What a California Court Commissioner Really Is and how Charles Rogers Jeremiah Raxter are Engaged in RICO and Felonies in Riverside California 1 1

Riverside, California: What a California Court Commissioner Really Is and how Fraudulent “Commissioner” Charles Rogers, Jeremiah Raxter are Engaged in RICO and Felonies

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.

In Riverside County, California, individuals Charles Rogers (California Bar #64530) and Jeremiah D. Raxter (California Bar #276811) are engaged in a blatant and ongoing scheme of judicial fraud, unauthorized practice of law, and systematic deprivation of rights under color of law.

Both Rogers and Raxter are currently inactive members of the California State Bar and thus have no lawful authority to act as judges, commissioners, or officers of the court. Their actions in presiding over court proceedings, issuing warrants, signing orders, and exercising judicial powers are executed without lawful authority and are VOID AB INITIO — having no legal force or effect from inception.

  • Charles Rogers (Bar #64530), listed as a “judge,” is currently an inactive member of the California State Bar and has no lawful authority to preside over judicial proceedings. Acting without a valid license is a felony under California Business and Professions Code §§ 6125 and 6126.

Public Notice of Criminal Enterprise, RICO Violations, and Systematic Fraud Committed by John Charles Rogers, Jeremiah D. Raxter, and Monika Vermani in Riverside County

 

 

 

  • Jeremiah D. Raxter(Bar #276811), purporting to act as a “commissioner,” is likewise an inactive member of the California State Bar and has no authority to issue orders or warrants. His acts include the illegal issuance of a bench warrant without jurisdiction, rendering all acts VOID AB INITIO.

Public Notice of Criminal Enterprise, RICO Violations, and Systematic Fraud Committed by John Charles Rogers, Jeremiah D. Raxter, and Monika Vermani in Riverside County

⚖️ Summary of Violations:

 

Issue Reality
Must commissioners and judges be active licensed attorneys? ✅ Yes, mandatory under California law
Are Rogers and Raxter actively licensed? ❌ No, both are inactive and unauthorized
Are their judicial acts lawful? ❌ No, their acts are null and void
Is acting without a license a crime? ✅ Yes, felony under California Business and Professions Code § 6126
Are these acts violations of federal civil rights? ✅ Yes, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, and 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242

📜 Criminal and Civil Violations Committed:

  • Unauthorized Practice of Law — California Business and Professions Code §§ 6125, 6126

  • Fraudulent Personation of Judicial Officers — California Penal Code § 115

  • Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law — 18 U.S.C. § 242

  • Conspiracy Against Rights — 18 U.S.C. § 241

  • Obstruction of Justice — 18 U.S.C. § 1503

  • Racketeering (RICO Activity) — 18 U.S.C. § 1962

  • Extortion Under Color of Official Right — 18 U.S.C. § 872

 


📜 Elements of the Criminal Racketeering Enterprise:

 

Element Facts
Predicate Acts Unauthorized practice, issuance of void legal instruments, deprivation of rights
Pattern of Racketeering Activity Multiple related acts of fraud and extortion under guise of judicial authority
Enterprise Public offices (courts) used as fronts for unauthorized and criminal operations
Conspiracy Coordination and concealment of unlawful status to extract fines, penalties, and control over property

 


🛑 Legal Status of Their Acts:

  • Any orders, warrants, judgments, or rulings issued by Rogers or Raxter are null, void, and unenforceable.

  • Their actions constitute federal felonies and expose them to immediate civil and criminal liability.

  • Their continued operation under color of law creates ongoing violations of the United States Constitution, California Constitution, and multiple statutory protections.

 


🚨 Public Demand:

Immediate investigation, removal from any position of purported authority, disbarment proceedings, criminal indictment, and civil rights enforcement actions are warranted against Charles Rogers and Jeremiah D. Raxter based on their ongoing fraud and criminal misconduct under color of law.


Conclusion:

The public is hereby noticed that Charles Rogers and Jeremiah D. Raxter are acting unlawfully, without jurisdiction, and without proper license authority.
Their actions represent a clear and present threat to due process, constitutional protections, and the lawful administration of justice in California.

All affected parties are urged to challenge any proceedings presided over by these individuals and to demand immediate vacatur of all fraudulent and void orders issued under their unauthorized authority.

Leave your vote

3838892 points
More

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

Judicial Integrity in Action: Judge Wesley Hsu and Magistrate Maria Audero Honorably Uphold Due Process in Kevin: Walker vs Chad Bianco RICO and 42 U.S.C. 1983 Case

Judicial Integrity in Action: Judge Wesley Hsu and Magistrate Maria Audero Honorably Uphold Due Process in Kevin: Walker vs Chad Bianco RICO and 42 U.S.C. 1983 Case

Judge Wesley Hsu’s and/or Magistrate Maria Audero’s Court took a significant step toward restoring judicial integrity by docketing and honorably backdating Kevin: Realworldfare’s VERIFIED Affidavit asserting State Citizenship and constitutional standing in case 5:25-cv-00646-WLH-MAA. This filing directly rebuts prior false presumptions labeling him a U.S. citizen or ward of the State. In contrast to prior judicial misconduct by Judge Jesus G. Bernal, who obstructed identical filings, Hsu and Audero’s actions demonstrate procedural fidelity and impartiality. Their conduct marks a hopeful departure from the systemic corruption plaguing courts in Riverside County. The case highlights growing public scrutiny and demand for lawful adjudication based on record, not presumption.

Affidavit Delivered to Judge Wesley Hsu's Court in Kevin Walker vs Chad Bianco Remains Undocketed — Delay or Concealment? Benefit of the Doubt Extended, For Now

Affidavit Delivered to Judge Wesley Hsu’s Court in Kevin Walker vs Chad Bianco Remains Undocketed — Delay or Concealment? Benefit of the Doubt Extended, For Now

This article exposes a troubling pattern of judicial misconduct in California’s federal courts, where verified affidavits asserting State Citizenship and national status have been received but concealed from the official record. Specifically, it highlights the nondocketing of a key affidavit in Kevin: Walker v. Bianco et al. before Judge Wesley Hsu, while extending temporary benefit of the doubt due to possible administrative backlog. The article also touches on and reconfirms how Judge Jesus G. Bernal falsely claimed non-response in a related case to justify an unlawful dismissal, now under appeal. These actions collectively suggest systemic obstruction, due process violations, and potential criminal liability under multiple federal statutes.

Jurisdiction Citizenship and Federal Zones The Truth Behind Wong Kim Ark and the Buck Act of 1940

Jurisdiction, Citizenship, and Federal Zones: The Truth Behind Wong Kim Ark and the Buck Act of 1940

This article explores the crucial legal distinctions between a State Citizen and a U.S. citizen (14th Amendment subject) by analyzing the Supreme Court case Wong Kim Ark v. United States and the jurisdictional implications of the Buck Act of 1940. It reveals how federal jurisdiction is not based on geography, but on consent and contractual participation in federal benefit programs. Through detailed legal reasoning, it explains how one can owe allegiance to the United States as a constitutional Republic without being subject to its corporate statutory codes. The piece provides actionable remedies for rebutting federal presumptions and restoring lawful State Citizenship.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!