WilsonBlock1000 Radio

Featured News

Why It Appears That Women Are Taking Over Everything

Who Defined “Jewish”? The Deeper Battle Over Identity and Divine Authority By: Michael Taylor | ThaWilsonBlock Magazine In today’s world of rewritten truths and rebranded identities, few topics are more misunderstood—or more manipulated—than the question: Who is a Jew? For centuries, institutions, cultures, and religious authorities have claimed the right to define Jewishness. But beneath the noise of tradition and politics lies a deeper issue—a spiritual one. Because the question isn't just how “Jewish” is defined. The real question is: Who or what has the authority to define it in the first place? --- The Origin of the Covenant When we go back to the beginning, the answer is simple and undeniable. The Most High—YHWH—established a covenant with Abraham, reaffirmed it through Isaac, and fulfilled it through Jacob, who was renamed Israel. The covenant was not based on culture or customs. It was based on divine election and lineage. > “I will establish my covenant betw...

Exhibit B-5 (5.1.24) [EVALUATION REPORT] Defendant Withholds Consent Pending Constitutional Challenge — Evaluation Aborted (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

Exhibit B-5: May 1, 2024 — Declaration of Non-Evaluation by Dr. Phani M. Tumu, M.D.


Defendant Withholds Consent Pending Constitutional Challenge — Evaluation Aborted

---

🔹 Verbatim Excerpt: Letter from Dr. Phani M. Tumu (May 1, 2024)

> “Pursuant to your Court Order dated 3/22/24 under Section 730 of the Evidence Code and Section 1368 of the Penal Code, I was appointed to evaluate the defendant Michael Taylor.

I attempted to evaluate Mr. Taylor but he declined my request, stating in an email dated 3/31/24 that 'before we proceed, I will need to challenge the validity of the initial evaluation and remedy potential violations of my constitutional rights to due process that have been disregarded since preliminary... I will follow-up with more information as soon as I have it. Thank you for understanding.'

He has since sent numerous emails to various individuals, including myself, but has not contacted me about an interview.

As such, I was not able to interview him and therefore have not been able to produce a report.”


🔹 Legal Analysis

This letter serves as official documentation that the defendant did not submit to a subsequent court-ordered PC 730 evaluation due to a pending challenge to the lawfulness of prior proceedings, specifically regarding the unauthorized use of a confidential diversion report by Dr. Pietro D’Ingillo (Exhibit B-2).

Dr. Tumu’s letter confirms three critical legal facts:

1. No New Evaluation Was Conducted

No interview occurred.

No psychiatric opinion was rendered.

No report was submitted to the court.


2. Defendant Clearly Withheld Consent

The defendant made an express, written objection based on constitutional concerns tied to prior procedural violations.

The objection was not evasive or incoherent — it was articulated in legal terms and grounded in due process principles.


3. Court-Appointed Expert Acknowledged the Objection

Dr. Tumu not only documents the refusal but includes the defendant’s legal rationale.

This amounts to notice to the court of a standing due process objection that precedes any new mental health determination.

---

🔹 Public Commentary (Accessible Explanation)

Let’s be clear: The court ordered a new doctor to evaluate the defendant’s mental state.
But the defendant said no — not because he refused mental health care, but because he wanted the court to fix a previous violation first.

Think of it like this: If a doctor shows up with fake paperwork and gives you the wrong diagnosis, you’re going to want that mistake fixed before another doctor takes over. That’s exactly what happened here.

And rather than ignoring the objection or calling it nonsense, the doctor respected the boundary and informed the court that he couldn’t move forward. He didn’t try to force it. He didn’t accuse the defendant of being uncooperative. He acknowledged a legal barrier that hadn’t been resolved.

This isn’t obstruction. This is basic due process.

---

🔹 Implication for the Dossier

Exhibit B-5 affirms that the defendant actively withheld consent for further psychiatric evaluation until the legal foundation for the initial PC 730 evaluation (Exhibit B-2) was addressed. It also places the court on notice that any continued attempt to prosecute without correcting the record would constitute knowing misconduct.

This exhibit proves that the competency process had fully collapsed — not due to obstruction or avoidance by the defendant, but due to the court’s refusal to cure its own constitutional errors. The defendant's objection is now part of the evidentiary record — documented, legal, and unavoidable.


