Six Ways to Sunday – Part DEUX


“The bedrock of our democracy is the rule of law and that means we have to have an independent judiciary, judges who can make decisions independent of the political winds that are blowing.”  ~Caroline Kennedy

The following post is dedicated to the Adams County District Judges, Colorado, to included yet not be limited to:

District Court Chief Judge C. Vincent Phelps

and, 17th Judicial District Judge John E. Popovich, Jr..

The purpose of this post is to reveal the motions that have been sealed by the court by Popovich and/or Phelps in an attempt too further violate the substantial and procedural rights of yours truly and suppress the TRUTH with malicious intent to confuse and mislead anyone who would investigate my malicious and vindictive prosecution!!!

On Thursday the 23rd of January 2014, I did visit the Adams County Justice Center [Legion of Doom] for an appointment with the District Attorney’s Office in re discovery on a single disk for $15.00 USD.  As I approached the security desk to sign-in and announce my arrival I broke out laughing when I spied a “wanted” poster hanging up of yours truly behind the security desk:


Honestly, the one thing I was looking for in the discovery was a copy of the subpoena filed for me by advisory counsel Raymond Joachim (aka Benedict Arnold) to force FALSE victim John Anthony Stipech to appear at my jury trial to testify.  I promise you that Sarah with the District Attorneys office stated my files with the DA did not include copies of the subpoena’s I filed.

I was amazed when I went to the File Room at the Adams County Justice Center [Legion of Doom] thereafter and upon not locating the copies of the subpoena’s in my court files the clerk told me they would be in the District Attorney’s file(s).  WTF!!!

The following email offers PROOF that I did have to subpoena the FALSE victim elected attorney John Anthony Stipech with the Westminster Municipal Court to my Trial by Jury:


Usually, the victim would have been required to sign a formal complaint, under oath, that becomes part of the arrest warrant charging the accused with committing a crime. By signing and verifying the complaint, the victim has indicated their willingness to appear as a witness to testify in Court if at the trial.  The victim is a witness for the state, and will be represented at trial by the District Attorney.

It is important to again review the unconstitutional Information filed in my case which is fatally erred failing to grant jurisdiction to the Adams County District Court:


The following motion and case law supports why the Information is defective not granting jurisdiction:

Fails To State Offense

Below you will find links to the six (6) letters to the court that are currently “sealed”.  The public in general and news media in particular have a qualified right of access to court proceedings and records. This right is rooted in the common law (Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc., 435 U.S. 589, 596–97 (1978)).

Sealing of judicial records is not considered appropriate if it is done merely to protect parties (i.e., Public Defenders/Alternative Defense Counsel, District Attorney(s) and/or Magistrates/Judges) from embarrassment (Siedle v. Putnam Invs., Inc., 147 F.3d 7, 10 (1st Cir. 1998); Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–79 (9th Cir. 2006)).


The first letter sealed was addressed to Judge Popovich and concerns inappropriate conduct by the Colorado Mental Health Institute at Pueblo and Dr. Micheal Morrison and also deals with the delay for a Preliminary Hearing to establish probable cause.  Speedy Trial issues are also advocated:

07.19.11 Popovich

The second letter sealed was addressed to Judge Popovich and concerns my plea for application of a court’s supervisory powers in dismissing a criminal case:

07.24.11 Popovich

The third letter sealed addressed to Judge Popovich is another plea for court’s supervisory powers:

07.25.11 Popovich

The fourth letter sealed addressed to Judge Popovich is a call-to-action on for the court to address the many unconstitutional issues with my vindictive prosecution:

07.27.11 Popovich

The fifth letter sealed is addressed to Chief Judge Phelps and is another plea for the court’s supervisory powers in dismissing a criminal case:

08.21.11 Phelps

Included in the sealed envelope is a particular motion.  At this exact moment I am unsure why this particular motion was sealed but obviously it is very important to my Civil Rights lawsuit so I am posting it:


As I have stated before, the charging Information is fatally in error, insufficient, unconstitutional failing to grant jurisdiction to the Adams County District Court and it allows me to personally sue every judge that touched my case:

The issue before us is whether “sufficient factual grounds exist to cause a reasonable, objective person, knowing all the the relevant facts so far revealed, to question the judge’s impartiality (United States v Pearson, 203 F3d 1243, 1277 (10th Cir 2000); Liteky v United States, 510 US 540, 555 114 S Ct 1147, 127 Ed 2d 474 (1994) (Evidence the degree of favoritism or antagonism required for recusal).

