a Police officer belonging to Unionized NJ Police representing a big chunk of more than 325,000 voters; who can legally finance Election Campaigns of these Politicians thru their Union and lobbyist?

It took Union PD to complete the IA investigations almost 3 months and another 1 month to let the defendant know the known out come of their sham investigations. Now they are refusing to provide the copy of the same to the defendant when he has also participated in this investigation. It looks like they are holding Patrolman Cavallo who is accused of Racial Profiling, Selective Enforcement of Law and of making obscene gestures; above the President of America and treating their sham IA report more classified secret than highly classified famous and top secret Pentagon Papers. The defendant is pointing to United States vs. Richard Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) where a “generalized interest in confidentiality” by even the President of the United States was insufficient to prevail over the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. Then it is an established precedent that public release or publication denial is acceptable only in the most exceptional circumstances, not even the claims of threat to Millitary Security swayed the US Supreme Court in Landmark 1971 ruling that allowed the publication of the Top Secret Pentagon Papers.

In the above referred matters second sham investigation has already been completed by Municipal Division Manager of Union County and third is to be conducted by Union County Prosecutor. Union Municipal Division Manager Michael D’Ecclessis & County Prosecutor Theodore Romankov is important players of so called Home Rule (Elite Club Rule to save Rulers) both lack credibility and are racially biased. Mr. D’Ecclessis had failed to take any action against a racist Democrat Judge Steven Firsichbaum for allowing his Court Room to be used as Ethnic Party Room for eating & drinking by his community members, for allowing a Racist Cop Kahora to stop 5 & 9 year old children with her hand on the Gun and allowing his Racist crook attorney friend Keith Beibelberg to do all kinds of frauds to intimidate, discriminate, threaten, harass and torture a woman and her entire family from a minority Hindu community all under racial bias just to save a habitual traffic speed violator Steven Sobel from their community in Springfield.

Then Prosecutor Romankov had failed to take any actions against Springfield Democrats and its Police Department for violating the Freedom of Free Speech Rights and Racial Discrimination on the complaint of the Defendant in some other matters. Worst of all, he also failed to take any action against a racketeer Lunatic Zygmunt Wilf for doing wholesale permanent destruction to the environment by materially influencing or bribing Springfield & Union County Democrats and various officials including Superior Court Judges. This kind of massive permanent environmental destruction is not allowed in rest of the 49 state of America and even in most corrupt countries around the world.

Looking at all the above to maintain the sanctity of our Legal system; Defendant request an investigation by State Attorney General’s office in the matters of Racial Profiling, Selective Enforcement of Law and illegal Traffic Summons Quota in the Twp of Union and Springfield as well as the ongoing massive destruction to the environment done by a racketeer financier to Democrats Zygmunt Wilf in the Twp of Springfield. At the same time all pending requests of the Defendant for discoveries must be complied in full by Union Twp, its Municipal Court & Police Department and Municipal Division Manager.

Respectfully Submitted,

Devendra Makkar

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Union Police sham IA Report more classified than Pentagon Papers

May 20, 2008
Sgt. James Purcell
Police Department,
1976 Morris Ave., Union, NJ 07081

Re: Summons # UNN638639 & UNN637580 my Request for Information under
OPRA pending since 11-29-07 & Your response of May 12, 2008

Dear Sir:

I am not at all surprised with your additional misrepresentations on the matters of various Discovery requests pending since 11-29-07 in the above referred Court Matters. You’re writing that your Court Coordinator Mrs. Shaw has supplied me with all the discovery in this case on 4-18-08 is an insult to the intelligence of the Defendant. What she has supplied is the copies of the 2 summons issued to the defendant by Patrolman Cavallo just to frustrate, intimidate and financially hurt the defendant.

Coming to the dates of Racial/Cultural Sensitivity Training for Union PD which now you are referring for your convenience as Racial Profiling Training; the defendant once again wants to remind you that it was you, who on 11-29-07 denied the request for Training Dates in writing. Then Sgt. Elliott on 12-18-07 made a statement that it has been a while that such training has been conducted and as far as Patrolman Cavallo is concerned he is fairly new in the force for 31/2 years only he never had such training. After that it was Chief Thomas Kraemer who could not come up with dates when specifically asked for on the floor of the Town Hall on 4-22-08. Now very conveniently after 5 months you are coming up with Training dates 10-15-05 for Chief Kraemer and 12-05-05 for Patrolman Cavallo conducted by Lt. Davis with material provided by The New Jersey Attorney Generals Office and The Union County Prosecutors Office. Looking at your credibility and the other officers involved; please provide the copy of the Material/Curriculum Used in such training conducted for Chief Kraemer and Patrolman Cavallo. Also provide the names of other Union PD officers who underwent the so called Training with Chief Kramer and Patrolman Cavallo. I am sure this training was not exclusively for Chief Kramer or Patrolman Cavallo only; there must be few other officers also.

