History Making Rights Law

ECF # 1:15-cv-05348 -- Review today.


Read these sensational legal arguments by Federal Pro Se Counter-Claimant Benjamin Irish.

If CBS truly believes they have no obligation to respond to Constitutional Rights violations in The United States of America by their agents which include fraud, extortion, sexual shaming, death threats, false imprisonment, the intimidation of witnesses and other heinous acts, then they can appeal any judgment against them in that same legal process. The evidence is crystal clear in this matter.

"Jonathan Baram has made it a point to let us know his impetus behind his vindictive prosecution in this matter is because I am poor and he is rich. He has stated such in documented text messages and emails, displaying his belief that American Justice is only attainable to those who own "millions in real estate" and not those who come from families that are "broke". For that he has shown his firm belief that poor people deserve less than equal protection including the rights against criminal activity and being falsely imprisoned. This is the antithesis of Freedom, Your Honor, and sanctioning an economic hardship of this nature, including against exculpatory evidence, would send a painful shock to the public, but I am one-million percent confident in this Court's judgment in that regard."

"The Purpose of vindictive prosecution is to burden its victims (the Government included) with delays and costs so great that Justice is unattainable. The counter-defendants represented by Mr. Thompson engaged in a blatant act of this alongside the other counter-defendants so brazen, it actually caused a Government prosecutor to admit its tactics in open-court. The evidence that such transpired is well-documented in this matter, and includes emails and a notarized contract as incentive for participation in pursuing the rights violations against me."

I respectfully request that the Court deny a pre-trial conference on the matter requested in ECF # 116 until all of the parties have completed the summons process (due 10/25/2016), and that no stay be issued in that respect. In this on-going matter, which continues to stalk Justice, CBS officials by their own admission launched this matter's precipatory investigation utilizing the defendants represented by their counsel, including a former police detective, and others, seeking criminal elements to charge me with. For this $56 billion dollar public company receiving money from U.S. Financial Markets and it's gigantic legal department the world over to claim it lacks the legal resources and needs additional time to answer the 25-page transparent counterclaim of an individual pro se borders on a judicial admission of guilt, and is derelict to their public duty.

"I ask respectfully in the interests of Justice that the court consider I am a defendant, and the complaint against me calls for seizure of my property and assets, which despite being almost nothing of monetary value, are still my property. They include my means to make a living and support my family, encompass my freedom, personal family belongings, future benefits to my children, and also exculpatory evidence in an attached criminal case. Pre-emptive legal "strikes" in this context are meant only to impose burdens against fact-finding by the court, and are pure in their vindictiveness. In fact Jonathan Baram has stated on record that part of his impetus for his vindictive prosecution and civil rights violations are because his family is wealthy and I am a poor person, at the same time making accusations that I will lose the case based on his perceptions of my father's sexuality, my education and my mother's mental capacities, all the while threatening me with his guns and to bomb my apartment and my mother's apartment in New York, naming their addresses. These are outrageous civil rights violations by a business agent of CBS/Showtime Television concerning the project the original complaint here is designed over. In fact, the man continues his threats to shoot people and settle scores with his guns. (See attached.)"

"It is highly suspect that the bulk of the firm's letter revolves around the service of Jonathan Baram, and adjusts a general inquiry as to the firm's adherence to Federal Rule 11 as relates to due diligence requirements of their client's contentions. The Baram Brothers are well-established in history as problematic stalking horses to multiple jurisdictions including this matter and also Katherine Gibbs vs. Jonathan Baram, index no. NYS 120848-99. The representation of Jonathan Baram, in consideration of prior representation by the same firm in this matter of his brother Damon Baram, conflicts the judicial statements by those attorneys that these brothers do not share any involvement in this matter between them. Nevertheless, a plethora of evidence has been either docketed or discussed-for-discovery in relation to this proving otherwise, and shows also a family history of delaying Justice without purpose, giving more sufficient cause for the court to find them in default. The Gibbs matter culminated in tactics of delay so extreme that a work product investigation showed Jonathan Baram relieving his attorneys of their duties and appointing new counsel after a long litigation, and prima-facie representations of a "backroom deal" to pay off a victim and leave attorneys unpaid. Such type backroom deal was also attempted in this matter by the Barams with a third-party here, Ms. Germosen, and is evidenced."

"The firm's false claim that I submitted a "frivolous" application and the asking that the court impose monetary sanctions "next time" is not only a non-peaceable contention (First Amendment), it is also slanderous and a judicial admission of their failure to inspect the court's docket fully, and probably an unnecessary strike against my filing of a motion for En Pauperis status here and a strike against my equal rights due to my modest means, which have been discussed by the court (Memorandum and Order, 5/24/2016). I also want to state that the continued efforts by attorneys to deride me as being in violation of Federal Rules I am aware of and have upheld by the best of my ability, because of my status as a pro se, is a further attack on due process rights, and a perversion of Justice. Essentially they are demanding the court not let me defend myself and my life, in some events from gun-toting maniacs who have threatened to kill me and my family and have me imprisoned on record, because of my financial status. These statements are discriminatory. They are Constitutional Rights erosions, including Freedom of Speech."

"The cross-representation of parties here is also vexing to due process rights. The complainant in the criminal case, Margaret Germosen, who is also the lead actress in the project for which the disputes of this matter arose, and is named here as a counter-defendant, had a Bronx, NY attorney represent her concerning the parties and events of this matter in March 2015, and also has a friendship with the petitioner's attorney here, Danny Jiminian. She is the former girlfriend of Jonathan Baram and accused him of drugging, raping and threatening her with his guns to the FBI, and other law enforcement groups, then signed a notarized business contract with Jonathan Baram to "go after" me both here and in New York State Court to violate my rights, which culminated in threats from him about this matter and a docketed admission of attempts to affect my false imprisonment by the Queens District Attorney's office. These Constitutional Rights violations have been discussed further in the State Court as well."

"The American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct state that lawyers are "public citizens, with a special responsibility for the quality of justice." The involvement of the parties collectively to pursue vindictive prosecution using this court and the New York State criminal court as a stalking horse to such, the proof and evidence that such is fact and contended properly by the amended claims, and the refusal by the parties to make any sort of colorable opposition or even respond in the majority of cases to the counterclaim, is a true deterioration of Justice. The contentions of the counterclaim make a legally effective argument that the original complaint and the plaintiff's adversarial actions in and of it are abuses of process to vindictively prosecute me in an attempt to cover-up fraud, and such pre-emptive legal "strikes" are meant with the intended purposes of delaying Justice and creating economic and other burdens on both the targeted party (myself, in this instance) and the courts. To use the Justice System in this way burdens the courts with Constitutional Rights questions posing a "potential for strife" against the law. (Quoting Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, scholarly dicta, Active Liberty, 2005)"

Requesting monetary sanctions for raising violations against one's constitutional rights in a peacable fahsion is not a test of their knowledge of the law, rather an "economic means test".

"Benjamin Irish, love him or hate him, he has had an effect on a major American Company"             -PULSE TV


Benjamin Irish, a pro se counter-claimant in a $104,000,000 Federal Constitutional Rights trial against executives of a Fortune 500 Company has twice requested default judgment and is now ready to bring their executives to the stand to answer charges of violating Title 18 USC 246 (Conspiracy to Violate Rights).

Print Print | Sitemap