Press Release From Amy Mischler 863-753-6213 ajmischler@yahoo.com

A writ of mandamus has been filed against Pike County Circuit Court Clerk David Deskins inthe Kentucky Court of Appeals case 2011-CA-OO1424.

The writ is demanding that Deskins show a copy of an order granting jurisdiction to -luliePaxton in Pike County Case 02-D-00202-001.

Paxton conducted sham legal proceedings without actualjurisdiction in that action. Thiswas a fraud upon the court creating an unenforceable order and denying the petitioneraccess to the courts with a judge with actual jurisdiction.

Kentucky law requires that the circuit court clerk notify the Chief lustice upon recusal.However, in this case the certified court docket shows that Judge Larry Thompson acted asthe clerk and personally mailed the case file to Paxton without ever notifying theAdministrative Office of the Courts or the Chief Justice. This is specifically in violation of thestatute and the circuit court clerks manual.

The motivation for Thompsons actions were to protect fellow Pike County attorney JonahStevens who according to the original petition in 02-D-002O2-AA| spit in Amy Mischlers facein 2O42.

There has also been a motion in the action to request an en banc hearing of the entire Courtof Appeals on this matter because of the political nature of the case and the ethicalramifications of two sitting judges openly violating Kentucky law.

Mischler notified the Kentucky Attorney Generals Office of the fraud upon the court which isalso a violation of felony criminal statute. Assistant Attorney General Craig Newbernfacilitated the cover up the fraud in April 2009 when Newbern, in collateral case Pike 01-CI-1197 requested the quashing of a subpoena to both Julie Paxton and Larry Thompson.

Senior Judge Lewis Nicholls granted the quashing of Thompsons and Paxtons who werespecifically subpoenaed for their testimony regarding jurisdiction in O2-D-00202-001.Nicholls later wrote in a factual finding that Paxton had jurisdiction although there is noorder granting Paxton jurisdiction in three cases collateral cases between Amy Mischler andJonah Stevens. Those cases are O2-D-OO202-OO7,02-D-OO202-O02, and 01-CI-7197.

Proper procedure was followed in a 2006 case entitled 02-D-00202-003. Paxton made afinding that Mischler had committed domestic violence because she marched in public with asign in April 2006. Paxton also took all custody rights away from Mischler in that action.However, in December 2006 a newly appointed Judge John David Preston vacated 02-D-00202-003 on the basis that the petition itself did not allege domestic violence grounds.

However, because of the prior fraud of Julie Paxton and Larry Thompson; the fraud uponthe case taints the entire proceedings because it has not been rectified. Mischler continuesto be denied parental rights on the basis of Paxton and Thompsons criminal acts.

Supreme Court Chief Justice Minton has been notified of the fraud upon the court. He hasnot notified Mischler of taking any administrative actions against Deskins, Thompson,Paxton, or Nicholls.

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKYCOURT OF APPEALS

',}.0t\ "- lfr - rnrdh\

AMY JERRINE MISCHLER PETITIONER

VS. PETITION FOR OzuGINAL PROCEEDING PURSUANT TO CR 76.36

DAVID DESKINS RESPONDENTPIKE COTINTY CIRCUIT COURT CLERK

And

JONAH LEE STEVENS REAL PARTY IN INTEREST

*************

The Petitioner, Amy Mischler petitions the Court of Appeals for relief pursuant to

CR 76.36 in this original proceeding.

I. introduction

Attorney Jonah Lee Stevens, acting strangely spit in the petitioners face and

frightened her with his actions. Appropriately, she sought protection from him with an

emsrgency protection order.

Judge Lany Thompson recused under KRS 264. See Exhibit i '

Judge Larry Thompson then acted as the circuit court clerk and personaliy mailed

the records to Judge Julie Paxton in Floyd County. See Exhibit2, date July 25, 2002.

l1l

Without being gtanted jurisdiction or an order in the hle; Julie Paxton ruled in

the case and dismissed it.

Amy Mischler notified the Kentucky Attomey Generals Office and the cuffent

judge in her custody case on the record that Julie Paxton had acted without jurisdiction in

02-D-00202-001, Knowing that both a c;Jme and ethics violation had been committed by

Paxton and Thompson; the Kentucky Attorneys Generals Office and the current child

custody judge only retaliated against Amy Mischier to whitewash the actions.

Amy Mischler requested a copy of the order granting Paxton jurisdiction from the

Pike Circuit Court Clerk on multiple occasions. Only after she carbon copied a request to

the Federal Bureau of Investigation did the Pike Circuit Court comply in part.

David Deskins admitted that no copy of any order granting Julie Paxton

iurisdiction in 02-D-00202-AU existed. See Exhibit 3'

The Kentucky Supreme Court administrative arm has been informed but has

failed to take any administrative actionto give the petitioner administrative relief that she

has been made aware of.