Then again your denial under NJSA 47:1A-10 to my request for Internal Affair Investigation report is unwarranted, unlawful and unjustified. I have already cited in my letter of 5-6-08 South Amboy Municipal Judge Joseph Hoffman’s Ruling of 2-13-07 in the matters of State vs. Rajnikant Parikh Complaint # 06-00193001 to release the Internal Investigation to the defendant. Moreover the right of a defendant to obtain Internal Affair investigation reports and other similar evidence is well established under both United States and New Jersey Law. State v. Harris, 316 N.J. Super 384 (App. Div. 1998) and State v. Ewtushek, App. Div. 2005 WL 1802099 (7-1-05)

Likewise, the same principle has been established in Federal Law since at least UNITED STATES V. RICHARD NIXON, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) where a “generalized interest in confidentiality” by even the President of the United States was insufficient to prevail over the “fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.” Id at 713.

Then these reports are Public Record it may be politically embarrassing to Democrat administration and Unionized Police Department of Union Twp. who can legally finance Lawmakers Election campaigns thru their Unions. This is a First Amendment case Plain and Simple. Union PD’s denial could be as offensive to-day as was the government application & high handedness to halt the Publication of Pentagon Papers in 1971. It is an established precedent that public release or publication denial is acceptable only in the most exceptional circumstances, not even the claims of threat to Military Security swayed the US Supreme Court in landmark 1971 ruling that allowed the publication of the Top Secret Pentagon Papers.

Moreover where a law enforcement investigation has been completed, the State’s interest in confidentiality of Internal records related to the investigation is substantially reduced. Shuttleworth V. Camden, 258 N.J. Super. 573, 585 (App. Div. 1992), certif. den., 133 N.J. 429 (1993).

Your contention that defendant can appeal your decision to the Government Record Council or the NJ Superior Court is nothing but intimidation and violation of defendant’s constitutional rights. It looks like you are more worried to cover up the existence of illegal Traffic Summons Quota in Union Twp, Obscene gestures and Racial Profiling under selective enforcement of Law done by Patrolman Cavallo.

It looks like you are holding Patrolman Cavallo on a much higher pedestal than US President and your sham internal investigation to cover up Traffic Summons Quota as well as Racial Profiling more sensitive and more classified than Pentagon Papers. The defendant in the present case himself has provided statements to the Internal Investigation. Such statements are clearly discoverable to the defendant for use in cross examination. There is no rationale to withhold discovery. Under R. 3-313 (f) (1) and R. 7:7 (e) (1), a court, on a motion and for good cause, may consider an application for a protective order to withhold evidence from discovery under only certain circumstances.

Moreover in the instant case, any Police need for confidentiality that too for a cover up of their unlawful activities pales in comparison for Defendant’s discovery needs under his constitutional rights to present an effective defense against an offense which he has not committed, a Parking violation in which he is being selectively cited, Racial Profiling and obscene gestures by a Uniformed officer all under racial bias and selective enforcement of Law to meet an illegal Twp Quota for Traffic Summons.

The Union Township, Police, Prosecutor and Court are knowingly indulging in Information Discrimination. They are knowingly denying Knowledge and Information to the defendant for which Defendant has constitutional rights. Since Nov. 2007 collectively and individually all of them are intimidating the Defendant by deliberately delaying and denying Knowledge and Information by sending him from post to pillar. Then individually and collectively they have hurt the defendant mentally, physically, emotionally and financially by issuing Arrest Warrants on fabricated charges and Notices of Failure to Appear with threat of Arrest on fabricated charges.

Union Municipal Judge Kelly Waters has already conveyed to the defendant on 5-19-08 they may reconsider its earlier decision to Recuse itself from the above matters once another (sham) investigation by Union County Prosecutor (Democrat Romankow an important Player in corrupt Home Rule System) is over. This is the same Prosecutor who failed to take any action in a complaint of violation of Freedom of Free Speech Rights by Democrats of Springfield, a complaint against a racist Democrat Judge Steven Firsichbaum for using his Court Room as ethnic Party Room and allowing his attorney friend Keith Beibelberg to do all kinds of frauds to save a habitual speed law violator, a Springfield Cop Kahora stopping 5 & 9 yr old children with a hand on Gun, a Lunatic Zygmunt Wilf; financier to Democrats blowing up a Hill in Springfield doing wholesale massive permanent damage to Environment by bribing the Springfield, Union County and Trenton Democrats. Union Municipal Court has failed to understand that it has lost its credibility by issuing Arrest Warrants & Notice of Failure to Appear all under fabricated charges. It has failed to address the allegations of Racial Profiling by the defendant including execution of his arrest warrants at lightning speed by Union & Springfield PD under Racial Bias. Then it has failed to address the issue of Discoveries for more than 5 months. This Court has no moral and legal sanctity left in the above matters. So it will be in the best interest of the Justice to maintain Court’s sanctity; for it to Recuse itself in prosecuting the defendant by transferring matters to some other Court.

