Brazil Legal Shysters
Exposing transgressions by Brazil Judges and Lawyers.
Site address: http://BrazilShysters.BoycottBrazil.com
Visit our main site:
BRAZIL LEGAL SHYSTERS "STENCH LIST!"
1. Nelio Roberto Seidl Machado, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Tragedy 1;
2. Carlos Roberto Schlesinger, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Tragedy 2;
B. BRAZILIAN JUDGES
3. Moreira Alves, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 3;
4. Marco Aurelio, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 4;
5. Celio Borja, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 5;
6. Paulo Brossard, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 6;
7. Maurico Correa, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 7;
8. Octavio Galloti, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 8;
9. LLmar Galvao, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 9;
10. Celso de Mello, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 10;
11. Sepulveda Pertence, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 11;
12. Sydney Sanches, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 12;
13. Neri da Silveira, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 13;
14. Carlos Velloso, Supreme Court Justice, Tragedy 14;
TRAGEDY 1: JOHN GREGORY LAMBROS
No fiction writer would dare to use what really happened to an American businessman in Brazil as the story line for a novel. It would certainly be called "not believable" by the critics. But sadly, what is "not believable" as fiction really happened to John Gregory Lambros.
Minnesota stockbroker, investment banker and international businessman John Gregory Lambros was arrested on May 17, 1991, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. He was denied a bail hearing and bail that had been previously approved by the U.S. federal district court judge that authorized his arrest in Brazil. Lambros was denied court appearances required by the Brazilian Constitution, and his family was ripped-off by scamming Rio de Janeiro attorneys: CARLOS ROBERTO SCHLESINGER, NELIO ROBERTO SEIDL MACHADO, RUY LUDOLF RIBEIRO, and VERNON DALE McNAMEE. Lambros was held in degrading conditions in Rio de Janeiro and Brasilia, Brazil, and tortured in Brazilia, Brazil while awaiting extradition to the State of Minnesota.
You say, "That's what happens when you get arrested in a third-world country, right?" Well maybe, but the usual foreign arrest doesn't include the high-tech depaterning (interrogation) that Lambros was subjected to: a form of torture akin to living inside a toaster, bombarded by an intense elector-magnetic field twenty-four hours each day. But when depaterning apparently didn't deliver the results the Brazilians (acting as U.S. agents) wanted (or needed) from Lambros, implants were surgically implanted in Lambros's brain to interrogate, monitor and control him.
To add insult to injury, the Brazilian Supreme Court ILLEGALLY granted Lambros' extradition to the United States on April 30, 1992, knowing Lambros could only receive a MANDATORY LIFE SENTENCE WITHOUT PAROLE. The Brazilian Supreme Court had been advised several times by the United States Embassy in Brasilia, Brazil and by Lambros that the Brazilian Constitution did not allow extradition of persons facing a life sentence. The Brazilian Constitution prohibits any penalty of a lifelong character (Article 5, clause XLVII, b) and Article 75 of the Brazilian Criminal Code, limits the maximum sentence in Brazil to THIRTY (30) YEARS. See, STATE OF WASHINGTON vs. MARTIN SHAW PANG, 940 P.2d 1293, 1352 (Washington, 1997). Lambros COULD NOT legally be extradited, as proven by Mexico's Supreme Court, who blocks the extradition of criminal suspects facing life sentences in the United States. See, "INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION NEWS" section within this web site for details. In fact, the Brazilian Supreme Court never applied "The Doctrine of Dual Criminality" to Lambros' criminal conduct. 'Double criminality' is in effect a reciprocity REQUIREMENT which is intended to ensure both the U.S. and Brazil that they can rely on CORRESPONDING TREATMENT. In November 1997, Lambros retained the U.S. and Brazilian Lawyers for MARTIN SHAW PANG, who advised Lambros that CONSPIRACY to distribute cocaine is specifically addressed in Brazilian Law No. 6368, Article 14, and carries a sentence of THREE (3) to TEN (10) YEARS. Therefore, the Brazilian Supreme Court by resolution should of at least stated to the United States that Lambros MUST NOT BE SENTENCED TO PRISON FOR MORE THAN THREE (3) to TEN (10) YEARS. CLICK HERE FOR PDF COPY OF DECEMBER 19, 1997 LETTER FROM MARTIN SHAW PANG'S U.S. AND BRAZILIAN ATTORNEY'S TO LAMBROS. (December 19, 1997 letter from Attorney Timothy Dole, Browne & Ressler, Seattle, Wa. and Attorney Dr. Roberto B. Dias da Silva, Escritorio de Advocacia; Rua Marconi, n053 - Coni. 83; Sao Paulo, SP; Brazil to Lambros. This letter offers an excellent overview about statutes of limitation and maximum sentences for drugs within Brazil's Penal Code).
