Apparently the Director gets to violate all kinds of rules and court orders

December 26, 2012, I hand-carried to the MN Supreme Court:  1) an Objection to the Referee’s December 20, 2012 ruling (objecting on the grounds of various constitutional violations – none of which have been addressed, ever, in the proceedings); and 2) a motion to seal the December 20 order.

The Director’s response to the motion, by my calulation, was due January 2, 2013.  The Director filed a response 5 days later – on January 7, 2013.  See first page scan, below and FILED stamp.

Jill Clark_20130313_155455

That is the kind of “rule violation” that the Director would charge an attorney like me for (you know, an Attorney who speaks).  And yet the Director’s response was considered by the Supreme Court, not  mention made of the lateness of the response.

I note that on October 17, 2012, I told the entire Supreme Court that I had been falsely imprisoned at the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility, and that Assistant Director Craig Klausing had violated court order(s), and that he had repeatedly violated my confidentiality rights.  I see not one mention of THAT anywhere in any MN Supreme Court order.

That Assistant Director again violated my confidentiality after October 17, 2012.

Just how much is the Director’s Office going to be protected?  What price does the public have to pay for this system?

I don’t think the Public is fooled by these antics.  It’s pretty obvious to many people, I think, that the MN Supreme Court protects some and sacrifices others.  I feel proud that I stood up as an American, and that I am being punished for that.  But hey, enough is enough.  When the jig it up – sometimes the best thing to do it wave the white flag and say – we get it, we goofed.  Peace.