Defendant believes all the above reasons are more than enough for Union Police Department, Municipal Court and various Union Twp. departments to release the IA investigation reports and other pending discoveries as requested, to the defendant. This must be done to uphold the sanctity of our Legal system and the doctrine of “Equal Justice” as guaranteed by the US Constitution.

Sincerely,
Devendra Makkar

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

President Nixon, IA Reports & Union Cops

May 6, 2008

Sgt. James Purcell
Police Department,
1976 Morris Ave.
Union, New Jersey 07081

Re: Summons # UNN638639 & UNN637580 my Request for Information under
OPRA pending since 11-29-07 & Your response dated 4-30-08 received 5-5-8

Dear Sir:

Please be advised initially the following request for Discoveries:

Number of summons issued & their copies under 38: 4-138G Loading Zone out side Union Theater & Blue Ribbon Bakery at 988 Stuyvesant Ave. on:

Oct. 23, 2007 from 11.00 AM to 11.55 AM.
Nov. 21, 2007 from 10.00 AM to 11.55 AM
Nov. 24, 2007 from 10.45 AM to 11.55 AM
Nov. 27, 2007 from 5.15 PM to 5.55 PM

was made to Union Municipal Court on 11-29-07 and the Court advised on 1-22-08 the same should be made to Municipal Prosecutor. The Defendant complied the orders of Hon. Judge Waters immediately and provided the copies of the request to Prosecutor Wittenberg in the Court. The Municipal Prosecutor Mark Cassidy wrote on 4-18-08 that this request be made to Union Twp Police Department; defendant complied to this demand also. Now you are writing on 4-30-8 that the Discovery request be made to the Municipal Court. The Defendant leave it to all the 3 Departments operating under Home Rule who are joining against a resident of the state to protect each other; to decide who is responsible for providing the discoveries requested by the Defendant on Nov. 29, 2007.

Coming to your writing that Chief Krammer on 10-15-05 and Pat. Cavaollo on 12-05-05 had the Racial Profiling Training does not give any comforts to the defendant. Sgt. Elliot made a statement on 12-18-07 that it has been a while the Union Police Dept. had any racial/cultural training and this particular officer (Cavaollo never had any such training. Then Chief Krammer on the floor of the Town Hall on 04-22-08 could not come up with specific dates on being asked for such training dates in specific. Moreover you yourself wrote to the defendant on 11-29-07 that, “the above request is being denied because the request is not an identifiable record as required by OPRA.” Now after almost 5 months you have come up with the dates; how convenient to misrepresent? Looking at the credibility of the department and its officers; the Defendant request that name of the instructor and the state department who provided such training; be provided to him.

Then your denial under NJSA 47:1A-10 to my request for Internal Affair Investigation report is not enough reasons for the denial. First it took your department more than 3 months to complete the investigations on 3-10-08 and then another month to mail me the decision based on cooked up investigations that officer has done nothing wrong on 04-11-08. Most disturbing was after rendering the decision on 03-10-08 in favor of Patrolman Cavaollo; why investigator Sgt Elliott came to my business on 03-25-08 to pick up the photographs I had taken on 11-21-07? Under these circumstances what ever credibility this report or investigating Officer Sgt Elliot and other officers involved has must be determined by the Court. For this reason alone this Report must be disclosed.

Most recently the right of a Defendant for IA investigations was upheld by Honorable Judge Joseph Hoffman of South Amboy Municipal Court on Feb. 13th, 2007 in the matters of State vs. Rajnikant Parikh under complaint # 06-00193001.

Then the right of a defendant to obtain Internal Affair investigation reports and other similar evidence is well established under both United States and New Jersey Law. State v. Harris, 316 N.J. Super 384 (App. Div. 1998) The right of confrontation requires disclosure of (police personnel records) where a defendant advances some factual predicate making it reasonably likely that information in the file could affect the officer’s credibility. Id 387. The Court noted that “[t]he Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, section 10 of the New Jersey Constitution guarantees the right of an accused in a criminal prosecution to be confronted with the witnesses against him” (citation omitted) and that “[t]he essential purpose of confrontation is to secure for the defendant the opportunity of cross examination. Cross examination is the principal means by which a witness’ credibility is tested.”

