Corruption Arrogance – Part Two
The Eugene Forte Story
- Corruption doesn’t always start out with malice towards all.
Sometimes a mistake is innocent in nature but for some unknown reason
the errant person rationalizes that the advantages out measure the risks.
Then again on other occasions the perpetrator feels that they are privileged
or superior to their victim(s) or they are of a divine right to conduct
business to their advantage regardless of the rules and regulations
that are established to restrain this behavior. After reading volumes
of evidence consisting of court transcripts, letters to and from court
and government officials I am of the opinion that the arrogance that
permeates the venue that Gene Forte finds himself in is of the deliberate
with malice, toward a select target(s) type of venue.
The scene of this story
changes from the attorneys’ offices to the courtroom that most
reasonable people think is awash in truth, integrity and justice. That
impression will fade from the readers’ minds when they become
exposed to the duplicitous conduct of the Monterey County Superior Court
judges. Thomas Jefferson once asked, “Where is the check on the
judiciary?” I think that is the number one question that is on
Forte’s mind during these trying times. It is my desire that the
readers will be asking the same question at the end of this story.
The first incursion into
the Monterey Superior Court by Forte sets the tone for what is to follow
over the next five years. Gene Forte is sued by his former attorney
Loretta Loop in small claims court for fees rendered in the beginning
of the Forte vs. Powell case in 1999. You may recall from last months
column Forte paid Loop a retainer and when their relationship ended
Eugene discovered that Loop never answered interrogatories from the
Horan Law Firm thereby causing sanctions to be filed against Forte,
causing him to be fined $700 by Judge Richard Silver for impeding discovery.
Loop had the unmitigated gall to bill Forte an additional fee when she
never completed the task at hand with the interrogatories. So Loop vs.
Forte commences in early 2001. Forte responds by filing a lawsuit Forte
vs. Loop in Superior Court charging malpractice against Loop. The case
is assigned to Commissioner Richard Rutledge who you will recall was
the person who ruled against Gene in the small claims action in 1997.
In that case Rutledge ruled in favor of the plaintiff who did not appear
at the trial. Due to this absurd ruling Forte had the presence of mind
to file a Challenge for Cause since it was obvious that Rutledge was
prejudice against Forte. Attached to the Challenge were several exhibits
including a letter Forte had written to several Monterey Judicial Officers
alleging that Commissioner Rutledge and Judge Robert Moody had violated
the law in 1997. Rutledge disqualified himself due to his involvement
in Loop vs. Forte, a good thing, most people would agree, for Forte.
Entering into this melodrama
would be Judge Robert O’Farrell the supervising judge for Superior
court to disprove that notion. As supervising judge, Judge O’Farrell
is responsible for managing the master civil calendar for civil matters.
This is an important note to remember as the story unfolds because O’Farrell
assigns the judges to hear particular cases before the court. O’Farrell,
prior to commencing the trial would be privy to the Challenge for Cause
with its attachments. Somehow Forte gets the feeling that O’Farrell
took exception to a citizen taking umbrage with the judiciary. Could
it be that judges think themselves to be of a higher echelon since they
sit in judgment of the common man?
Normally, when there is
a small claims action in conjunction with a cross complaint in a higher
court the small claim is adjoined to the complaint. Not so in O’Farrell’s
domain. O’Farrell ruled for Loop in the small claims action then
treated the complaint as an appeal instead of a stand alone case, thereby
prejudicing Forte for the first time.
Forte, staying true to form
asks the court to reconsider O’Farrell’s decision and Judge
Richard Silver reversed the order and consolidated the two cases together.
Assuming O’Farrell did indeed review the Challenge of Cause and
the supporting documents was this the reason O’Farrell tried to
deny Forte the right to present Loop’s alleged malpractice as
his defense to Loop’s claims for additional fees? A reasonable
person would surely agree to this analysis. Apparently Judge Richard
Silver did. Judge O’Farrell, reacting in 2002, launched the case
into a black hole by taking it off the calendar.