Back in the U.S.A. there was a massive cover-up by the CIA, the Department of Justice, and the State Department, supported by the government and courts of Brazil. Lambros has now sustained years of torture and mind control. He has also been denied the freedom to practice his religion. Lambros remains imprisoned by the federal government, and has been denied the medical treatment he so desperately needs. Lambros' sentence was overturned on September 8, 1995 by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals that vacated his mandatory life sentence without parole because the sentence was not legal under a law in effect at the time of his alleged crime. See U.S. vs. LAMBROS, 65 F.3d 698 (8th Cir. 1995). The sentencing mistake occurred with the consent and assistance of Lambros' court-appointed attorney, CHARLES FAULKNER. Lambros was re-sentenced to thirty-eight (38) years, 30-year sentence with a 8-year term of supervised release, to be served upon release from imprisonment, thus a 38-year term. See, U.S. vs. ROBERTS, 5 F.3d 365, 369 (9th Cir. 1993). PLUS a CONSECUTIVE 5,357 DAY SENTENCE that he WAS NOT EXTRADITED ON, which was a breach of Article 75 of the Brazilian Criminal Code, which limits the maximum prison sentence to thirty (30) years in Brazil and DENIED his request to vacate three (3) other counts as per Brazilian law under the legal terms of Bis in Idem, Mutatis Mutandis, and the Principle of Subsidiarity, that have been granted to other Americans extradited from Brazil. See, STATE OF WASHINGTON vs. MARTIN SHAW PANG, 940 P. 2d 1293 (Wash. 1997) and AFFIRMED by the U. S. Supreme Court, 139 L.Ed.2d 608.
The following facts and proof of this case didn't support Brazil's extradition and treatment of Lambros. - You can't fit a square peg in a round hole. The peg simply won't fit. - When you don't have the law, you pound the facts. And when you don't have the facts you pound the law. If you don't have either, you pound the table. And that's what you've been seeing from Brazil since Lambros was arrested in 1991. But no matter how hard Brazil pounds, the peg still doesn't fit.
: Mr. Lambros offers proof as to the above sentence he received and the laws affecting same by offering the court document written and researched by the oldest and whom most consider the most prestigious law firm in Minnesota, BRIGGS AND MORGAN, P.A., dated August 15, 2000, in LAMBROS vs. FAULKNER, et al, Civil No. 98-1621(DSD/JMM), U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota. The following first four (4) pages of the August 15, 2000, "PLAINTIFF'S MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' COMPREHENSIVE MOTION TO DISMISS OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT" offers an excellent summary overview. You may download the entire 29 page document IN PDF FORMAT BY CLICKING HERE. THE FREE ADOBE ACROBAT READER MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM ADOBE SYSTEMS BY CLICKING HERE.
The 1988 new constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil (Republica Federative do Brasil) clearly states within Title II, Fundamental Rights and Guarantees, Chapter I, Individual and Collective Rights and Duties, ARTICLE 5:
The following letter from MARTIN SHAW PANG'S lawyers in the U.S. and Brazil to Lambros proves that the MAXIMUM SENTENCE FOR CONSPIRACY TO DISTRIBUTE COCAINE in Brazil carries a sentence of THREE (3) to TEN (10) YEARS. Therefore, the Brazilian Supreme Court should of specified that Lambros must not be sentenced to prison for more than TEN (10) YEARS. The U.S. District Court did not follow "The Doctrine of Dual Criminality" either. It appears Lambros, attorneys in Brazil must of obtained there law license within a Cracker Jacks box.
