But Justice Page, are all of these your signature?
Check out this one from March 2012. This looks like a secure hand.
Tag Archives: Jill Clark disciplinary case
Judge Gerald Seibel – are these both your signatures?
First, check out this pic I took today (this was first posted March 13, 2012 on jillclarkspeaks) at the MN Supreme Court of the unguarded signature of the Honorable Gerald Seibel, back in April 2012 when he was first receiving the file.
Next, check out that signature (it appears on the right hand side below), next to the signature on the June 27, 2012 order that supposedly recommended Attorney Clark (candidate for the Minnesota Supreme Court at the time…just coincidence!) be immediately placed on disability status (that sig is on the left hand side below). The order was dated June 27. As I was trying to take the picture of the comparison docs, and email it to myself to post here, there was a lot of stuff going on. The date of the June 27 order may be cut off in the picture.
Like I said, I am no handwriting expert, but look at the starting letter of the signature – the capital G. Someone who has been signing their name a long time usually has a confident start to the sig.
Try these: Just the April 2012 sig:
And here is what is on the paper presented to me as a June 27, 2012 order signed by Seibel:
The Deadline is 5 o’clock today
Today at 5 o’clock, if I have not heard from Justice Alan Page, or Judge Gerald Seibel, that they claim the “orders” that they supposedly signed on:
PAGE:
January 4, 2013
January 10, 2013
January 11, 2013
January 16, 2013 and
February 14, 2013
SEIBEL:
June 27, 2013 and
December 20, 2013
then I will be justified in assuming they did not.
This is nothing to trifle with. The integrity of the court system is at stake. Why would the public pay for all kinds of salaries, and building maintenance, if someone is just going to change or destroy the final product of all of that expense: court orders.
If I am ignored, that will be my message.
P.S. These orders are not the sum total of my concerns. It is the place I am starting.
Minnesota courts have a policy or custom of violating court orders: Part 2
I need to start by saying that I do not acknowledge the authenticity of the orders in my disciplinary case. I do not come to this lightly. I have studied on this.
It is not my fault that someone (some committee?) decided to destroy original court orders. That was not my decision. And I refuse to be punished for that decision.
I asked the Ramsey County Clerk (see Part 1) how she was going to authenticate the court orders, and she pulled out a page full of Ramsey County Judge signatures. I asked if I could have a copy, she looked stricken, and ran away to “talk” to somebody. When she came back the answers was (predictably), no.
I asked why not, and she said something like, it is “their” document. This is just one more example of the entitlement that state court employees evince, as they prevent the Public from seeing Public documents. (And, I might add, we pay their salaries.)
I was told yesterday at Ramsey County Courthouse that I had to get a court order to see the documents in my case. The Clerk sitting next to me could see all of them on her computer. When I asked to sit there, she said no. She said I had to sit at the “public” computers.
I asked for a Supervisor, who came in a brusk, going-to-put-me-in-my-place style, and told me I could not have a copy of the judge-signature document. Someone tried to tell me the piece of paper I had observed was not a “document.”
I asked for the Chief Judge.
She came back with the Assistant Chief Judge. He was a nice man, but he didn’t know anything. I fault him for that. But I don’t have any animosity against him. He is sorely undertrained. When I mentioned the Rules of Public Access to Records of the Judicial Branch, it was as if I was talking about the Moon. Before I could finish my sentence about how all documents are public unless a specific provision makes them non-public, he spouted that it was “not a record.”
I asked to see the court records that I had driven across town to see.
He said “no.”
I asked why not.
He turned to the CLERK and asked her why I could not see them. So much for going up the ladder.
The clerk said the documents were either sealed or confidential. (She didn’t even say which, obviously didn’t even know which one to say.)
The Assistant Chief Judge turned to me and said, they are either sealed or confidential.
When I said to him that they could not be sealed from me, a lawyer and party to the case, he would not budge. He said I had to come back.
He said I had to get a court order.
He said I had to talk to the Chief Judge (who was in a Judicial Council meeting – is that the body that made this horrific decision?).
Yet the entire BUILDING of court staff, judges, law clerks, were all permitted to see the case records.
Stay tuned for part 3.
Minnesota courts have a policy or custom of violating court orders: Part 1
I had a really shocking realization at Ramsey County Court yesterday. This was supposedly the place where the Public can come look at civil files.
Right.
I had the luxury of getting hostile tones, angry stares. But that wasn’t what I had come for. (At least, that was not my idea of “service.”)
I was told that all of the original court filings had been destroyed (“shredded” was the word she used), and a computer-only system installed. I challenge whoever/whatever made this decision. No officials in the court system have authority to destroy the Public’s documents.
And this is a big issue. It seems the court clerks view them as their documents. They are not. And the lack of training of these people is palpable. Those documents belong to the People of the State of Minnesota. The People did not give authority to shred 100 years of court records.
When I said, just confirming, that then they would not be able to authenticate any of the orders in my case, the clerk said something about, if it’s on the scan, then it’s the order.
Huh.
I guess I missed Denial 101.
It seems fifth graders surfing the web have more knowledge of computer hacking than the clerks in the state court system, or the DECISION MAKERS in the state court system.
People.
We have a problem.
This is a good example of why judges should stick to judging.
Stay tuned for Part 2.
Jill Clark continues 