Eliot I. Bernstein, Iviewit Technologies Vs. The Florida Bar. Florida Supreme Court Corruption and Cover Ups over the Iviewit Stolen Patent.

"QUESTION(S) PRESENTED

1. Does this Court have the power to intercede on behalf of Petitioners' constitutional rights guaranteed under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution when all other legal remedies instituted to protect such rights at the state level, such as access to the courts, due process and procedure and others, have all been usurped Petitioner by dubious methods employed by members of the system designed to protect such rights?

2. Does this Court have the power to intercede on behalf of Petitioner when the state courts and their self regulated attorney disciplinary system has been infiltrated and corrupted so as to turn the traditional mechanisms of protection for Petitioners' rights, against Petitioners' rights, by those charged with upholding such rights?

3. Did the Florida Supreme Court err in denying the motion for rehearing, clarification and certification?

4. Did the Florida Supreme Court not only err in decisions but in fact take actions to aid and abet members of that court and its disciplinary agencies and agents from escaping prosecution of violations of public office and conflicts of interests?

5. Did the Florida Supreme Court err in denying the petition for relief and did it also err in failing to provide an opinion or explanation?

6. Did the Florida Supreme Court err in refusing Petitioner's request for conflict of interest checks prior to considering the original petition?

7. Did the Florida Supreme Court err in failing to seek Judicial Qualifications Commission approval as requested by Petitioner prior to the ruling on the motion for rehearing, clarification and certification, in evaluating if their order to destroy the records pertinent to conflicts of interests and violation of public offices of its members, prior to record retention policies, was an attempt to obstruct due process and procedure in effort to aid and abet its members caught in conflict and does this Court have power to levy such charges against them?

8. Does the order to destroy the work product files of The Florida Bar and only return Petitioner filings to Petitioner constitute the basis for charges of obstruction of justice by this Court, as that courts efforts were designed to deny this Court all the facts and evidence in the matters now before this Court?

9. Was the Florida Supreme Court obligated to report the conflicts of interest, violations of public offices at The Florida Bar they oversight, asserted and confirmed conflicts of interests, to the proper authorities?

10. Does the failure to report constitute basis for charges by this Court against that court for failure to uphold justice and follow state law and procedure?

11. Was the Florida Supreme Court obligated to review the merits of attorney misconduct pursuant to their exclusive jurisdiction to regulate and discipline attorneys in the state of Florida?

12. Did the Florida Supreme Court err and further act as accomplice by not allowing Petitioners' complaints to be filed against public office members of Respondent caught in conflict of interest and abuse of public office?

Is such refusal of complaints against public officers against the intent of the Florida and United State constitutions when creating a complaint process to protect the public's interest from conflict of interests and abuses of public offices?

13. Did the Florida Supreme Court fail to follow judicial cannons and attorney conduct codes, in its refusal to make disclosed conflicts of interest at the Florida Supreme Court, and at the Florida civil court.

14. Should this Court take a leading role in establishing oversight to the administration of justice in the matters where the state supreme courts of the states having traditional jurisdiction are now in an adversarial role with Petitioner to block access to the legal and enforcement agencies of those states.

LIST OF PARTIES

[X] All parties do not appear in the caption of the case on the cover page. A list of all parties to the proceeding in the court whose judgment is the subject of this petition is as follows:

Iviewit Technologies, Inc., any and all affiliates both known and unknown

Iviewit Holdings, Inc., any and all affiliates both known and unknown

The Florida Bar

Christopher C. Wheeler

Matthew Triggs

Eric Turner

Lorraine Hoffman

Kelly Overstreet Johnson

Joy Bartmon

Kenneth Marvin

John Anthony Boggs "

Source of Post and Tons more Documents and Details.
http://www.iviewit.tv/supreme%20court/index.htm

Posted Here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox


Florida Supreme Court Corruption, Judicial Corruption.

Where there is Billions Lost by Investors and Trillion Dollar Patent Thefts, there is Proskauer Rose LLP

US Second Circuit Court Seems to Ignore Emergency Request
to Investigate Proskauer Rose LLP.

Information from March 2009 included in Eliot Bernstein's Complaint to the SEC On Proskauer Rose... Time Warner, Warner Bros., Intel Corp, SGI, Lockheed Martin and More...

