DEFENDANT #12: DAVID W. SLAYTON (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

 

Role in People v. Michael Taylor (XNEGA111132)
As the Executive Officer and County Clerk of the Los Angeles Superior Court, David W. Slayton’s official name and file stamp appear on every critical document underpinning the psychiatric fraud in People v. Michael Taylor — including the October 2, 2023 sealed order used to justify the § 730 evaluation, and the later-filed assessment by Dr. Pietro D’Ingillo, which was unlawfully relied upon to suspend criminal proceedings and commit the defendant to psychiatric detention.

Though Slayton may not have authored or directly processed these documents, his office formally authenticated the paper trail of due process violations, effectively lending institutional legitimacy to an unconstitutional sequence of events. His failure to detect, report, or intervene upon evidence of record falsification, venue mismatches, and missing legal authority implicates him as an administrative enabler of judicial fraud.

Summary of Involvement
In the architecture of systemic fraud, paperwork is the scaffolding. David W. Slayton, as the Executive Clerk, stands at the apex of that administrative structure — the final stamp of legitimacy on documents that were procedurally and constitutionally defective. His file stamp, name, and authority appear on:

The October 2, 2023 sealed court order — an order that to this day has not been served, produced, or made accessible to the defense, despite being used to detain Mr. Taylor under the pretext of Penal Code § 730.

The psychiatric assessment authored by Dr. D’Ingillo, filed in Hollywood court but addressed to Judge Suzette Clover in Pasadena — a jurisdictional contradiction that should have triggered immediate red flag review.

As custodian of the official record, Slayton’s office bears the duty to protect the integrity of court filings, especially those which suspend rights, authorize detainment, or involve sealed proceedings. His failure to catch venue inconsistencies, improper filings, missing service notifications, and contradictory order usage contributed materially to the ongoing deprivation of the defendant’s liberty.

Slayton's office also enabled the laundering of psychiatric fraud across judicial departments — from Pasadena to Hollywood — without ensuring proper chain of custody, notification, or legality. In doing so, the Clerk's office became the procedural vehicle through which unauthorized mental health determinations gained state force.

Why He Is Defendant #12 in the Dossier:

• Authenticated documents that were procedurally defective, constitutionally void, or never lawfully served.
• Enabled the sealed order and Dr. D’Ingillo’s report to be laundered into legitimacy via official file stamp and clerk endorsement.
• Failed to review or report contradictions in filing jurisdiction, content origin, and judicial authority.
• As the highest administrative officer of the LA Superior Court, bears final responsibility for institutional misfiling that facilitated unlawful detention.

> “Slayton did not author the fraud — he notarized it. With every file stamp, the lie became law. In the silence of his office, unlawful orders found a voice.”