II. Statement of Facts and Procedural History

A. The Parties.

Amy Mischler is the petitioner. She attempted redress at multiple levels on

multiple occasions for the fraud that has been ongoing in this and other cases.

David Deskins, the Respondent is the Pike Circuit Clerk in Pike County

Kentucky.

Jonah Stevens, the Real Party in Interest is a member of the Kentucky Bar

Association whom the fraud upon the court was initiated to protect his legal reputation.

t2l

B. The Underlying Action

The action this arises from is Amy Mischler v. Jonah Stevens Cast 02-D-0A202-

001 in the Pike County Courls.

III. Facts that Entitles Mischler to Relief.

On July 25, 2002 Judge Larty Thompson without authorization or.jurisdiction

took on the duties of the Pike Circuit Court Clerk and personally mailed his

disqualification order to Floyd County Family law judge Julie Paxton. Exhibit 2

Julie Paxton, without an order granting her permission from the Chief Judge

necessary under KRS 26.A.015 and KRS 26A.020 or any order whatsoever; began to

issue orders and dismissed the case. Paxton also gave the custody of Mischlers children

to a non-party in the action. Exhibit 2

Knowing that there was no order granting Paxton jurisdiction; the Pike Circuit

Court Clerk entered the orders into the records as if they were binding creating the

illusion of a valid proceeding. Exhibit 2

The Pike County Circuit Court Clerk refused to give copies of any order granting

Paxton jurisdiction to Mischler though paid for in advance and specifically requested.

IV. Relief requested

Due to fraud upon the court; Amy Mischler has been denied access to the courts

in 02-D-002A2-001 with a judicial officer who has jurisdiction, and with a proceeding

that has enforceable validity. In short, the proceeding was a sham and she was never

given acfual access to the court.

A. The Petitioner requests that this Court order David Deskins to produce an

order granting Julie Paxton jurisdiction in 02-D-00202-00t.

l3l

B. If Deskins cannot produce any such order, then the Petitioner requests that the

Court order Deskins to forward a request to the Chief Justice to assign a judge to 02-D-

00202-001.

C. The Petitioner also requests that the Court order that the judge assigned to this

shall grant the EPO, and that the continuance must be for three years. The Petitioner, due

to the economic distress of the perverse civil rights violations spanning nearly a decade

cannot travel afford to travel to Kentucky for a hearing.

V. Memorandum of authorities in support of the petition

A. Sitting judges purposely violated Kentucky Statute.

KRS 264.015 Disqgalification of justice or judge of the Court of Justice" ormaster commissioner.(3) (a) Any justice or judge of the Court of Justice disqualified under theprovisions of this section shall be replaced by the Chief Justice.

KRS 264.020 Designation of retired justice or iudge as special judqe(1) When, from any cause, a judge of any Circuit or District Court fails to attend,

or being in attendance cannot properly preside in an action pending in the coufi, or if a

vacancy occurs or exists in the office of circuit or district judge, the circuit clerkonce certifu the -facts to the Chie-f Justice who shall immediately designate a-regular orretired justice or judge of the Court of Justice as special judge.

Exhibit I shows Judge Larry Thompsons signature that he disqualified himself

under 26A.Arc. However, in violation of KRS 26A.015 and KRS 26A.A20 Judge

Thompson, personally send the records to Julie Paxton bypassing the Chief Justice. See

Exhibit 2.

Then without any order granting Paxton jurisdiction in the action; Paxton began

issuing orders without jurisdiction. Judge Thompson not only violated the law, but two

provisions of it. First, Thompson is not the circuit court clerk and has no authority to do

send notices that are strictly the duties of the circuit coufi clerk. Second, even if

t4l

Thompson has merely sent the copies to the Chief Justice as prescribed by law it would

be de minimis. However, Thompson did not do that.

Thompson had the records sent directly to Paxton. Both Thompson and Paxton

are imputed to know that KRS 26A.020 demands that the records be sent to the Chief

Justice but purposely violated Kentucky law. They also knew that an order granting

Paxton jurisdiction must be entered upon the record. They also knew that any rulings by

Paxton are void ab initio. It was merely a "simulated" legal hearing.

Why would two sitting judges purposely violate Kentucky Statutes? For the exact

same reason Thompson put on his disqualification; "Due to Hon Jonah Stevens being a

practicing attorney before this Court." Exhibit I

Further, the cases were withheld from AOC online records by the circuit court

clerk. Mischler with permission from Kentucky Bar member William Bonilla checked to

see the records for herself in 2004 on his bar account. In 2004 the EPO/DVO hearings

did not exist on oniine AOC records.

B. A Retroactive order is prohibited.

The trial court cannot issue order backdating Julie Paxton's jurisdiction. The Seventh

Circuit, while not controlling is clear and direct on this issue. "As 'we have reminded the

district courts time and again, the only proper ffice of a nunc pro tunc order is to

correct a mistake in the records; it cannot be used to rewrite history. E.g.,

Transamerica Ins. Co. v. South, 975 F.2d 32L,325-26 (7th Cir.1992); United States v.