Larry Lichtenegger has been
Forte’s attorney of record in this case since March of 2000, and
has become totally immersed in it. Forte informs him prior to the trial
that the one judge he did not want to hear the case was Judge Terrance
Duncan. Judge O’Farrell assigns the case, by some rare coincidence,
to Judge Terrance Duncan the same judge who began the investigation
into Commissioner Rutledge’s and Judge Moody’s bazaar rulings
against Forte in the Packwood vs. Forte small claims action a few years
earlier. Duncan discovered that Packwood was his next door neighbor
three weeks into his investigation. In any event Duncan knew about Forte’s
judicial activism prior to his selection as the presiding judge. In
addition, Duncan was a judge in the Monterey Criminal department and
did not hear civil cases, with some exceptions that are becoming obvious.
While Lichtenegger represented Forte he voluntarily revealed some of
the dirty secrets concerning the Monterey Superior court regarding “manipulating
trial dates and sabotaging motions” during a phone conversation
that Forte legally recorded. Thereby, Lichtenegger unceremoniously exposed
the corruption and arrogance that Forte had intuitively known all along.
Little did Gene suspect, from the onset, the sabotage that Lichtenegger
was undertaking against his client in a well orchestrated conspiracy
with other attorneys to drain Forte of his assets as Forte now alleges
due to hindsight. In early 2001, Lichtenegger attempted to withdraw
as Forte’s attorney stating that Judge Richard Silver was seething
at Lichtenegger because he was representing Forte. Gene opposed the
motion and revealed to Silver the true motives and statements by Lichtenegger.
Fighting fire with fire is both a defensive and offensive strategy that
sometimes must be employed. Judge Silver immediately recused himself
and actually scheduled O’Farrell to hear the motion in five days
time. He did this in such a fashion that it was transparent that he
and O’Farrell had preplanned this continuance. Forte is very much
aware of O’Farrell’s bias toward him and was waiting for
the other shoe to drop.
The next week O’Farrell,
as if on cue, allows Lichtenegger out of the case, one month prior to
the commencement of the damage portion of the Forte vs. Powell case,
without addressing any of the scandalous allegations made by Lichtenegger
to Forte as they were related by Forte to Silver. This thread of conduct
connects the dots of the puzzle and reveals the onset of alleged criminal
activity. O’Farrell actions from here on out are baffling to even
the most naïve court observer. A week later in a mid March 2001,
hearing of Forte vs. Powell, Judge O’Farrell allows the defense
counsel James Cook of the Horan Law Firm to launch a scurrilous attack
on Forte in court, denies Forte the right to respond to conflicting
statements by Cook, states that he sees no reason why he, O’Farrell,
should recuse himself simply because he, O’Farrell is a friend
of the defendants (waves to the Powell’s from the bench) and literally
tries to extort Forte by offering a continuance of the trial, in order
for Forte to find another attorney, if Gene agrees to release a “lis
pendens” from Powell’s property (Lis pendens according to
Black’s Law 6th Ed., “Jurisdiction, power, of control which
courts acquire over property in litigation pending action and until
final judgment.”). The rhetorical question begging to be asked
is what was O’Farrell’s reasoning for pressuring Forte to
release the property? O’Farrell also informs Forte that he did
not issue subpoenas as per Forte’s request because O’Farrell
thought Gene “may be harassing people.” Wouldn’t a
reasonable person consider this behavior to be another prejudgment by
the judge? Once Lichtenegger is released as attorney of record Gene
proceeds to prosecute the litigation in Propria Persona (Black’s
Law 6th Ed: “In one’s own proper person”).
modus operandi (he wasn’t the judge assigned to this hearing of
Forte vs. Crabb, Forte vs. Powell in late March 2001) is to stifle Forte’s
discovery in both cases at every turn. Forte’s deposition of the
Powell’s is limited to 45 minutes each, he is ordered to pay for
a Special Master and the cost of a videographer for this deposition
because James Cook thought it would be unpleasant for the Powell’s
and (nota bene) Forte was not an attorney. How do you spell d-i-s-i-n-g-e-n-u-o-u-s
c-o-n-d-e-s-c-e-n-d-i-n-g? Then again Forte is not a member of the exclusive
club administering justice. Is this yet another example of O’Farrell’s
prejudice toward Forte?
In the next episode I will
relay to you Judge Robert O’Farrell’s continuing persecution
of Gene Forte and set the stage for what may be the next coming of Operation
Greylord, a FBI sting in the 1980’s that uncovered over 92 public
officials in judicial corruption. Again, stay tuned. You are encouraged
to read some of the transcripts and evidence on Gene Forte’s website:
You can write R.S.
Errol at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Note: Read part 1
of this continuing saga!