Click here to view STATE OF WASHINGTON vs. MARTIN SHAW PANG, 940 P.2d 1293 (Wash. 1997) opinion which proves Lambros was not given any type of law in Brazil. This opinion was affirmed by the Supreme Court.
TREATIES DO NOT SUPERSEDE THE CONSTITUTION: By the Constitution of the United States a treaty is made of like obligation as an act of legislation; both are declared to be the supreme law of the land; and NO SUPERIOR EFFICACY IS GIVEN TO EITHER OVER THE OTHER. See, WHITNEY vs. ROBERTSON, 124 US 190, 8 S Ct 456, 31 L Ed. 386 (1888). A treaty CANNOT change the CONSTITUTION or be held valid if in violation thereof. See, BOUDINOT vs. UNITED STATES (The Cherokee Tobacco) 11 Wall 616, 20 L. Ed. 227 and THOMAS vs. GAY, 169 US 264, 18 S. Ct. 340, 42 L. Ed. 740 (1898). When a treaty is inconsistent with a subsequent act of Congress the latter will prevail. See, RAINEY vs. U.S., 232 US 310, 34 S. Ct. 429, 58 L. Ed. 617 (1914). An act of Congress prevails over an earlier treaty so far as they cannot be reasonably harmonized, although an intent to abrogate a treaty will not be lightly attributed to Congress. See, U.S. vs. PAYNE, 264 US 446, 44 S. Ct. 352, 68 L. Ed. 782 (1924). Where the provisions of a treaty and a subsequent act of Congress ARE IN CONFLICT, the Act of Congress WILL CONTROL IN THE COURTS of the United States as the later expression of the municipal law of the United States. See, PIGEON RIVER IMPROV. S. & BOOM CO. vs. CHARLES W. COX, 291 US 138, 54 S. Ct. 361, 78 L. Ed. 695 (1934). Under the Constitution, the treaty power CANNOT OVERRIDE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS RESPECTING INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, REID vs. COVERT, 354 US 1, 16-17, 77 S.Ct. 1222 1230, 1 L.Ed.2d 1148 (1957). See, ONEIDA INDIAN NATION OF NEW YORK vs. STATE OF N.Y., 860 F.2d 1145, 1163 (2nd Cir. 1988). PLEASE NOTE: The Treaty of Extradition Between the United States of America and the UNITED STATES OF BRAZIL was signed on January 13, 1961, entered into force on December 17, 1964, 15 U.S.T. 2093; T.I.A.S. No. 5691; Additional Protocol to Treaty, signed on June 18, 1962, entered into force on December 17, 1964, 15 U.S.T. 2112; T.I.A.S. No. 5691. See, STATE OF WASHINGTON vs. MARTIN SHAW PANG, 940 P.2d 1293, 1330 fn. 22, 1334, and 1354 fn. 1 (Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc 1997), cert. denied, 139 L.Ed.2d 608 (1997). In 1964 military leaders of Brazil took control of the Brazilian Government and Brazil's government was returned to civilian rule in 1985. In 1986, Brazilians elected a new Congress and new state legislatures and governors in the FIRST nationwide general election after military rule ended. See, WORLD BOOK ENCYCLOPEDIA, (2002), Volume 2, page 586. The 1988 NEW CONSTITUTION OF BRAZIL abolished the president's former power to rule by decree. Legislative power is exercised by the National Congress (Congresso Nacional), which consists of a 487-member Chamber of Deputies (Camara dos Deputados) and a 72-member Senate (Senado). The 1988 NEW CONSTITUTION OF BRAZIL provided for direct elections every five years to the country's most powerful political position, the presidency. Brazil's judiciary is headed by a FEDERAL SUPREME COURT, whose 11 members ARE APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE SENATE. See, THE NEW ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, (1993)(Micropaedia), Vol. 2, page 488. Both ENCYCLOPEDIA'S state that Brazil's OFFICIAL NAME IS: REPUBLICA FEDERATIVO do BRASIL (Federative Republic of Brazil). WHY DOES THE TREATY USE THE NAME "UNITED STATES OF BRAZIL"???? It is clear that the 1988 NEW CONSTITUTION OF BRAZIL reaffirmed Article 5, clause XLVII(b), that there will be no life sentence in Brazil and the legal norm consolidated by Article 75 of the Brazilian Criminal Code, which limits the maximum prison sentence to thirty (30) years. See, STATE vs. PANG, 940 P.2d 1293, 1345 and 1352 (This Article limits the prison sentence time, conforming exactly with the present constitutional dictamen, as it was the case with the Constitutions [Brazil] of 1937 (Article 122, 13), 1946 (Article 41 Par. 31 and 1969 Article 153 Par. 1) which prohibited life sentences. Now, if that is the case, how can we give up a constitutional precept in face of a request for the extradition of an individual who one way or another, subjects himself to Brazilian Laws?) Id. at 1345-1346. LAMBROS COULD NOT BE EXTRADITED TO THE UNITED STATES LEGALLY.
DOING BUSINESS IN BRAZIL, by Brazilian Attorney PINHEIRO NETO, (1991) offers an excellent overview into THE BRAZILIAN LEGAL SYSTEM. Attorney PINHEIRO NETO'S book is in english and published by Matthew Bender & Company. Of interest are the following: (1) "In the field of CRIMINAL LAW, the principle IN DUBIO PRO REO (i.e. any doubt shall be resolved in favor of the defendant) has been fully recognized and applied by the courts. See, §1.133; (2) "In the international sphere, the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the Brazilian Courts have jurisdiction when: (i) the defendant, WHATEVER HIS NATIONALITY, IS DOMICILED IN BRAZIL; ..." See, §1.140; (3) "Finally, the Code provides that an action brought before a foreign court does not prevent the Brazilian Courts from hearing the same action and any others connected with it." See, §1.141; (3) "The Federal Constitution enacted on Oct. 5, 1988 has created the Superior Court of Justice, which is, in fact, a third level of ordinary jurisdiction. On April 7, 1989, the Superior Court of Justice was inaugurated and began its activities, as established in Law No. 7746 of March 30, 1989. The Superior Court of Justice will, inter alia, judge at the special appeal level decisions that (i) CONTRAVENE A TREATY OR FEDERAL LAW, OR DENY THE EFFECTIVENESS THEREOF; ...." See, §1.145 (4) "The lower jurisdiction is exercised by the STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS, by the puisne judges who have competence to hear CASES AT FIRST INSTANCE. See, §1.147 IN 1991, JOHN GREGORY LAMBROS WAS NEVER SEEN BY A JUDGE WITHIN A STATE OR FEDERAL COURT IN Rio DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL WHEN HE WAS ARRESTED AND ILLEGALLY TAKEN TO BRASILIA, BRAZIL TO BE TORTURED AND SEEN BY THE BRAZILIAN SUPREME COURT. WHY WAS THE SUPREME COURT THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE???????
Here is the July 17, 1992 (07/17/92) RADIOLOGICAL CONSULTATION REQUEST/REPORT of John Gregory Lambros by the U.S. Bureau Prisons Medical Center, Rochester, Minnesota, which states, "In the lateral views there appear to be clusters of punctate radiopaque foreign bodies...."
HERE IS THE JULY 17, 1992 (07/17/92) x-ray of John Gregory Lambros by the U.S. Bureau of Prisons Medical Center, Rochester, Minnesota, that shows the clusters of PUNCTATE RADIOPAQUE FOREIGN BODIES. BRAIN CONTROL IMPLANTS.
CLICK HERE to download this x-ray in PDF. YOU MUST HAVE ACROBAT READER INSTALLED ON YOUR COMPUTER TO VIEW AND PRINT THE X-RAY. THE FREE ACROBAT READER MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM ADOBE SYSTEMS BY CLICKING HERE.
