WilsonBlock1000 Radio

Featured News

The Vernon Patterson Dossier (Complete Transcript) PEOPLE V MICHAEL TAYLOR XNEGA111132-01

Download Now! The Vernon Patterson Dossier : A public, factual evidentiary record in People v Michael Taylor XNEGA111132-01 , starring Bar Panel Attorney Vernon Lloyd Patterson #165016 who exposed the chains of command of The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles for knowingly and actively concealing Judicial Fraud Upon The Court . https://payhip.com/b/FMUD8 Michael Taylor <michael.taylor.workforce@gmail.com> Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 4:06 PM To: Republic General <republicgeneral@hotmail.com>, districtdefender911@gmail.com Cc: judicialcouncil@jud.ca.gov, Judicial Ethics <Judicial.Ethics@jud.ca.gov>, JudicialMentors@jud.ca.gov, Judicial Senator <sjud.fax@sen.ca.gov>, Judicial Clerk 2nd District <2dca.clerk@jud.ca.gov>, First District Judiciary <First.District@jud.ca.gov>, 2nd District Judiciary <Second.District@jud.ca.gov>, ExecutiveDirector@calbar.ca.gov, deputyexecutivedirector@calbar.ca.gov, CTC@calbar.ca.gov, george.card...

Vernon Patterson Provokes Anger of Defendant By Denying Due Process (made with Spreaker)

Source: https://ift.tt/JB9xiEb Defendant Michael Taylor has been subjected to a falsified PC 730 competency assessment with misdated clerical errors. Bar panel attorney Vernon Patterson provokes anger of Defendant by denying him requested access to a copy of the assessment that he has a constitutional right to have. This upsets the defendant and prevents him from making informed decisions and being well-prepared for court. These due process denials by Vernon Patterson suggests misconduct as the assessment itself contains obviously misdated clerical errors that he refuses to address before coercing Taylor to undergo a 2nd cpmopinion. Furthermore, denial of access to the assessment suggests that Vernon Patterson is conspiring to systemically deny Taylor the ability or opportunity to make necessary objections at the appropriate stages of legal proceedings.  This falsified competency assessment was initiated by the court in response to the defendant asserting his constitutional rights to his public defenders via text, voicemail, and email that has timestamps. It is imperative that all emails between the defendant and the public defenders are subpoenaed to ensure there was no foul play or manipulation under the guise of attorney-client privilege. A defendant being upset over being denied due process is not a valid reason to initiate a competency assessment under PC 1368 when the public defender explicitly informed the defendant the assessment would be pursuant to PC 1001.36.

Comments

Full Archive

Show more

Mistah Wilson's Podcast