Thus, under New Jersey Law, so long as defendant shows “some factual predicate” that would make it reasonably likely that information in the desired file is relevant or could affect a witness’s credibility, disclosure shall be made. The review and release of such records is now fairly common. State v. Ewtushek, App. Div. 2005 WL 1802099 (7-1-05)

Likewise, the same principle has been established in Federal Law since at least UNITED STATES V. RICHARD NIXON, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) where a ‘generalized interest in confidentiality” by even the President of the United States was insufficient to prevail over the “fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of criminal justice. The generalized assertion of privilege must yield to the demonstrated, specific need for evidence in a pending criminal trial.” Id at 713.

The defendant in the present case himself has provided statements to the Internal Investigation. Such statements are clearly discoverable to the defendant for use in cross examination. There is no rationale to withhold discovery. Under R. 3-313 (f) (1) and R. 7:7 (e) (1), a court, on a motion and for good cause, may consider an application for a protective order to withhold evidence from discovery under only certain circumstances.

In the instant case, the factual basis underlying the production of the Internal Affairs reports does not present sufficient confidentiality concerns to justify withholding them from discovery. The Union Police Department investigation has been concluded they have nothing to fear by releasing the contents of the report. Where a law enforcement investigation has been completed, the State’s interest in confidentiality of Internal records related to the investigation is substantially reduced. Shuttleworth V. Camden, 258 N.J. Super. 573, 585 (App. Div. 1992), certif. den., 133 N.J. 429 (1993).

Moreover in the instant case, the Union Police have completed their investigation. Any Police need for confidentiality pales in comparison for Defendant’s discovery needs under his constitutional rights to present an effective defense against an offense which he has not committed, a Parking violation in which he is being selectively cited, Racial Profiling and obscene gestures by a Uniformed officer all under racial bias and selective enforcement of Law to meet an illegal Twp Quota for Traffic Summons. There is a prima facie evidence that this Quota is primarily being used against individuals belonging to minorities & colored communities.

The Union Township, Police, Prosecutor and Court are indulging in Information Discrimination also and are knowingly denying Knowledge and Information to the defendant for which Defendant has constitutional rights. Since Nov. 2007 collectively and individually all of them are frustrating the Defendant by deliberately delaying and denying Knowledge and Information by sending him from post to pillar. Then they have hurt the defendant mentally, physically, emotionally and financially by issuing Arrest Warrants on fabricated charges and Notices of Failure to Appear with threat of Arrest on fabricated charges.

Defendant believes all the above reasons are more than enough for Union Police Department to release the IA investigation reports to the defendant. Union Municipal Court also must reconsider its earlier decision to Recuse itself from the above matters. This Court has lost its credibility by issuing Arrest Warrants & Notice of Failure to Appear all under fabricated charges and has failed to address the issue of Discoveries for more than 5 months; so it must Recuse itself in prosecuting the defendant and must transfer the matters to some other Courts.

Sincerely,


Devendra Makkar

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

Union Municipal Court request for Discoveries

April 28, 2008
Ms. Pat Nasta, Certified Court Administrator
Union Twp Municipal Court
981 Caldwell Ave.
Union, New Jersey 07081

Re: Summons # UNN638639 & UNN637580
Request for information under Discovery Rules

Dear Ms. Nasta:

Please provide the following information under Discovery Rules which I intend to use for my defense in the above referred court matters.

From July 1st to Dec. 31st, 2007

How many Arrest Warrants were issued against defendants under 39:4-81 for very first non appearance; especially when the defendant’s written request for adjournment is on record delivered in person to the Court staff.

How many Notices of Failure to Appear under 39:4-138G was issued despite Defendant being present in the Court for previous appearances.

Defendant wants to remind the Union Municipal Court that it is Defendant’s constitutional right to defend himself against a moving violation which he has not committed, against a parking violation in which he has been singled out because of his ethnic background both under Racial Bias. Then Patrolman Covallo has also violated defendants basic Right of Racial Equality by making obscene gestures to him.

Then this Court has denied the Defendant’s Recusal Motion of 1-22-08 despite defendant raising question of Prejudice and Racial Bias as well as no faith in the Home Rule system prevailing in all the Municipalities of New Jersey. Since the Defendant is raising the issue of Prejudice, Racial Bias and Racial Profiling he must be provided with the above discoveries as per the this request in timely fashion; so that effective defense can be prepared for the Trial on May 19, 2008 in above matters.

Thank you for your anticipated help.

Sincerely,
Devendra Makkar