TEXAS COURTS COMMIT MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS OF "FRAUD ON THE COURT" ...AND EASTERN DIST. OF TEXAS FED COURT JUDGE MAZZANT DEFIES THE LAW  AND DISMISSES THE CASE 


HEAR HOW A WELFARE CALL CAN SEND YOU TO PRISON...NOT A HOSPITAL, WHEN DERELICT COPS AND EXCESSIVE FORCE GETS THE D.A. INVOLVED IN COVERING UP FOR THEM

https://www.spreaker.com/user/resurrecttherepublic/bailey-frisco-police-state-of-corruption

FIRST LIVE SHOW.... IN AN UPCOMING SERIES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

Paul Clarence Bailey Cause #

v.

Collin County D.A.‘s Greg Willis and Amy Byers Wynne

366th District Court Judge Ray Wheless,

Greg Gibbs and Mark Ledbetter,

The Court of Appeals Justices,

The Court of Criminal Appeals Justices

Frisco Police Department

Gov. Greg Abbott, and

Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton

This is a civil rights complaint for declaratory, injunctive and other appropriate relief, brought

by Paul Clarence Bailey, Pro Se Plaintiff. Bailey, brings this complaint for violations under the first,

second, forth, fifth, sixth, ninth, and fourteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution in violation of

42 U.S.C.1983, and pleads this complaint to the court.

Movant requests the Court be cognizant that this is a “Pro Se” pleading; and as such,

is not held to the same high standard of perfection as those of practicing attorneys. Movant

respectfully requests the court recognize the reason for such, where as this is a “Propria

Persona” without regard to technicalities as expected in such legal citing, but rather a sincere

attempt, not held in ransom to legalistic interpretations that tend to restrict a just process. See

HAINES v KERNE Et Al., 404 US 519, 97 at 594, 30 L Ed 2s 652, RE HALL v.

BELLMON, 935 F2, 1106 (10th or 1991).

Claim # 1 - Abuse of Process

Defendant Frisco Police Department (Ranking Staff) filed documents with the prosecution in

the 366th District Court, upon the Plaintiff, that were;

1

A) Knowingly erroneous of the actual events, as the original ‘Affidavit For Search

Warrant” dated on June29, 2009, was a falsely elaborated narration, in its depiction, and not factual.

B) A second ‘Affidavit For Search Warrant” dated 30,March,2010, bearing forged

signatures of deceased (suspiciously) police detective [Debra Stansell] ) to obtain a DNA sample,

was then submitted to the prosecution nearly 1 year later. (Plaintiff prays, this was done ONLY in

order to enter this fraudulent documents in the evidential record, and although this too is an act of

“fraud on the Court“ Plaintiff shall add that claim later in this suit)

In summation, the aforementioned was all done to first to obtain a fraudulent felony arrest

warrant upon the plaintiff, and then eventually used, in order to facilitate a prosecution for a crime

Plaintiff was knowingly not guilty of. This was all done in order to cover up the egregious display

of excessive force and police-assisted theft of the Plaintiffs property and identification that occurred

at Plaintiff’s home, due to Frisco P .D.’s acts being complicit and derelict.

Claim # 2 -False Imprisonment

The Collin County District Attorney (Greg Willis, Asst D.A.. Amy Byers Wynne ) , 366th

District Court Judge Ray Wheless , in collusion with Plaintiff’s defense attorneys Greg Gibbs and

Mark Ledbetter, The Court of Appeals, then The Court of Criminal Appeals, Frisco PD, then AG

and now Gov. Greg Abbott, and A.G. Ken Paxton.

A) set about a deliberate collusive strategy to defy justice and convict an innocent man, by

denying Plaintiff’s own explicit request REPEATEDLY to employ a defense strategy of “The Castle

Law Doctrine”.

B) Judge Wheless deliberately misled the jury by means of abstaining from proper court

instructions to the jury by instructing them to deliberate “from the actors perspective”.

