I spent many years as a police officer. I was sworn to adhere to and protect our Constitution. It was an honor. But after many years of service I saw flaws in the system that concerned me. I retired many years ago and not until recently have I been awakened to the fact that my simple beliefs were and are not reality. Our Constitution rides in the back seat.
Although the following narrative describes certain undisputable events that support my beliefs that our Nation no longer represents ‘truth, honesty and the American way’, they are small and insignificant when you compare them to the slow progressive centurial evolution of corruptive collaborative successful efforts it took to literally change the meaning of the words in our Constitution. And let there be no doubt that the current definition of our constitution as decided by our Supreme Court does not benefit the masses in the United States of America. This is why there is always division amongst Congress as to who should be sitting in a Supreme Court Chair. The power of the Supreme court is undisputed. Supreme Court nominees are all lawyers. Lawyers are nominated by President and approved by the Senate. How does a lawyer who desires to be a Supreme Court judge get nominated by the President? I’ll leave that to your imagination and logic.
All this was accomplished because we live in a free land and freedom is not discriminate. Freedom has enabled all of the Three Branches of Government to be governed by one. The Judicial Branch and enforced by an army of obedient lawyers who have infiltrated the other two branches of government.. The rule of law was and is created, described, evaluated, massaged and spit out by our Judges. And let there be no correlation drawn between the ‘rule of law’ and righteousness or truth or honesty.
Our Constitution was created to protect against tyranny and corruption. Conversely ‘the rule of law’ protects tyranny and corruption. This is to say that the ‘rule of law’, worshipped by the lawyers in this country, defines every word in our Constitution and these definitions are spooned out by The Supreme Court. The following narrative is a profound brazen example of how a Hawaiian Federal Court Judge has committed crimes against our Constitution without the blessing of the Supreme Court but with the blessings of his fellow judges who have protected him.
The biggest fear of the corrupt is the Grand Jury. If you eliminate the Grand Jury, corruption will smother our country. The Grand Jury was conceived to protect citizens from corrupt governments. The Grand Jury is comprised by 23 normal everyday citizens. Lawyers are not allowed to interfere. Why do you suppose that law exists? Why do you suppose Judge Seabright and his cronies do not want a Grand Jury investigation?
On May 22, 2018 the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued their answer to a request made for a 9th Circuit Court intervention into alleged illegal corruptive activity within the Hawaii District Court of Judge Michael John Seabright.
This request was made in response to the squashing of a prior request for a Grand Jury investigation into the 1993 Hawaii murder of four year old Lacey Woolsey Ruff and the subsequent cover up of improprieties involved in the initial murder case investigation and the following arrest and prosecution of the suspect Aaron Schonlau.
Much later in 2012 Aaron Schonlau’s brother Todd admitted complicity in the murder of the Ruff little girl.
It all began in December of 2015 when retired police detective Jim Benish sent a 60 page affidavit to Judge Seabright asking for a Grand Jury investigation into the cold case murder of four year old Lacey Woolsey Ruff in 1993. It seemed a simple request. Benish explained to Seabright that the murder of this little girl in Hawaii in 1993 was connected to a child’s murder in the Denver Colorado area. This was the 1984 cold case murder of a 7 year old little girl that he was working on just before he retired.
Benish also told Seabright that the primary reason he was requesting a Federal Grand Jury is that he believed that the Kauai Police Department botched their investigation and to cover it up they submitted a fraudulent affidavit to the Judge handling the murder case. He explained that for an unknown reason, he could not get any involvement from local police authorities or the FBI nor the US Attorney’s office District of Hawaii. He retrieved the police documents from the court and the police department and noticed stark differences between what the police investigated and the documents filed with the court.
The contents of the files that Benish had presented to the Seabright court represented about 6 months of investigation into the Murder of Lacey Woolsey Ruff in Hawaii by Benish.
Benish knew that a man had been arrested for this murder in 1993 but in 2012 Benish had been contacted by a woman in Oregon who told him that her boyfriend Todd Schonlau had admitted to her that it was actually him that committed the murder and that it was his brother, Aaron Schonlau who had been prosecuted for the murder. Benish learned later that it was Todd Schonlau who turned in his brother for the murder. He also could see from the police documents that there was no physical evidence that implicated Aaron Schonlau, but there were witnesses and other evidence that implicated Todd Schonlau. it looked to Benish like the police had arrested the wrong man.
Benish found many inconsistencies in the original 1993 murder case investigation and discovered that a Federal Crime (fraud against the court) had been committed. It appeared that the police investigators failed to inform the Judge who was presiding over the Probable Cause hearing on the arrest of Aaron Schonlau in 1993, that there was exculpatory evidence that was withheld from the court in 1993.
As Benish’s inquiries progressed over the next six or seven months in 2015 he was contacted by other people who alleged corruption in the Hawaii Police agencies as well as allegations against judges and he looked into these allegations too.