February 24, 1995 letter from Glen E. Nichols to Attorney Jeffrey L. Orren as to Mr. Nichols review of John G. Lambros' X-rays dated 07-17-92, and the other dated 07-27-92. Mr. Nichols states, "However, I saw two sets of 'clusters of punctate radiopaque foreign bodies.' They were in two separate clusters; one approximately two (2) inches above and slightly forward from the ear canal, in the area known as the AUDITORY AREA of the temporal lobe cerebral cortex; a second cluster approximately one (1) inch frontal to the above cluster in the area known as the SPEECH AREA or BROCA'S AREA of the frontal lobe cerebral cortex. I used a magnification lens, and there appear to be approximately 10 to 15 radiopaque objects within each cluster, each object is about 1 millimeter (.039), or less, in diameter. The objects are clustered in two separate groups and within a diameter for each group of approximately 1 centimeter (.39 inch). I viewed the 07-17-92 X-ray of John G. Lambros with a Christian minister familiar with X-ray material. He also saw several identifiable radiopaque bodies in the two separate clusters in the X-ray." This letter is a total of two (2) pages in PDF FORMAT. YOU MUST HAVE ADOBE ACROBAT READER INSTALLED ON YOUR COMPUTER TO VIEW AND PRINT THIS DOCUMENT. THE FREE ADOBE ACROBAT READER MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM ADOBE SYSTEMS BY CLICKING HERE.
December 20, 2001, letter from LAMBROS to Glen E. Nichols, regarding the release of the NICHOLS February 24, 1995 letter. This letter is a total of two (2) pages in PDF FORMAT. YOU MUST HAVE ADOBE ACROBAT READER INSTALLED ON YOUR COMPUTER TO VIEW AND PRINT THIS DOCUMENT. THE FREE ADOBE ACROBAT READER MAY BE DOWNLOADED FROM ADOBE SITE BY CLICKING HERE.
April 12, 2002, letter from LAMBROS to Glen E. Nichols, as to his FINAL NOTICE to Lambros to remove all letters and documents related to Nichols from the Boycott Brazil web site. Please note that Lambros requests Nichols to have the Central District of California, U.S. Attorneys Office to prosecute Lambros for violations of Title 18, USCA §1001, as to Lambros' willful filing of false statements as to the X-rays of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons. WHY DOESN'T ANYONE WANT TO PROSECUTE OR FILE CIVIL ACTIONS AGAINST LAMBROS FOR ANYTHING WITHIN HIS BOYCOTT BRAZIL WEB SITE?? COULD IT POSSIBLY BE THAT ALL FACTS AND LAW ARE TRUE??? This letter and exhibit is a total of two (2) pages in PDF FORMAT. YOU MUST HAVE ADOBE ACROBAT READER TO VIEW AND PRINT THIS DOCUMENT.
In 1995, Author Alex Constantine stated within his book PSYCHIC DICTATORSHIP IN THE U.S.A., "Is it possible, asks John Lambros, a prisoner at Leavenworth and mind control experimentee (a claim he corroborates with an X-ray of four strand-shaped foreign objects in his head) that the particle beam intended for enemy missiles alone might now be intended for human minds?" See, Page 43. 1 would strongly suggest reading Mr. Constantine's book, as it offers an excellent overview on mind control technology, "Masers, not lasers, are the hidden thrust of "Star Wars." The weapon is an extremely sophisticated mind and body machine capable of thought transfer, manipulation of emotions and muscle control. Images, even dreams, can be beamed to the subject. A human or cybernetic controller can carry on a conversation telepathically, and at the same time instill physical sensations, subliminal commands, emotions and visual and aural hallucinations. Computerized EM devices that talk and transmit images to the brain were current when Reagan delivered his first SDI pitch in 1983 . . . . The Microwave Mafia often rely on the implantation of miniaturized radio receivers. The technique known as intracerebral control and uses radio or ultra-sound. It was developed by the CIA's MKDRACO and HATTER brain telemetry projects. The implantation of a micro-receiver in the frontal or temporal lobes by trained teams of operatives is done with an encaphalator,' usually through the sinuses of a drugged subject. But the current state of art in Radio-Hypnotic Intracerebral Control (RHIC) depends upon 'Personal Radio and Electromagnetic Frequency Allocation,' or PREMA a frequency unique to the subject's brain. A 'READING WAND' is hidden near the victim, who is scanned by an instrument smaller than a briefcase. Once the 'Freak' is determined,. the brain becomes a link in a cybernetic system, and the subject (or a group" can communicate, be surveilled, guided, manipulated, harassed or controlled from afar." See, Pages 43 and 44.