C)The Collin County District Attorneys, denied exculpatory evidence of the known dash-cam

audio/video of second officer Roger Moore, that WILL exonerate the Plaintiff AND show that officer

Scott Greer was nowhere near the Plaintiff’s home when he discharged a warning shot at a perceived

burglar. Former AG Greg Abbott and current A.G. Ken Paxton knowingly and fraudulently ruled on

behalf of Frisco PD by referencing Government Code 552.108 which is inapplicable and gave

Frisco PD and the District Attorneys cover for perpetuating the malicious prosecution and their

2

withholding of much other audio/video exculpatory evidence from the multitudes of other officials

on the scene.

D) The repeated filings by the Plaintiff with the 366th District Court, The Court of Appeals,

then The Court of Criminal Appeals, were denied without a hearing and/or proper appellate

procedure on the numerous timely filed motions only facilitated and perpetuated the lower court's

malfeasance.

Claim #3 - Concert of Actions

The actions of all of the defendants were deliberate, malicious, and were performed in a

concerted manner, and meant in bad faith, meant entirely to cause the fraudulent criminal conviction

in order to conceal the actions of law enforcement, (most notably Frisco P.D.‘s) egregious display of

excessive force, dereliction of duty, improper police protocol/procedures, that led to the policeassisted

theft of Plaintiff’s property and identity.

All at an enormous waste of taxpayer dollars.

Claim # 4 - Conspiracy

Utilizing the State of Texas Criminal Justice System as a whole, the Defendants ALL

CONSPIRED in their individual capacities to facilitate and perpetuate an elaborate concealment of

evidence from both the Plaintiff and the public eye, the actions of law enforcement as a whole, made

the Plaintiff their “Scape Goat”, thereby strategically avoiding their own civil accountability.

Claim #5- Fraud on the Court

Although the most notable and important actions by the defendants has been concealing and

absconding with original untampered Audio/video(s), (Officer Moore’s dash cams most notably)

from the evidence entirely, despite a Judges court order in response to a Duces Tecum subpoena.

The criminally altered, deleted and/or erased, audio/video(s) that WAS provided to Plaintiff poses an

even more grave example of how police corruption and collusion with authorities can so easily be

facilitated to obscure how police vigilante mindset is actually displayed in response to a false claim

by one officer to another.

A courtroom is not the place to provide cover for such civil disobedience. Certainly not for

Dishonorably Discharged Ex-Officer Scott Greer of Frisco P.D. who is banned from court

3

testimony in Denton and Collin Counties. Certainly not at the cost of an innocent man’s liberty.

It is repulsive, and even more corrupt when judicial authorities willingly defy “the rule of

law” in order to cover up such a public disobedience and embarrassment.

To defy the rule of law in its purest form, should indeed be the most repulsive of crimes as

it defies justice itself. And although the Plaintiff makes his own complaint now, he asserts that

an inquiry into all of the involved Texas authorities, in this event, should be scrutinized by federal

authorities.

Claim #6- Malicious Prosecution .

There has been considerable legal debate as to whether a criminal conviction must be

overturned before a claim for malicious prosecution can proceed. However, the law provides that a

violation and/or absence of “probable cause” validates such a claim. For that is exactly what has

been absconded, the evidentiary facts that will disprove that any probable cause ever existed.

The Defendants have conspired to deny the truth, that will prove …..there never was

“probable cause” for an arrest of the Plaintiff, let alone a prosecution and conviction BECAUSE

THE PLAINTIFF NEVER COMMITED `ANY CRIME …AND THE DEFENDANTS HAVE

ALWAYS KNOWN THAT!! And if that’s not malice, nothing is!!

Prayer and/or Relief Sought:

Plaintiff prays for the court to provide a jury trial that will allow the Plaintiff AND the defendants a

venue that will make ALL accountable to a jury of their peers. The defendants have utilized their

formidable skills as legal professionals to prove that they can readily manipulate the system and

procure a criminal conviction upon a man THAT THEY KNEW, ALL ALONG, WAS INNOCENT!

Plaintiff thereby prays also that any and all relief due him be so assessed by a jury. AND,

that a federal investigation into the actions of the defendants stand scrutinized by federal

authorities, accordingly.

Signed this 20th day of April , 2017

____________________________________

I , Paul Clarence Bailey, Pro Se, (certify, verify or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing

is true and correct.