Was anyone listening to Eliot I. Bernstein? Or was the Madoff Liquidation of Assets just simply another layer to an already corruption Multi-Billion Dollar investment scheme...

From Eliot Bernstein's Blog on his SEC Complaint listing Warner Bros., AOL, Time Warner, Ernst Young, Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin and explaining a whole lot more about the names and players of the Trillion Dollar Stolen Iviewit Patent, and the Involvement and Cover Ups for and by Proskauer Rose LLP - Meg Law Firm.

" " March 02, 2009 “EMERGENCY MOTION TO INVESTIGATE PROSKAUER ROSE DEFENDANTS INVOLVEMENT IN THE ALLEN STANFORD FINANCIAL, THE BERNARD MADOFF AND THE MARC DRIER FRAUD SCANDALS.

REMOVE PROSKAUER FROM SELF REPRESENTATION IN THESE MATTERS UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE FBI REMOVES THEM FROM THE ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE STANFORD FINANCIAL FRAUD”

http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090302%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20Re%20Proskauer%20Stanford%20Madoff%20Dreier%20Scandals4017.pdf

I filed Motions at the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals and US District Court, already exhibited herein, with similar claims of regulatory failures of the prior Presidential administration. Failures allegedly directly related to the Madoff case and I have reported this to Federal Authorities.

The Motions also discuss Conflicts centering on the Madoff saga where Proskauer publicly identified their firm as having the most clients in the Madoff Ponzi and now it is revealed in the press that many Madoff clients are the subject of ongoing SEC investigations.

The Motion at the US Second Circuit is to Compel that court to address the Conflicts of Interest and other matters according to law, laws being ignored while the Court and the Defendants perpetuate never ending Conflicts and Crimes. Note here that the handling of the Madoff Ponzi is by the same courts handling my RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit and that the same courts were notified for months of the correlations between the Madoff Ponzi and my Lawsuit and have failed to notify the proper authorities, including the SEC and instead attempted to bury my lawsuit and motions.

The SEC should further note that in the courts handling my Lawsuit, many of the judges and clerks are also Defendants in the Lawsuit and despite the obvious conflicts, they continue to handle the matters, as if no rules or laws apply to them.

These illegal actions by members of the courts should also be cause for the SEC, FBI and others addressed herein to investigate the members of the courts involved for possible collusion and aiding and abetting these schemes through Fraud on the Courts.

Following this Formal Complaint, for the courts failures to address the conflicts and misprision of a felony, the three Second Circuit Judges involved in my appeal will be filed on for Criminal Obstruction and other crimes, as exhibited already in the Motion to Compel.

The SEC should note here that the US Second Circuit has recently attempted to evade the Motion to Compel, by attempting to dismiss the Appeal as baseless, while the related Whistleblower case remains ongoing.

Sneaky as it sounds, by dismissing the case, the court has evaded addressing the criminal charges levied against them and the request for oversight of their criminal actions, as set forth in the Motion to Compel. This brilliant but failed attempt to evade the Motion to Compel, without having to rule on their conflicts or answer the charges against them, despite factual and material conflicts of interests in the court, further evidences their continued criminal obstruction.

All those addressed herein, should therefore immediately begin investigation of the Second Circuit and US District Court for the Southern District of New York court officials involved. Especially concerning their concealment from authorities of these material facts relating to these Schemes, again which may be a Misprision of Felony and whereby had the courts acted within law they could have prevented injury to many victims in these Schemes years earlier, when I initially reported Proskauer’s misdeeds to them.

This information should be cause for the SEC to reanalyze the entire Madoff Scheme in light of this new evidence. All asset sales and other distributions should instantly be halted until these material facts can be reviewed to determine if these funds are also relating to the Iviewit stolen patents. " "

Click here for Source of this Post and the Entire SEC Complaint

Wake Up Mary Schapiro - this is and has been a Financial EMERGENCY for a VERY long time..

Posted Here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox

If you have any information on Proskauer Rose's further involvement in the Standford Affair, the Madoff Scheme or any dirty deeds or favors owed that would make it so that Proskauer Rose LLP can seem to hold no accountability for Billions of Dollars of Shareholder Loss... Please Email Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox at Crystal@CrytalCox.com
blog
crystal cox