If you would like to review the court ordered January 19, 1994, COMPETENCY EVALUATION OF JOHN GREGORY LAMBROS, which was conducted by Dr. Kenneth J. Criqui, a holder of multiple Ph.D.'s, please click here. Please note that Dr. Criqui stated within his January 19, 1994, "ADDENDUM TO COMPETENCY EVALUATION JOHN GREGORY LAMBROS," on Page 2, "The government could not have done a better job of instilling fear and paranoia in Mr. Lambros had they hired a psychiatrist to plan this out. First Mr. Lambros was sent to FMC Rochester. The FIRST X-RAY SHOWED SOMETHING, AND WHILE THE SECOND SHOWED NOTHING, IT IS PLAIN AND EVIDENT THAT THE SECOND X-RAY WAS TAKEN AT A DIFFERENT INTENSITY SETTING AND IS THEREFORE QUITE INVALID TO C014PARE TO THE FIRST. HOW BETTER TO MAKE THE SUBJECT THINK THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS JUST INVOLVED IN "ANOTHER ONE OF ITS COVER-UPS'?."
FREE LEGAL ACCESS AND SELF-HELP LAW RESEARCH ONLINE:
The following web sites offer mostly FREE legal research to assist you in filing law suits and doing legal research. Get involved and take the law into your own hands online.
NOLO.COM - is a self-help one-stop law resource center for doing your own legal research. Web site: www.nolo.com
THELAW.COM - offers informative articles and ONE-ON-ONE REAL TIME CHATS WITH ATTORNEYS. Founded by former New York City mayor and PEOPLE'S COURT judge Ed Koch. Web site: www.thelaw.com
FINDLAW - The Net library houses all the forms, statutes, and federal regulations you'll need. Web site: www.findlaw.com
LAWOFFICE.COM - this site offers a directory of attorneys throughout the United States. Web site: www.lawoffice.com
National Federation of Paralegal Associations (NFPA). NFPA maintains a web site to assist all legal professionals in their internet research. Web site: www.paralegals.org
ICOURTHOUSE - this site PROVIDES YOU WITH A JURY of unseen peers that will decide your fate of innocent or guilty when you present your legal case. [BRAZIL has been found GUILTY]. Web site: www.i-courthouse.com
USLAW.COM - this site offers LAWYER CHAT to assist you in understanding legal concepts. The site's ASK A LAWYER forum, where you chat with a real attorney, operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The site also sells binding legal documents such as wills, leases, employment contracts, and partnership agreements for $25 or less each. Web site: www.uslaw.com
SEARCH THE INVISIBLE WEB
Can't find more on mind control, torture, brain control implants and Brazil when searching the World Wide Web using your typical search engines? It's no wonder. Typical search engines only skim the surface of the Web. What they don't see is known as the "DEEP" or "INVISIBLE" Web. The deep Web contains nearly 550 BILLION DOCUMENT (May 2001), compared with about I billion on the Web's surface, according to internet content company Bright Planet. The deep Web consists of data that search engines generally miss, INCLUDING PDF FILES, streaming audio and video, and information STORED IN DATABASES, such as government records and telephone directories. If your looking for a specific piece of information, search the invisible Web by trying the following sites:
1. InvisibleWeb.com: www.invisibleweb.com
2. CompletePlanet: www.completeplanet.com
3. WebData.com: www.webdata.com
4. ProFusion.com: beta.profusion.com
Click the logo to shop
PLEASE VISIT "BOYCOTT BRAZILIAN ORANGE JUICE." The web site designed to expose the loss of jobs by U.S. orange growers due to Brazilian orange juice. Web site: BoycottBrazilOJ/BoycottBrazil.com
Copyright© 2005-2009 by John Gregory Lambros. All rights reserved.