PO Box 265

Roanoke, TX 76262

THIS IS THE MOTION FOR DISCOVERY THAT FED.JUDGE MAZZANT DID NOT EVEN ALLOW TO BE CONSIDERED IN HIS DECISION !

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

Paul Clarence Bailey

P.O. Box 265

Roanoke Texas 76262

PLAINTIFF cause number;

VS.

Collin County D.A.‘s Greg Willis and Amy Byers Wynne

366th District Court Judge Ray Wheless

Law Firm and Greg Gibbs and Mark Ledbetter, Individually

The Court of Appeals Justices

The Court of Criminal Appeals Justices

Frisco Police Department

Gov. Greg Abbott

Atty General Ken Paxton

DEFENDANTS

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY UNDER RULE 16

Now comes Paul Clarence Bailey, Pro Se indigent, and moves to

compel discovery as mandated by Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 16 (a)(1).

The Facts and legal arguments supporting this Motion are set

forth herein. Movant requests the Court be cognizant that this is a

"Pro Se" pleading; and as such, is not held to the same high standard of

perfection as those of practicing attorneys. Movant respectfully requests

the court recognize the reason for such, where as this is "Propria

Persona" without regard to technicalities as expected in such legal citing,

but rather a sincere attempt, not held in ransom to legalistic

interpretations, that tend to restrict a just process. See HAINES v. Kerne

Et. Al., 404 US519, 97 at 594, 30 L Ed 2s 652, RE Hall v. Bellmon 935 F2

(1)

FACTS OF THE CASE

On June 29 , 2009, Paul Clarence Bailey, was arrested and charged

in a one count indictment for Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon

(Tex. Penal Code 22.02).

At trial, Bailey was sentenced to 5 years. The trial was held in the

366th District Court of Collin County.

Plaintiff has repeatedly attempted to recover the State's Exhibit

#4 - the original, unaltered recording of 911 dispatcher, Delanna Copeland,

AND any "body cam" as well as the complete vehicle audio/video recordings

of arresting officer Scott Greer ; AND the vehicle dash-cam of back-up officer

Cpl. Ryan Moore, BOTH of the Frisco City Police Department. This evidence

was presented by the prosecution at trial (see Volume 2-Pg. 6-L-6 thru Pg 9-L-6).

ARGUMENT

On June 28th, 2009, Paul Bailey's son, (Ricky P. Bailey) made a

felonious/malicious 911 telephone call to The Frisco Texas Police Dept.

He erroneously asserted that his father was suicidal, as part of an

elaborate scheme to rob his father's home.

Although there were many controverting facts available to

invalidate the call (such as the caller 's ID conflicted with caller's

stated location, etc.), 911 Operator Delanna Copeland decided to dispatch

two separate officers , in two separate cars, to the initial "welfare

call", to Paul Bailey's residence at 6515 Winston Dr., Frisco, TX.

Officer Greer arrived first , with his dash-cam audio/video

operational, and Officer Moore arrived several minutes later .

Without waiting for Moore to arrive, Greer decided to go to the

residence alone. Greer's dash-cam and audio were operational as he

approached. Officer Moore arrived several minutes later as Greer was

moving away from the residence.

(2)

Moore's cameras were also operational at this point. But, it

would be Greer's actions (approaching a house for a welfare call alone) that

were in direct violation of police department(s) policies and protocols.

This, Greer's very derelict actions, would set the stage for the massive

display of excessive force by the Frisco police and various police agencies , their

vigilante mindset being revealed, became the catalyst to this absconding

evidenciary debacle.

Police protocol demands that both officers approach together.

Simply stated, there are 3 recordings (Copeland's, Greer's, AND

Moore's) that combined will illuminate all of the events of that fateful

night. The only audio/video recording(s) released has been the criminally

altered one from Greer and Claussen,... BUT NOTHING from officer Moore's

dash-cam.

The Frisco Police Department continually refuses to release

the evidence of all of these recordings. Which constitutes an overt

attempt to malign justice and cover-up the malicious acts

perpetuated by the Police, as well as this malicious prosecution that

has followed.

