by David Tulis / NoogaRadio Network

Persistence wins for the widow facing the unjust judge in the Lord’s parable. Detail from “The Unjust Judge and the Importunate Widow” (1864), created by John Everett Millais, engraved and printed by the Dalziel Brothers (Metropolitan Museum of Art)

(Jan. 13, 2023) — CHATTANOOGA, Tenn., Jan. 4, 2023 — Judge Pamela Fleenor of Hamilton County chancery court is an unjust judge whose work against state of Tennessee on relation, has cost the lives of more than 104,400 people, according to federal data.

In preparing a petition for an appeal in the federal high court at 1 First St. N.E. in Washington, D.C., I have been considering her dozen orders against me and her denial of 100 percent of my motions in the case State ex rel. David Jonathan Tulis v. Bill Lee, governor of Tennessee, et al.

Pamela Fleenor, taking time off to relax with friends, is in charge of a chancery court division in Hamilton County. She allowed the global jabs project to continue even though the health department admits it is fraudulently violating state law. (Photo Pam Fleenor)

The death toll from the military project of pandemic relief could have been stopped by her two weeks after I filed the case at her clerk and master’s office in the old courthouse downtown Chattanooga on Oct. 2, 2020. My petition is in equity, for a writ of mandamus, an emergency action requiring care for parties being irreparably harmed by the lawlessness of which I complained in a 32-page petition backed by an affidavit and exhibits.

To date 13,266 vaccine injury reports have been reported to the FDA from Tennesseans, meaning 1.32 million adverse events and side effects cases, or more, given underreporting in a population of 7 million.

Under the rules of equity (justice, in effect), she had a duty to immediately call the parties to a hearing in one or two days. It was filed on a Friday; they should’ve been in chambers or in a courtroom by Wednesday at latest, to show cause of their actions. They had admitted to me prior to filing they were disobeying the infectious disease law at T.C.A. § 68-5-104. 

A mandamus is a remedy Judge Fleenor and her staff know little about. On Oct. 30, at a meeting with the clerk that she turned into a hearing (donning her black robes), I said to clerk Robin L. Miller that court attorney Rachel Kapperman had asked if a mandamus is “like a TRO.” Well, yes.

The rules on a TRO, or temporary restraining order, are similar. “A restraining order may be granted at the commencement of the action or during the pendency thereof without notice, if it is clearly shown by verified complaint or affidavit that the applicant’s rights are being or will be violated by the adverse party and the applicant will suffer immediate and irreparable injury, loss or damage before notice can be served and a hearing had thereon.” 

In other words, in the interest of equity and harm being committed that moment, a petitioner can get a ruling BEFORE a hearing, even BEFORE the other side is served. It can be done ex parte, with only one party present, in a verified complaint.

My prosecution of our case is blessed by Hal Anthony, a miner and legal researcher at Jefferson Mining District in Oregon. He has helped me prosecute an excellent case, on its way to the U.S. supreme court by petition to be heard. “I’ve been telling you about the rules and to use the language if possible,” he says. “The literal rule may be inadequate to do justice. And the rules are only guides where an established right to remedy makes them superfluous or an obstacle to justice.” 

“If you do that, if you include what I call the elements of any remedy or procedure, the rule speaks for itself without citation. In other words, where the key phrases may exist in a document those can be cited to have invoked the remedy. I tried to have those included throughout your prosecution to be picked up now if it is any question.”

Sales resistance and the unjust judge

Judge Fleenor’s work as judge is a nightmare of disregard for basic legal principles. Had she had no subject matter jurisdiction, as she rules, why does she hold on to the case 201 days? If a case of routine nature involves the governor, why did she not refuse to filing and direct it be done in Davidson County, or have the clerk automatically transfer the emergency petition there? Harm and injury are piling on across the state. State actors are openly outlaw. My petition empowers her to use judicial authority and power to bring compliance with law — get Gov. Lee and administrator Barnes to obey the law. If some cases say she has no authority to compel Lee “to perform an act,” she has power to bring him to court to show cause, if nothing else.

The petition is adequate and sufficient. But she’s not buying it. She won’t be convinced by the facts I provide of my harm and injury that in an ordinary civil case would give me standing, and make the case justiciable and a cause for which relief may be granted. Nor is she convinced of the duty to obey in the law. Neither respondent had examined the law at issue, scheduled a single meeting about the law, nor drafted a single memo about compliance with the law and implementing its requirements.

To Lee and Barnes, public servants, the law is a dead letter, and no duty.

Judge Fleenor is not buying. She accepts fraud in her court from the state’s highest person. She tolerates what a news report might call a “technical defense” preventing any viewing of the bizarre facts of go-f—k-yourself government. Lee and Barnes make a “facial challenge” to the court’s having subject matter jurisdiction. To demur, to focus on the legal case of the relator and not his substance or claims allows the facts and grievances of the lawsuit to be accepted as true. Judge Fleenor lets fraud stand throughout.

But Relator fails to allege what communicable disease case that Barnes received a report of where she failed to establish the diagnosis, or failed to determine the cause of the disease, or failed to take such steps to quarantine that person. Accordingly, Relator failed to state a claim for mandamus to compel Barnes to perform a specific ministerial act under T.C.A. 68-5-104.

Here, Judge Fleenor is saying I should have done my own investigation of so-called SARS-CoV-2 disease, prior to filing, and shown how Barnes “failed to establish a diagnosis” or “failed to determine the cause of the disease” or found the “first case” and then “failed to *** quarantine that person.” Therefore, I “failed to state a claim” under the mandamus law to compel the official to obey the law. Truly, a nincompoop of a relator!

Alternative universe

She has no sales resistance for folly, however, and pays top dollar for worn goods. When Barnes says she is exercising discretion when disobeying all six demands of § 68-5-104, Judge Fleenor explains the scam in a discernment.

Further the Court discerns that the language in T.C.A. 68-5-104(a)(1) that “the local health authorities” are “to take such steps as may be necessary” to quarantine, to confirm or to determine the source, is by its terms inherently discretionary. Where a public official has any discretion concerning doing of an act, the issuance of a mandamus is not available.

She’s right about mandamus and discretionary acts; the remedy is available to the beleaguered citizen to compel a ministerial duty. That means, to compel an act requiring Choice A or Choice B to be made, but not to compel the choosing of either A or B. Ministerial means compulsory, nonoptional.

But Judge Fleenor finds discretion at Step 5 of a six-step law, and smears discretion across the whole of the provisions of the law, voiding the law for benefit of a respondent-in-fraud.

A cardinal rule in what’s called statutory construction is similar to that imposed upon theologians studying God’s word. No interpretation of a provision can void other provisions; they must all be accounted for, and be made to work systematically, and no interpretation stands that contradicts any part of the system as awhole.

To the honorable jurist, this business owner ruined by fiat diktat of Gov. Lee is not hurt, and comes to court with no woes, grievances or losses. My five-page affidavit of personal harms is not challenged in any way by Lee or Barnes attorneys. They do not put me on the stand to test it, or to elicit supporting details, or try to rebut it or show it false. They simply ignore my harms, and selling her on that idea. 

And again, Judge Fleenor is buying.

“The Court determines that Relator failed to allege that he sustained a concrete injury in fact.”

The insanity knows no bounds. The Hon. Judge Fleenor says that I am “under” T.C.A. § 68-5-104, a law turned into ashes and dust in the presence of Gov. Lee and the senior local official. But I’m not under the law. They are. Judge Fleenor brings up the theory that the law was being obeyed, and that in obeying it, they might have hurt me, and that because I didn’t allege they were hurting me by obeying the law, I have no right to sue to have the law obeyed.

