ONE DAY BEFORE SCHEDULED HEARING AND TEN DAYS LATE
by Sharon Rondeau
(Jun. 27, 2012) — At 3:49 p.m. on June 26, 2012, Assistant District Attorney Paul D. Rush called the home of Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III’s address of record and asked the homeowner if Fitzpatrick had received the court’s response to his motions in his current case. The court’s deadline to file a response and send copies to Fitzpatrick was June 15.
The homeowner answered in the negative. Rush then stated that the response motions would be “delivered” on Wednesday, June 27, the day prior to a scheduled hearing.
“As a friend of mine would call it, it’s a ‘trial by surprise,'” Fitzpatrick said. “This is the way these guys do business. There was no excuse for them not to put these documents in my hands. I should have had their response in my hands on Monday.”
Fitzpatrick stated that he believed that if the motions were delivered today, it would be “late in the day.” Fitzpatrick stated that he has several options given the tardiness of the court’s purported response.
Judge Walter C. Kurtz has dismissed 15 of 25 motions which Fitzpatrick filed prior to the deadline of May 25, 2012. Therefore, the court has ten motions to which it could have responded. “They could have mailed them from anywhere on Friday, June 15, and I would have had them within a few days at the most. The first alert to me of a government response was at 3:49 EDT on Tuesday, June 26, 2012.”
Local news media have been alerted to the hearing on Thursday, June 28 in the “Monroe County Criminal Court,” which 1984 statutes demonstrate was outlawed. Trial courts were ordered to be organized at the district level, which in most cases would comprise several counties.
“I’m not an attorney, so they should have taken extraordinary care and caution to have these things in my hands on time,” Fitzpatrick said.
The only response Fitzpatrick has received as of this writing is a motion petitioning the judge to enjoin Fitzpatrick from wearing his Navy uniform. Fitzpatrick retired from the U.S. Navy with an honorable discharge in 1994.
“This is not a surprise,” Fitzpatrick said. “All this does is throw more suspicion and more question marks at the prosecution. It puts them in a bad light and focuses more attention on them. It shows questionable tactics on the part of the judges. I filed my motions with the county court on May 23rd and with the prosecutor’s office on the 24th, a day earlier than the deadline. Paul D. Rush drove up with the motion about the uniform on May 30th, and there’s been nothing since then.”
Fitzpatrick then looked at the “Certificate of Service” which a sheriff’s deputy had signed and dated for “May 25, 2012.” “This is a perjured statement,” he said. “They waited five days for the drive-up police escort to deliver it. He said that this was served on the 25th, but it wasn’t. That’s a lie.” He then read from the document:
The undersigned certifies that a true and exact copy of this pleading has been served upon all parties in this case as required by rules of the court, this 25th day of May, 2012.
“This is a perjured statement,” Fitzpatrick said.
“This is the way things work in their government instead of in our government,” he added. “These are their tactics; these are the kinds of things that they do.”
A hearing on a charge of tampering with government records is scheduled for Thursday, June 28, 2012, at 1:30 p.m. in the “Monroe County Criminal Court.”
Sharon Rondeau has operated The Post & Email since April 2010, focusing on the Obama birth certificate investigation and other government corruption news. She has reported prolifically on constitutional violations within Tennessee’s prison and judicial systems.