.jpg)
Role and Reasonable Suspicion
Pamela Jo Bondi, a licensed attorney (Florida Bar #886440) and former Attorney General of Florida, is named as Suspect #9 in the Dossier due to her federal capacity within the U.S. Department of Justice during the period when formal, substantiated complaints—filed by Defendant Michael Bernard Taylor—were received and summarily closed without inquiry, action, or acknowledgment.
Bondi’s position within the DOJ’s upper ranks, especially given her legal notoriety, commands an affirmative obligation to recognize and address credible allegations of civil rights violations, public corruption, and violations of constitutional protections—especially when implicating judges, public defenders, and state agencies under color of law.
Circumstantial Factors and Institutional Relevance
1. Pattern of DOJ Complaint Dismissals
All complaints submitted by Defendant Taylor—detailing ongoing fraud upon the court, civil rights deprivations, judicial misconduct, unlawful psychiatric holds, and suppression of evidence—were closed without investigation. This happened repeatedly and under Bondi’s federal leadership umbrella, calling into question the DOJ’s intent and constitutional fidelity.
2. Professional Obligations as an Officer of the Court
Bondi, as a member of the bar and a senior legal officer at DOJ, is bound by mandatory reporting obligations, especially regarding credible claims of felony misconduct by government agents. Her failure to act, or ensure internal review, places her under scrutiny for willful indifference and constructive obstruction of justice.
3. Chain of Command and Dereliction of Federal Duty
Bondi’s role requires due diligence in ensuring lawful process, particularly when state-level oversight has been demonstrably exhausted. Her inaction effectively severed the final chain of governmental redress, leaving the Defendant completely unshielded from institutional abuse.
4. Exacerbation of Defendant's Risk and Harm
The closure of these complaints without so much as acknowledgment enabled California court officials to continue violations with impunity, placing the Defendant under increased physical, psychological, and procedural risk—an outcome that now carries federal liability implications.
Key Affiliations- Former Florida Attorney General
- U.S. Department of Justice (Appointee and Executive Counsel)
- Public speaker and legal analyst with influence over legal culture and prosecutorial discretion nationwide
Institutional Implication Theory
Pamela Bondi’s DOJ leadership during this blackout of accountability suggests one or more of the following:
- Intentional preservation of state-federal fraternities,
- Top-down shielding of judicial actors in California, or
- Deliberate avoidance of cases that would expose intergovernmental malpractice.
Her name carries prestige and media familiarity, which makes her DOJ decisions particularly potent in their effect—and particularly harmful in their omission.
> “To close the final door of justice without examination is not neutrality—it is complicity.”
Final Position
Pamela Jo Bondi is listed as a Suspect in the Dossier due to her federal jurisdiction over the Defendant’s unresolved grievances, her legal obligation to ensure lawful redress, and her failure to intervene in the face of well-supported evidence. Whether through administrative design, deference to California officials, or silent fraternity loyalty, Bondi’s inaction is a key junction where lawful remedy was knowingly refused, thereby rendering her implicated in the prolonged and ongoing violations now at the heart of People v. Michael Taylor.
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment