Judge under criminal investigation for quid pro quo sexual favors

Editor’s Comment: This story represents the frightening convergence of two unfortunate trends currently underway in the U.S.: 1) the theft—via documented, admittedly fraudulent foreclosure–of private property by the bailed-out banks, and 2) the attempts to place more restrictions on citizens’ right to own guns, which have historically been used as a last resort to protect citizens’ personal property. Karen M. Rozier, the subject of the following story, has been battling GMAC, Bank of America, and US Bank for a number of years. She is a pro se litigant—i.e., representing herself in court—and has been able to stay in her California home throughout her fight with these various banks. However, there is another foreclosure auction of her home scheduled for April 25, 2013, and this time Rozier may be successfully evicted.

As discussed in the story below, the law firm representing US Bank sought a restraining order for so-called “workplace violence” against Rozier in February 2013, and that order was granted last week, just in time for the foreclosure auction and subsequent eviction. Rozier must relinquish her guns under the restraining order.

A number of troubling things leap out at me about this situation. First of all, the main purpose of the restraining order is clearly to disarm Rozier as opposed to protecting the bank attorneys from Rozier, because (according to Rozier) the order does not require her to maintain a certain distance from the US Bank attorneys or prevent her from communicating with them, or any other similar types of things that are typically found in restraining orders. Secondly, as mentioned above, it is rather fortuitous timing for the foreclosing entity that Rozier was disarmed exactly two weeks before her home is to be sold at a foreclosure auction, after which, if standard procedure is followed, eventually Rozier and her family will be evicted. This is not at all to suggest that Rozier or anyone in her family would or should resist eviction with violence using firearms or anything else.

Rather, this suggests that the banks in general realize that lawsuits like Rozier’s represent an existential threat to their economic hegemony, which could be greatly diminished or completely destroyed if the banks were to lose even one significant foreclosure fraud case like Rozier’s. And the banks certainly realize that if homeowners continue to lose their foreclosure fraud lawsuits despite the overwhelming evidence in favor of said homeowners, the banks and/or their agents may ultimately face actual physical violence, as depicted in the upcoming movie “Assault on Wall Street.” In other words, the banks are scared, not just of Rozier in particular, but of homeowner lawsuits in general. And they should be, because as a successful pro se litigant, Rozier is threatening to the banks, not because of the obviously ridiculous idea that she or her family will resort to physical violence, but because her success is an example to others that if they will just stand up to the banks on their own, without having to hire expensive attorneys, they can and will stay in their homes for years and may even defeat the banks.

Lastly, Rozier is essentially now a sitting duck. She says she has reached out to a number of government agencies for help, including the FBI and the district attorney’s office, but so far help has not been forthcoming. With the bank breathing down her neck, where is she to turn? The courts won’t help her. The police won’t help her. The “system” is making an example of Karen Rozier, so that the message will go out far and wide—challenge us, and not only will we take your house, we’ll take any and every means of defense you have, even if you never intend to use it. And that’s the endgame—fraudulent confiscation of property from disarmed, disfranchised citizens. Which of us will be the next Karen Rozier? All of us will be if we don’t come to the aid of Rozier and others like her.

JUDGE ORDERS GUNS TAKEN FROM WOMAN FIGHTING FORECLOSURE

Judge under criminal investigation for quid pro quo sexual favors

By Clinton Kirby (Monday, April 15, 2013)

On April 10, a judge granted a 3-year restraining order—under which she is required to turn in her guns–against Karen Rozier, a California woman fighting to save her home from foreclosure by US Bank.

Severson & Werson, the law firm representing US Bank, sought the order against Rozier under the incredible accusation that Rozier had threatened the firm’s lawyers with “workplace violence.” Bizarrely however, the judge’s order does not require Rozier to keep her distance from the Severson and Werson attorneys, it only requires that she give up her guns and “not be mean to them,” Rozier said in a phone interview. “I can go walk right up to their lawyers and say nice things to them, but nothing ‘mean.’ There is no ‘stay away’ order. I can visit their offices. I can find out where they live and go visit their houses. I just can’t follow them from work to their home. And I can’t own a gun or ammunition in my own house,” said Rozier.

The judge granting the restraining order was Scott Steiner of the Orange County Superior Court, who Rozier says wouldn’t reveal his name to her throughout the course of the proceedings last week. Rozier said she only found out the judge’s name when it appeared in the ruling which granted the restraining order. Incredibly, Steiner has been under criminal investigation since early March of this year for allegedly getting a woman a job at the Orange County District Attorney’s office in exchange for sex.

Meanwhile, the foreclosure auction for Rozier’s Buena Park property is still scheduled for April 25 (despite the fact that a preliminary injunction has been granted against Bank of America by one judge and another judge issued a temporary restraining order against all banks). Now that Rozier has been disarmed by the state, she said she fears for her safety on April 26, when she knows she will be served with notice that her property has been sold: “I’m suspecting that they (US Bank) plan to have me killed,” Rozier said. Rozier’s fears are not entirely unfounded, as she said that she has been served with notices and other legal papers before by the sheriff, backed up with the SWAT team of the Buena Park Police Department, who had guns drawn.

Rozier says Severson & Werson’s attorneys said they “fear for their lives,” but Rozier points out that she is a “peace advocate,” and in the past has participated in a peace walk with Thich Nhat Hanh, the noted Vietnamese peace activist, Buddhist monk, and author. Also, she is a Fellow of the Harvard Kennedy School and has been a civilian employee of the U.S. Navy in the area of future naval capabilities, including electronic warfare, knowledge superiority, and missile defense. In her job with the Navy, she was entitled to mid-level security clearance. Further, Rozier said she is a First Class Girl Scout, her son is an Inclusive Scout, and her husband David (who also was required by Steiner to turn in his guns) is an Eagle Scout and Air Force veteran with no criminal record.

Despite all this, Rozier said Judge Steiner “still ruled against us to take my guns, put us in the system, and brand us as bad people.” Rozier plans to appeal Steiner’s ruling (the case number is 30-2013-00630629-CU-HR-NJC).

LINKS:

Sign the petitition to keep the Roziers in their home:

http://start2.occupyourhomes.org/petitions/keep-the-rozier-s-in-the-home-they-built

GIVING PEOPLE POWER

https://www.facebook.com/GivingPeoplePower