THE VERNON PATTERSON DOSSIER EXHIBIT INDEX:

EXHIBITS A: COMMUNICATIONS

  • Exhibit A-1 (4/8/25): [EMAIL] Vernon Patterson Admits No Court Order for PC 730 Competency Assessment
  • Exhibit A-2 (5/8/25): [SMS] Vernon Patterson Dismisses Due Process While Presuming Client's Guilt
  • Exhibit A-3 (5/12/25): [SMS] Vernon Patterson Declares Unlawful State Hospital Commitment a “Non-Issue”
  • Exhibit A-4 (5/13/25): [SMS] Vernon Patterson Denies Relevance of Missing Court Order While Scheduling New Competency Exam
  • Exhibit A-5 (5/14/25): [COURT ORDER] Vernon Patterson Materializes Threat to Re-Evaluate Defendant Without Correcting Prior Fraud
  • Exhibit A-6 (5/15/25): [SMS] Defendant Rejects Unlawful Psychiatric Evaluation; Patterson Refuses to Answer Jurisdictional Challenge
  • Exhibit A-7 (5/23/25): [SMS] Judge Michael Carter Leverages Executive Authority Despite Lacking Jurisdiction; Patterson Weaponizes Silence
  • Exhibit A-8 (5/28/25): [SMS] Defendant Demands Consent Waiver and Dismantles Cover-Up
  • Exhibit A-9 (6/3/25): [EMAIL] Vernon Patterson’s Constructive Abandonment and Weaponized Incompetency Allegations
  • Exhibit A-10 (6/23/25): [SMS] Vernon Patterson Folds! Withdraws Representation Without Due Process

EXHIBITS B: TRANSCRIPTS
  • Exhibit B-1 (10/2/23) [SMS] Judge Suzette Clover Appoints Dr. Pietro D’Ingillo As Confidential Expert for Mental Health Diversion (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-2 (2/14/24) [EVALUATION] Unauthorized Competency Report Submitted in Violation of Court Order and Statutory Privileges (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-3 (2/14/24) [MINUTE ORDER] Unauthorized Invocation of PC §1368 and Retroactive Justification of Prior Evaluation (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-4 (2/28/24) [MINUTE ORDER] Appearance Waived, New Judge Assigned, Competency Hearing Continued W/O Jurisdictional Clarity (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-5 (5/1/24) [EVALUATION REPORT] Defendant Withholds Consent Pending Constitutional Challenge — Evaluation Aborted (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-6 (6/21/24) [EVALUATION REPORT] Defendant Refuses Evaluation Until Prior Due Process Violation Is Cured — No Opinion Rendered (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-7 (8/30/24) [EVALUATION REPORT] Involuntary Medication Order Recommended Solely on Records and Prior Contested Evaluation (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-8 (8/30/24) [MINUTE ORDER] Judicial Authorization of Forced Medication, Voter Disqualification, and Broad HIPAA Disclosure Without Procedural Redress (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit B-9 (5/14/24) [COURT ORDER] Court Authorizes Confidential Psychiatric Evaluation at Defense Request Following Accusations of Constructive Abandonment and Due Process Violations (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

EXHIBITS C: REDRESS
  • Exhibit C-1 (4.28.24) [COMPLAINT] Material Falsehoods & Constructive Ratification by The California State Bar (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-2 (3/20/24) CJP Complaint on Judge Clover (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-3 (3/18/25) [EMAIL] DSH Engages In Constructive Ratification of Fraud by Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-4 (5/15/25) [EMAIL] Sydney Kamlager-Dove Engages In Constructive Abandonment of Constituent Amidst Judicial Fraud (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-5 (4/8/24) [EMAIL] The Cochran Firm Declines Representation; Mandatory Reporting Duties Still Implied (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-6 (5/18/25) [EMAIL] ACLU of Southern California – Declination, Constructive Notice, and Failure of Mandated Reporting Duties (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-7 (6/10/25) [EMAIL] Judicial Acknowledgment of Fraud Upon The Court By 2nd Appellate District Court of California (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-8 (6/15/25) [EMAIL] Trump's DOJ Endorses Constructive Judicial Misconduct That Originated Under Biden (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-9 (6/22/25) [EMAIL] Congresswoman Judy Chu Receives Formal Complaint of Fraud Upon The Court After DOJ Closed Complaint (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)
  • Exhibit C-10 (7/1/25) [LAWSUIT] California Attorney General Rob Bonta Violates Equal Protection of Defendant Michael Taylor (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

Comments

Mistah Wilson's Podcast

Pasadena Music Scene

Seattle Music Scene

Los Angeles Music Scene

Political Narratives

Religious Narratives

Hip Hop Narratives

Sports Narratives

Meet Tha Artist (Full Stories)

Street Sign Photography