Court Order by Judge Clay Land
regarding the $20,000 sanctions against Orly Taitz
footnote 11
page 42 of 43
"The Court wishes to explore the possibility of directing the financial penalty to the National Infantry Foundation at Ft. Benning, Georgia, which has as part of its mission the recognition of our brave soldiers who do their duty regardless of the personal sacrifice required and their own personal political beliefs. The Assistant U. S. Attorney shall file within thirty days of today's Order a short brief outlining the position of the United States as to whether such a monetary sanction can be used for this intended purpose. The Court emphasizes that the Court is ordering the penalty to be paid to the United States as required under Rule 11 and not to a third party, but the Court seeks to determine whether the Court is authorized to subsequently order that the proceeds be paid by the United States to the Foundation."
page 43 of 43
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 13th day of October, 2009
Judge Clay D. Land
United States District Judge
www.scribd.com/doc/20996403/Gov-uscourts-gamd-77605-28-0
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the legal decisions of Judge Land in response to the various antics of Orly Taitz. Reading this order, in its entirety, was no exception. While I am not an attorney, Land is understandable even to the non-professional reader. He writes with clarity, and with a certain eloquence and even hints of humor. I delight in his use of quotations in his other Orders; we share an appreciation for using the words of others to augment and focus our written thoughts.
Judge Land was appointed to his position by former President George W. Bush, who I have been known to criticize from time to time. Let me in fairness not only applaud him for his choice of Land, but give him an enthusiastic standing ovation for this choice. While I am not familiar with the other (than Taitz) decisions of Judge Land, I can only hope that this is an example of our judiciary.
I hope all of the readers of Penigma will join me in an even more joyous ovation for Judge Land. His words in the above quoted footnote are a better tribute to the mind of the man than anything I can write to laud him. Judge Land, I salute you, your mind and your heart, for your administration of justice, and your thoughtful concern for those members of our armed forces that may benefit from this footnote in your Court Order.
A reading of the various legal actions to further the 'birther' movement filed by Taitz, the resulting Court Orders and Decisions, and the complaints filed against her with the California Bar, all strongly suggest that Taitz has been exploiting gullible, trusting, tragically misled members of the United States armed forces solely to promote her own notoriety and political agenda to the detriment of their military careers. Rather than serve the interests of her clients, Taitz acted primarily to serve her own agenda; her intent to continue to do so was one of the reasons for the size of the sanction. This is what makes the effort outlined in the footnote so poignant.
Well done, your honor. Well done.
I think that the article and Judge Land's comments stand for themselves. I sincerely hope that the US Attorney's office for the Middle District of Georgia is able to find Judge Land the ability to order those funds paid by the US to the foundation. Unfortunately, it may be a long and difficult process to get the money from Ms. Taitz.
ReplyDeletePut her in jail for contempt until she agrees to pay.
ReplyDeletePutting her in jail is probably what she wants, so she can claim she is a martyr.
ReplyDeleteNot that any of us get a vote in what happens next, but I would favor having the US Atty in California seeking to have her license to practice law suspended until she pays.
Or.......maybe a big garage sale of her office equipment and furniture, and dental office equipment and furntiture, and if that doesn't do it, her car, and so on until the $20k is paid up.
I think she has committed such an egregious disregard for the law that they should throw the book at her, for exploiting her clients. The largest of the California complaints to the bar, as well as the latest Land order referred to is very descriptive about that.
I may be thinking of the wrong case but in one of the cases she filed her client apparently did not know much about the case other than Orly was going to argue it was an illegal deployment. When the client, a female soldier, found out she was going to use the "birther" arguement she refused to show up to court and deployed as ordered. Her comment was that she would have no part of challenging the authority of the commander in chief. I suppose she either thought or was led to believe that some other argument would be used.
ReplyDeletett wrote"I may be thinking of the wrong case but in one of the cases she filed her client apparently did not know much about the case other than Orly was going to argue it was an illegal deployment. When the client, a female soldier, found out she was going to use the "birther" arguement she refused to show up to court and deployed as ordered."
ReplyDeleteI believe you are referring to the case of Captain Rhodes, an army doctor, the one I wrote about in two previous posts, The Explosion of the Judge Clay D. Land Mine, and Alice in Wonderland, Orly Taitz, and AOL. The captain DID show up, and testified in court, including answering questions about previously accepting orders under the Obama administration beore objecting to being deployed.
Rhodes later repudiated her relationship with Taitz in a letter to the judge/court.
There is a lot of misinformation circulating; you should be finding links to original sources in each of my articles which are more reliable.