Thus as additional grounds, the Court determines that Relator lacks standing to have a writ issued pursuant to T.C.A. 68-5-104, because Relator failed to allege that he was quarantined or escaped from quarantine, so as to demonstrate a right to relief under the statute.

I have a right to relief in equity, in the respondents’ being “under the statute.” I am not under the statute; for goodness’ sake — it doesn’t apply to me. Judge Fleenor, desperate to uphold judicial policy, creates an alternate reality and imposes it upon my pleadings for relief.

This process of creating an alternative case is a hallmark of my adventures as your relator, serving a public interest as NoogaRadio Network reporter and, as I’m known in the local radio business, “the blogger with the biggest pen, the smartest guy with a bow tie in Chattanooga.” Gov. Lee’s attorney, Janet Kleinfelter, and the less pernicious local lawyer handling Barnes’ defense, Sharon Milling, go along with this alternative reality, happy sellers of a defective product honored by customer willingness to pay. 

The court substitutes a fantasam in place of a real person — that would be me — and a real dilemma. The judge refuses to see the evidence and, with pages of bad writing, reconstructs the cause to give appearance of judicial consideration, and voids my case as noise, gas and nullity.

Persistent widow

The Lord’s parable in Luke 18 of the widow pleading with the unjust judge urges us to pray consistently and fervently to God with our petitions. The wicked judge yields, finally, not from righteousness, but weariness from the widow’s face at his bar. 

“Though I do not fear God nor regard man,” he says within himself, “yet because this widow troubles me I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me’ ” (Luke 18:4b,5).

First of four volumes created in our case filed in Hamilton County chancery court in October 2020 to stop the overthrow of government under a pretended and fraudulent state of emergency.

God hates unjust judges. “Do not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block in front of the blind, but fear your God. I am the LORD. Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly” (Lev. 19: 14,15).

Judges are drawn from the people and, in better and in worse, reflect their state of godliness. In Tennessee, the people elect judges from the caste of lawyers and attorneys. “Appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the LORD your God is giving you, and they shall judge the people fairly. Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the innocent. Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the LORD your God is giving you” (Deut. 16:18-20).

Sessions court judges in Hamilton County are paid F$186,058. T.C.A. § 8-23-103 says chancellors have a base pay of F$140,000. There’s no evidence that Judge Fleenor is bribed in her pay, in secret pay, or in gold or silver for her performance in what I believe is the most important court case in the state’s history that all its judges deny. 

Her extra compensation, if any, is public regard among her peers, their preferment of her among the state’s judges.

To honor her for the strain of dealing with me as plaintiff, and for other reasons, the Tennessee Judicial Conference in June 2021 voted Judge Fleenor president-elect.

In the Hebrew republic, God raised up judges for honor and warfare against raiders and idolators. “Whenever the LORD raised up a judge for them, he was with the judge and saved them out of the hands of their enemies as long as the judge lived; for the LORD relented because of their groaning under those who oppressed and afflicted them” Judges 2:18.

Unlike the modern era, with its legislatures and presidents, God ordains judges as the chief instrument of the power of the sword. In God’s eyes, the ideal government is ethical-judicial.

“[Jehoshaphat] told them, ‘Consider carefully what you do, because you are not judging for mere mortals but for the LORD, who is with you whenever you give a verdict. Now let the fear of the LORD be on you. Judge carefully, for with the LORD our God there is no injustice or partiality or bribery.’”

Truly, Judge Fleenor is a judgment on the state of Tennessee, and her 7 million people for what she has done in the case I prosecuted on your behalf.

But for Judge Fleenor, we would not have 104,400 deaths in Tennessee and 1.3 million jab harms and reportable side effects. Judge Fleenor has just started an eight-year term. Here is the record of her work, carried upward to the court of appeals, the three judges of which side with her. State ex rel. Tulis v. Lee, No. E202100436COAR3CV, 2022 WL 1612844 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 23, 2022), appeal denied (Oct. 20, 2022).

The state’s supreme court, to her honor, refuses to hear my petition.


See the article at its source here.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.