When Benish had completed looking into the other allegations he came to the realization that the coverup of the original investigation into the murder of Lacey Woolsey Ruff was not entirely about that murder. In fact there were indications of money laundering that involved huge deposits into local banks and subsequent transference of these funds into non-profit foundations such as the Hawaii Community Foundation. There were also suspicions of other murders and fraud involving local lawyers and their handling of Will and Trust agreements. The nexus in all of this was the Kauai Police Department who had arrested Aaron Schonlau.
After Benish had packaged up the documents that supported his investigations they were delivered to the Federal court District of Hawaii. Seabright’s initial response to the boxes of documents came via his clerk Llian Abernathy. Abernathy told Benish in a letter that they could not accept his request and that he should go to the court and retrieve his documents that were meant for the Grand Jury and that if he did not pick them up they would be destroyed.
Benish knew that the court clerk, Abernathy had no authority to destroy records or documents in fact he knew that it was against the law. Title 18 U.S Code 2071.
Benish performed an email search and was able to locate Judge Seabright’s personal court email address. He sent the judge an email and protested the threats made by his clerk and again requested that Seabright empanel a Grand Jury.
On or about January 8th, 2016 Benish received a telephone voice message from Seabright’s clerk Llian Abernathy stating that the Grand Jury request was to be honored and processed that same week.
Months went by after that and by mid 2016 Benish nor any other victims had been contacted by a representative of the Grand Jury. Benish was suspicious. He and others made telephone calls to the Court, and spoke with Abernathy about the Grand Jury to verify that the Grand Jury had been empanelled. Each time contact was made Abernathy indicated that although she could not reveal any information about the Grand Jury the case had been forwarded to the Jury.
Benish was satisfied that the Grand Jury had his information and would do their job. But he was wrong.
Approximately six months later in late 2016 two additional victims of corruption contacted Benish because they had heard that there was a Grand Jury investigating corruption in Hawaii. These two persons asked Benish how they could get their individual cases included in this Grand Jury investigation. Benish told them that he would take their names and forward it to the investigative agency that was working on the case. At this time Benish did not know what agency was working on the case. He texted Seabright’s clerk, Abernathy, and informed her that there were two more victims and asked who he should forward their names to. Abernathy instructed Benish to contact the US Attorney, District of Hawaii.
Benish contacted the US Attorney’s office in Hawaii several times and the final communication was that the US Attorney’s office had no record of Benish’s allegations or his Affidavit. It was suggested that he contact the FBI. He did so, and received the same response that he had received from the Hawaii Federal US Attorney. They had no knowledge of the investigation but this time it was suggested that Benish get the Court Docket number and with that number the FBI could perform a more accurate search.
Benish again emailed Abernathy and asked for the Court Docket number assigned to his documents and that is when he received a profound email from Abernathy.
In this email she admitted that his documents were not assigned a docket number because the documents were never processed, nor was the Grand Jury advised of the existence of his request. She said that she had made a phone call to the US Attorney’s office but could not remember who she spoke with. Benish knew that the US Attorney’s office did not have any knowledge of his case.
He was angry. He and other people had been lied to and scammed by a Federal Court as to the existence of a Grand Jury investigation. Logically, as far as the Federal court was concerned, there was no record of his Affidavit and the evidence that was sent with it. His documents had not been entered into the electronic court record management system (Pacer) as required by US Court regulations.
“To make matters worse”, Benish said, “When we requested any court documents that would substantiate their initial claim that they properly processed my documents as required by law and or any other documents that indicate that there was contact with either the Hawaii US Attorney or any other investigative agency, the request was denied citing the ‘Grand Jury secrecy provision’ that excludes Grand Jury information from accessible court documents.” How could there be a Grand Jury exclusion is there was no ‘Grand Jury’? Would this not be an effort by the court to conceal the whole thing?
Benish’s affidavit list of Defendants was extensive and the crimes included Murder violations of the RICO act and numerous other Federal Violations.
A time line description of all of the events are as follows:
On December 10, 2015 Benish requested the processing and transmittal of his Affidavit of criminal allegations of multiple violations of Federal crimes to the sitting Hawaii Federal Grand Jury.
On December 29 2015 Federal Judge Seabright’s Clerk notified Benish that the request was being rejected and will be destroyed if he did not retrieve the documents.
On January 8, 2016 Benish telephoned Seabright’s Clerk to inquire as to why the request was being rejected and the answer was “It’s just a general opinion”
On January 9th 2016 Benish sought out direct contact with Judge Seabright via email and explained the reason for the Courts processing of documents to the sitting a Grand Jury.
On January 18th 2016 Benish received a telephone voice message from Judge Seabright’s head clerk Llian Abernathy that his request was granted and that the documents would be forwarded to the sitting Grand Jury.
On June 26, 2016 The Seabright Court verified to independent persons via phone requests that there was in fact Grand Jury participation resulting from Benish’s affidavit and evidence.
Approximately seven months after filing the request Benish was contacted by two additional victims who had similar accusations of Hawaiian RICO Act Violations and requested to be added to the list of other victims contained in the Grand Jury request Affidavit.