This and other illegal acts that include:

1) manufactured evidence and the forged signature(s) of now ( very suspiciously)

deceased, lead detective Debra Stansell (forensic report attached)

2) tampered audio/visual evidence (affidavits attached)

3) the 366th Court Judge Ray Wheless' order to seal (unknown) files from

the defendant (See Docket entry)

4) Former Officer Greer's Dishonorable Discharge and ban from

testimony due to illicit affair with rape victim (whose case he worked),

which was uncovered by Texas Rangers upon her death.

(3)

The extensive results by all of the audio/video experts can be found in Paul

Bailey's Habeas Corpus (11.07) and Motion To Set Aside and Vacate

Void/Default Judgment filed in the 366th District Court of Collin

County and The Court of Criminal Appeals, in Austin.

ALL HAVE BEEN DENIED WITHOUT A WRITTEN ORDER . WITHOUT REVIEW,

WITHOUT A HEARING ... JUST DENIED, OR SIMPLY DISMISSED .

FACTS SUPPORTING ARGUMENT

Plaintiff has requested the audio/video evidence mentioned above three

separate times, as has a private citizen AND an independent news reporter from

the City of Frisco and a separate request from the Attorney General's office. The

City of Frisco has taken the position that “…. they do not have to.........

produce the evidence because it falls under Tex. Govt. Code 552.10B(a)(1)” -

evidence related to an on-going investigation (what investigation? Ricky Bailey, the

911 caller had already been investigated, charged, convicted and served his sentence) ; and

the Attorney General's office has erroneously validated this opinion, thereby giving

the City of Frisco leave to ignore the requests.

However, this is a misapplication of law and/or mis-interpretation. The

statute that this evidence falls under is Tex. Govt Code 552.108 (a)(2) - evidence

dealing with the detection, investigation, or prosecution of a crime only in

relation to an investigation that did not result in conviction or deferred

adjudication. Plaintiff asserts that the Defendants continually withheld the evidence

initially to convict him, and now to deny him justice all together! As this evidence

would/will have exonerated him and incriminated the City of Frisco for their gross

dereliction and over all malfeasance.

(4)

The recordings will clearly show that:

1) Officer Greer approached the residence alone and several minutes

prior to Officer Moore's arrival;

2) Officer Greer did not "knock and announce" to attempt to identify

himself as a police officer; and

3) Officer Greer was nowhere near the front porch of the residence when the

firearm was discharged, having approached stealthily/provocatively; and

contrary to law.

4) That the actions as a whole, by the various police agencies was significantly

responsive to the initial actions and conversations between officers Greer and

Moore AND it was their COLLECTIVE ineptness that is really at issue here.

5) The need for law enforcement to conceal their malfeasance made the then

defendant a “scape goat” and he was then methodically framed for their crime to be

concealed.

These points taken together , totally negate the prosecution's assertion

at trial, should ALL of the audio video be considered …..and would have

exonerated the plaintiff!!

Purpose of Sec.455, for example: "If there is [any] reasonable factual basis for

doubting the judge's impartiality, he should disqualify himself and let another

judge preside over the case. See U.S. v. Will 101 5.Ct. 480 (1980). Trial judge,

Judge Mazzant, had already ruled against plaintiff previously more than once.

Plaintiff asserts that this has demonstrated a tainted perception of this Plaintiff's

causation that shows culpability and partiality in his malicious prosecution by the Texas

judiciary.

.

S.B.161; In 2013, the 83rd Legislature passed otherwise known as the Michael

Morton Act (which took effect on January 1, 2014) stipulates the rules ensuring

prosecution and law enforcement produce the electronic copies of all

evidence and information in their possession.

(5)

S.B. 825; The Prosecutor Accountability Act ( enacted June 2013) sets forth

rules regarding prosecutorial misconduct or when a prosecutor violates

his or her ethical responsibilities. In the trial record (Vol.2 Pg. 6-L-6 thru

Pg. 9-L-6), Defense attorney, Gibbs, addressed the court regarding how

State Prosecutor, Ms. Byers, previously made it clear that the State would

make all evidence and information in their possession available to the

defense. Ms. Byers replied that “If they do not have the video evidence ,

and if it is no t already in the packet delivered to the defense, then the

defense will not have it for trial”. Court-Appointed attorneys continually

ignored requests to properly investigate the suspected tampering (prior to trial).