Every person is generally presumed to know the law (see People v Carey, 198 P3d 1223, Colo App Lexis 623 (Colo App 2008); People v Hayword, 55 P3d 803, 806 (Colo App 2002); Dikeman v Charnes, 739 P2d 870 (Colo App 1987).

Billy bob Bramscher petitions the Judges continued conduct in case 10CR3690 displayed a deep-seated favoritism and antagonism that would make fair judgement(s) impossible.

Billy bob Bramscher makes claim that the trial courts decisions were manifestly arbitrary, unreasonable, unfair and the trial court failed to articulate reasons for decisions and no such reasons were readily apparent from the record or the reasons so articulated were contrary to law (see In Re Bueno 248 B.R. 581, 582-83 (D Colo 2000); Todd v Bear Valley Village Apartments, 980 P2d 973, 977 (Colo 1999) in re trial court’s broad siscretion to act in a “managerial role”; CRCP 16 Committee cmt in re “It is expected that trial judges will assertively lead the management of cases to ensure justice is served”).

The role of the judiciary, if its integrity is to be maintained, is one of impartiality (see People v Martinez, 185 Colo 187 (Colo 1997); Tumey v Ohio, 273 US 510, 47 S Ct 437, 71 L Ed 749 (1927); see also Canon 1, Colorado Code of Judicial Ethics (1973)).  As stated in Harthun v District Court, 178 Colo 118, 495 P2d 539 (1972), “The semblance of Due Process is a sham when the judge is both prosecutor and judge” (see also Sancher v United States, 343 US 1, 96 L Ed 717, 72 S Ct 451 (1952) in re “There is strife in the trial of a contested criminal case, hence the supervision and control over counsel must be exercised only ‘by a neutral judge.'”).

The judge who resides over civil and criminal cases should be fair, unbiased and completely impartial.  Any Bias, hostility or prejudice, or even interest in the outcome of a given civil or criminal case will disqualify a judge from presiding over that case (see Tumey v Ohio, 273 US 510, 47 S Ct 437, 71 L Ed 749 (1927); Whitaker v McLean, 73 App DC 259, 118 F2d 596; cf Berger v United States, 255 US 22, 65 L Ed 481, 41 S Ct 230 (1921); Offutt v United States, 348 US 11, 99 L Ed 11, 75 S Ct 11 (1954)).

Jury Instructions


As I have written previously, “I am the victim of a ‘War of Attrition’ and truly thankful I was well versed on The Art of War by Sun Tzu.”

01/30/2012:  Trial started on January 30, 2012 ending on February 6, 2012 and as my own lawyer (pro se) I was found “NOT GUILTY” by a jury of my peers. At this time, I was charged with C.R.S. 18-8-615 via 18-9-111(1)(e) and the mens rea was changed to “Specific Intent” instead of “Knowingly” as incorrectly alleged for over thirteen (13) months.

In my jury trial, the Defendant’s Theory of Defense, provided to the Jury:

“It is the Defendant’s theory of defense that the prosecution of this case was based upon retaliation by the City of Westminster. The Defendant contends that he was exercising his First Amendment rights of free speech and to redress grievances he had with the City of Westminster and that this prosecution is based on bad faith investigation, legal harassment and retaliation against him Defendant for exercising his First Amendment Rights.”

I am Billy bob Bramscher and I am a victim of bullying, bad-faith investigation, vindictive prosecution, malicious prosecution, First Amendment Retaliation and Civil Rights violations by the City of Westminster, Westminster Police Department, Westminster Municipal Court, Adams County/District Court, Adams County District Attorney, Colorado Public Defender/Alternative Defense Counsel and others!!!

~Your Affectionate and Obedient Servant…

~Billy bob Bramscher



One thought on “Six Ways to Sunday – Part DEUX

  1. Pingback: Jeff Sessions Benedict Arnold!!! | Lonesome Lozer

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s