On July 27th 2016 Benish emailed Judge Seabright’s Court Clerk and inquired as to who would be the proper person to provide the names of the two additional victims. The Clerk (Lian Abernathy) informed him that to provide additional information for the Grand Jury it would be necessary to contact the Hawaii Federal US Attorney’s office.
In July, 2016 Benish also contacted the US Attorney and was advised that they knew nothing about the aforemen-tioned Grand Jury and suggested contacting the Hawaii FBI Office. Benish contacted the FBI in Hawaii and was also told they knew nothing about the investigation, but asked for a case or docket number and they possibly could locate the case and then assist Benish.
Months passed in 2016 as Benish tried to verify whether or not there actually was Grand Jury involvement in his allegations, or minimally was the Affidavit of allegations even processed. He needed proof, yes or no. There were FOI Requests sent to all three Branches of Government requesting information on the existence of the Benish’s documents.
On April 27 2017 Benish again emailed the clerk and inquired as to the docket number as requested by the FBI and Abernathy told him that there was no docket or case number and in fact his request was not processed. She further stated that she had contacted someone in the US Attorney’s office but could not remember who it was or exactly when it happened.
In July of 2017 in response to Federal Judge Seabright’s squashing of the Grand Jury a judicial complaint against Judge Seabright was filed with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Judicial Complaint Division.
Benish alleged that Seabright had violated numerous portions of the Federal Judicial Code of conduct. Incredibly the Complaint was ruled ‘Unsubstantiated” by the panel of Judges.
However the Judicial panel cited responses made by the Seabright court in their defense. The Seabright court claimed that they could not process the Benish affidavit to the sitting Grand Jury because it had not first been investigated by the US Attorney and that they had notified the US Attorney of Benish’s documents. There was no mention in the panel ruling whether or not an actual investigation was made to determine whether or not Seabright actually contacted the US Attorney’s office. There was also no mention of the status of the Benish documents or the prior claims by Seabright’s court that there was in fact a Grand Jury Investigation
Benish knew that the US Constitution does not support Seabright’s claim that the US Attorney must first investigate a request for a Grand Jury. In fact the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution states just the opposite and mandates all judges to summon a Grand Jury when requested. Additional Judicial requirements are:
28 U.S. Code § 1861 and FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ‘The Grand Jury’
(1) In General. When the public interest so requires, the court must order that one or more grand juries be summoned. A grand jury must have 16 to 23 members, and the court must order that enough legally qualified persons be summoned to meet this requirement.
Title 18 CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
US CONSTITION AMENDMENT 5
Benish appealed the Courts first complaint decision.
On November 16th 2017 the 9th Circuit Court again ruled a complaint filed against the Seabright Court by Benish against Judge Seabright was unfounded.
In March of 2018 Benish filed a motion to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Benish’s motion asked the Court for either intervention into Seabright’s Federal Court District of Hawaii or the empanelment of two Grand Juries. One to investigate Benish’s allegation that Seabright ‘squashed’ a Grand Jury and the second to replace Benish’s initial request to Seabright for the empanelment of a Grand Jury to investigate allegations of corruption in the State of Hawaii. Benish requested the Jury be empanelled in a District other that Seabright’s District.
Benish’s motion was processed and assigned docket number 18 80032. The case was assigned to a panel of two judges, Judge W.Fletcher and Judge Callahan.
On May 22,2018 Fletcher and Callahan decided to deny the request for intervention. Additionally they declared the question before the court ‘Closed’. No appeal can be made. The case number is 18-80032 however a case search in the Federal court case management Pacer system resulted in “no results” It’s believed that the case has been sealed or removed from the Federal court system.
In support of their decision the two judge panel cited court case Bauman v US District Court.
Judicial corruption exists in the Seabright Federal court District of Hawaii and continues into the 9th Circuit Court. The issue is the apparent squashing of a Grand Jury Investigation by the Federal Court District of Hawaii and then the following rejection of a complaint made against Judge Seabright and the denial of a request made to the 9th Circuit Court for Judicial intervention into the Seabright Court. Judge John Michael Seabright is the head Federal Judge District of Hawaii.
There was no mention of Benish’s request for a Grand Jury.
In December of 2017 Benish filed a motion with the 9th Circuit Court of appeals asking for Circuit Court intervention into the Seabright court.
In March. of 2018 the 9th Circuit Court denied Benish’s motion for intervention citing non compliance with court requirements for intervention.
USS Code Title 18 U.S. Code § 3332 – Powers and duties
a)It shall be the duty of each such grand jury impaneled within any judicial district to inquire into offenses against the criminal laws of the United States alleged to have been committed within that district. Such alleged offenses may be brought to the attention of the grand jury by the court or by any attorney appearing on behalf of the United States for the presentation of evidence. Any such attorney receiving information concerning such an alleged offense from any other person shall, if requested by such other person, inform the grand jury of such alleged offense, the identity of such other person, and such attorney’s action or recommendation.
Judges routinely ignore 18 U. S. C. § 242. They have given themselves the power to block all investigations of judicial corruption. It is impossible to get a criminal complaint against a judge, past a judge. Thus, judges are above the law.