Constitutional Law - 268 (5): Suppression by prosecution of evidence

favorable to the defendant upon request violates Constitutional Due Process,

where evidence is material either to guilt or punishment irrespective of good

faith or bad faith of prosecution. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5,14. See Kayles v.

Whitley 115 S.Ct. 1556 (1995).

Judgment 559: Common law did not bar convict in Receiving Stolen Property case

from bringing (1983) action against police officers claiming they had

procured conviction by altering transcripts of the tape recording, withholding

exculpatory evidence, and suborning perjury. Common law would not bar

re-litigation of issue of plaintiff's criminal guilt if prosecution had procured

conviction by fraud. See King v. Goldsmith 897 F.2d 886 (7th Cir.1990).

In trial record (Vol. 4 Pg. 64-L-8 thru Pg. 70-L-5), State Prosecutor, Ms.

Byers, questions Officer Greer if the recording Was an accurate copy of the

recordings made that night. How can the recordings be accurate when defense

expert can prove the recording has been altered, partially erased, and tampered

with? (See Plaintiff's 11.07). Later in the record (Vol. 2 Pg. 9-L-8

thru 9-L-19), Ms. Byers addresses the court informing the court that

Cpl. Ryan Moore will testify to the contents of the recordings.

(6)

Fed. Rules Evid. 1002, 1004) Where the rule applies, the proponent

must produce the original (or a complete, unaltered duplicate as per .

The rules application turns on "whether contents are sought to be

proven" by non-documentary evidence, even by non documentary evidence,

even though a written record of it was made. "Accordingly, the rule is

inapplicable when a witness merely identifies a photograph or video tape"

as correct representation of events which he saw or of a scene with which

he is familiar (Id.)(See also U.S. v. Workinger 90 F.3d 1409, 1415 (9th

Cir.1996).

CONCLUSION

In summation, the Frisco Police realized AFTER they had committed inept derelict

acts of excessive force. Vigilante-ism, they had committed gross malfeasance they enlisted

District Attorney of Collin County, the City of Frisco, The 5th Court of Appeals ,

Court Criminal Appeals ,and the Attorney General's office to conceal their

acts.....The final verdict as to Gov. Abbott awaits his response to a certified mailing of an

inquiry to his position. He is named now because of what this now Plaintiff believes to have

already been an adequate amount of time to respond. All in all, a conviction was rendered on

FALSE information , because the police and prosecution have absconded with the the most

pivotal information but denying it'!!

ITS REALLY THAT SIMPLE...A LIE IS A LIE , EVEN WHEN

THE TRUTH IS ELIMINATED

(7)

Within the realm of this, a Pro Se pleading, and being cognizant

of the fact that in such the plaintiff is not held to the same

high standard as a practicing attorney; the question as to his

rights being perhaps being better served, a writ of Prohibition

was considered. Certainly since these State Agents (the defendants)

have absconded with the exculpatory evidence and refuse to release it, this

Pro Se plaintiff will defer to the wisdom of this Court

as to how to best proceed.

Regardless, the evidence is unavailable and is exculpatory. The flimsy

rationale given by the City of Frisco and upheld by the Attorney

General's office is just one more piece of evidence of their complicity

and collusion to commit fraud upon the court.

Respectfully Submitted,

Paul Clarence Bailey, TDCJ-ID# 1833504

Pro Se

PO Box 265

Roanoke, Texas 76262

WHEN YOU ARE REALLY TO SEE ALL THE AMAZING EVIDENCE OF WHAT I CONTEND IS THE WORST CASE OF MALICIOUS  PROSECUTION IN THIS COUNTRY'S HISTORY OPEN THIS LINK TO SEE ALL 

THE ACTUAL EVIDENCE

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0A0RQkG9cOET0NmSzI2Q0huN28/view

AND OF COURSE, SHOULD YOU WISH TO READ HOW THE JUDGE GETS AROUND "CONSIDERING ALL THE REAL EVIDENCE" ...AND THEN MAKES HIS DECISION ...HERE IS A LINK TO THE ACTUAL COURT ORDER

 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dVwAuI4_UFqxdnSjQoWlDXg2NEOeS603fugi0vfglJo/edit