Charles Rogers (Bar #64530) and Jeremiah D. Raxter (Bar #276811) are engaged in an ongoing scheme of judicial fraud and racketeering in Riverside County, California. Both individuals are inactive members of the California State Bar and have no lawful authority to act as judges or commissioners. Their acts — including issuing bench warrants, signing orders, and presiding over court matters — are void ab initio and constitute federal felonies under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1962. Their actions represent a criminal enterprise under color of law, demanding immediate investigation, disbarment, and prosecution. Public notice is hereby given that all their proceedings are fraudulent and without legal force.
This exposé reveals a coordinated RICO enterprise operating within Riverside County’s justice system, naming Sheriff Chad Bianco, DA Michael Hestrin, Commissioner Tamara L. Wagner, and others for systemic fraud, extortion, and deprivation of rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It further exposes U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal for judicial obstruction and record concealment, constituting willful interference in violation of federal due process. Backed by an active federal RICO lawsuit under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 before Judge Wesley Hsu, the article outlines a pattern of racketeering, forged instruments, false filings, and unlawful evictions. Officials including Pam Bondi, Rob Bonta, Kash Patel, and the FBI have been formally notified but remain silent. This is not isolated misconduct—it is organized crime under color of law. The piece stands as both public notice and evidentiary documentation for further federal action.
Tamara L. Wagner (CA Bar #188613), a licensed attorney acting as a judicial officer in Riverside County, is now at the center of a federal removal action citing judicial fraud, civil rights violations, and RICO conspiracy. Defendants allege she is unlawfully practicing law from the bench without constitutional authority, advancing proceedings in open dishonor. Verified affidavits, UCC filings, and summary judgment demands were ignored, leading to claims of railroading and systemic court corruption. The case, removed under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1443, and 1446, is now pending in federal court.
Attorney Monika Vermani (CA Bar #355080) has been formally named in a high-level commercial fraud and racketeering operation involving Riverside County’s unlawful prosecution of a secured private trust estate. Verified affidavits, unrebutted notices, and perfected UCC filings establish that Vermani is proceeding without lawful jurisdiction, operating under color of law, and aiding in the unauthorized securitization and monetization of private estate assets. The record demands $100 million in damages, immediate dismissal with prejudice, and criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1961–1968 (RICO). This case exposes a systemic pattern of commercial fraud, identity theft, and administrative conspiracy masquerading as routine judicial process.
Attorney Monika Vermani (CA Bar #355080) has been formally named in a high-level commercial fraud and racketeering operation involving Riverside County’s unlawful prosecution of a secured private trust estate. Verified affidavits, unrebutted notices, and perfected UCC filings establish that Vermani is proceeding without lawful jurisdiction, operating under color of law, and aiding in the unauthorized securitization and monetization of private estate assets. The record demands $100 million in damages, immediate dismissal with prejudice, and criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 1961–1968 (RICO). This case exposes a systemic pattern of commercial fraud, identity theft, and administrative conspiracy masquerading as routine judicial process.
A U.S. citizen does not possess agency on behalf of the United States government unless expressly appointed by statute, contract, or lawful delegation. Mere citizenship does not establish authority to act for or represent the federal government in any legal or commercial capacity. In reality, the U.S. citizen is the governed and regulated party—operating under federal jurisdiction, not within it. Only properly delegated agents—such as public officers, attorneys, or fiduciaries acting under written authority—may speak or act on behalf of the United States. Recognizing this separation is essential in all matters involving legal standing, jurisdiction, and commercial equity.
This article explains how contracts can be formed through conduct, communication, and performance — even without a signature — under common law, equity, and the UCC. It highlights how real estate and auto sales can become legally binding when an offer is made, payment is tendered, and the other party accepts by silence or action. Citing UCC §§ 2-204, 2-206, and 1-103, the article shows how equity enforces what "ought to be done" when formalities are absent but intent and performance are clear.
In the modern mortgage and foreclosure landscape, few issues more clearly expose the divide between constitutional governance and administrative overreach than the foreclosure processes implemented by the states. Florida, California, and Nevada each represent fundamentally different paths — and philosophies — when it comes to property rights, due process, and lawful standing.
Properly asserting legal capacity in court is not just procedural—it’s foundational. When representing a trust or estate, many plaintiffs unintentionally undermine their own cases by blending fiduciary roles with personal appearances such as “pro per” or “in propria persona.” This confusion often leads to dismissal—not because courts prohibit fiduciaries, but because the capacity is improperly stated. Courts cannot lawfully prevent a duly authorized fiduciary (such as an Executor, Trustee, or Attorney-in-Fact) from asserting rights on behalf of a trust or estate. However, when fiduciaries use personal language or appear to be representing a separate legal entity as themselves, courts may treat the filing as unauthorized practice of law. This article clarifies which capacities are lawful, which combinations to avoid, and how to protect your standing by appearing strictly in a private fiduciary role. In law, it’s not only what you say—but how you say it—that defines whether you are recognized with authority.
Most workers in the U.S. sign a W-4 or W-9 without realizing they’re voluntarily entering into a federal tax contract that defines their labor as taxable "wages" or income. These forms establish U.S. person status and allow employers or payers to withhold taxes and issue reporting forms like the W-2 or 1099. Alternatively, the W-8BEN can be used to lawfully assert foreign status, potentially eliminating or reducing tax withholding and shifting your income outside federal jurisdiction. To use it properly, you must have a valid legal foundation—such as corrected status, a foreign trust or entity, and a private contractual arrangement not subject to statutory employment law. If used incorrectly, the IRS may treat the W-8BEN as fraudulent. Dealing in good faith and clearly expressing your intentions matters. Choosing the right form is more than paperwork — it determines your status, rights, and financial control.
Three sworn court documents were lawfully submitted and ignored. Judge Jesus G. Bernal concealed them, then dismissed the case in chambers—privately, without hearing, and under color of law. The Plaintiffs filed an unrebutted affidavit establishing judicial fraud and conspiracy. That affidavit stands as law. Due process was denied, and the Constitution disregarded.
Peace officers, including sheriffs, take an oath to uphold the Constitution—but when they exceed their lawful authority, they operate under color of law. Even without malicious intent, incompetence or inadequate training can result in serious civil rights violations. Under 18 U.S.C. § 242, depriving someone of their rights—whether knowingly or through ignorance—is a federal offense. The law is clear: ignorance is no excuse, especially for those entrusted to enforce it.
This guide explains how credit processing mechanisms like IRS Form 1041, Form 1042, and UCC filings allow for lawful deduction, refund claims, and debt discharge. You’ll learn how to use bad debt deductions under IRC §453, how to treat 1099-OID and 1099-B income, and how structured deposits to banks may qualify as lawful credit tenders. Designed for trusts, estates, and foreign or ecclesiastical entities, this strategy aligns contract law, tax law, and commercial paper. Explore how to convert paper obligations into lawful credits and reclaim financial standing.