Daniels, 902 F.zd 1238, 1240 (7th Cir.1990); King v. Ionization Int'l, Inc., 825 F.2d

1180, 1188 (7th Cir.1987).

An order granting Julie Paxton jurisdiction would be simply rewriting history and

giving approval to a circuit judge to violate the Kentucky Statutes in the future.

tsl

C. Due ProcesslEqual Protection under the law.

KY CONST. Section 14

All courts shall be open, and every person for an injury done him in hislands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, andright and justice administered without sale, denial or delay.

US CONST. 14 AMENDMENT SECTION 1

[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction theequal protection of the laws.

Mischler had the rights to file for an EPO, and for a judge with actual jurisdiction

to hear it. However, between two sitting judges, and three attorneys, and a circuit court

clerk; in 2002 knew that the proceedings were a sham and that Paxton never had

jurisdiction granted to her from the Chief Judge with a filing being placed in the case

file.1

The KY Const. Section 14 is very clear that Mischler had the right to seek

protection. Further, she has the right for justice to be administered without delay. In

addition, the US CONST. guarantees her, the right to due process and equal protection.

Instead, Thompson and Paxton intentionally committed fraud in violation of KRS 26A to

violate Mischlers rights in order to protect attorney Jonah Lee Stevens. Even though a

lengthy span of time has taken place, Mischler still has the right to proceed under the

Kentucky Constitution and the United States Constitution.

D. Writ is appropriate

(1) [where] the lower court is proceeding or is about to proceed outside of itsjurisdiction and there is no remedy through an application to an intermediatecourt; or (2) fwhere] the lower court is acting or is about to act erroneously,

t The sitting judges who actively participated in the fraud were Larry Thompson and Julie Paxton. The

Circuit Court clerk is David Deskins. The attorneys were Jonah Lee Stevens, who was the beneficiary ofthe fraud, his attorney Agnes Sipple Trujillo. The other attorney was Sid Trivette whom the Petitioner paid

and who failed to show up at the court hearing. He later refunded her money.

t6l

although within its jurisdiction, and there exists no adequate remedy by appeal orotherwise and great injustice and ireparable injury will result if the petition is notgranted. Hoskins v. Maricle, 150 S.W.3d 1, l0 (Ky.200a).

No judge in the A2-D-00202-00I has actual jurisdiction. Thompson recused.

Paxton's orders are void ab initio because she never jurisdiction. Not only does this meet

prong 1 of the Hoskins writ test, it also meets parts 2. There is no other adequate remedy

but to order the Pike Circuit Court Clerk to forward the certification to the Chief Judge.

To do otherwise is to deprive Mischler both her Kentucky and United States

Constitutional rights.

Further, because this was a fraud upon the court, a great injustice and iniury has

occurred not only to Mischler but to the judiciary's reputation itself. The legal system

according to the Kentucky Supreme Court ethic rules preamble is a "self regulating" one.

However, in this instance the legal system did not self regulate. It "self protected" by

retaliating against Mischler when she exposed the fraud.2

Where the fraud was clear to the other party involved because he is an attorney,

there can be no un-ringing of the bell. Stevens, by virtue of the beneficiary of the fraud

has unclean hands. Mischler has every right to be terrified of Jonah Lee Stevens. The

Court had a duty to protect her. Thus, under equity it is entirely appropriate for her

request for protection be granted, even belatedly. In short, Stevens didn't beat Amy

Mischler with his fists; the legal system itself was the willing proverbial stick of which

2 Paxton later took away all rights from Mischler to her children. A senior judge conttnued Paxton's orders

even though Mischler raised the issue ofjurisdiction and fraud upon the court. He made it so that Mischlerhas not been allowed to see or speak to her children siace April 2009. ln order io have supervised visitation

once month, he ordered her to ffavel three hours to Louisville, three hours to Winchester to pick up the

children back three hours to Louisville where she had to have supervised visitation although he never

articulated what danger the children were in. Then, after the weekend visitation was over Mischler wouldhave to ffavel three hours to Winchester to return the children, three hours back to Louisville [the drive had

to be supervised] then three hours back to her home then in Russell Springs. Thus, on a weekend Mischler

would have spent l8 hours driving. She could not physically do that, nor could she afford the gasoline.

The entire order by the senior judge was to punish Mischler for exposing the fraud.

t71

Stevens committed domestic violence against Mischler emotionally, economically and of

her reputation. There would be no need for the judges to have committed the fraud,

unless of course Stevens did spit in her face and Mischler was terrified of him as she

swore to in her petition.

VI. Conclusion

Either Kentucky judges have to follow the Kentucky revised statutes and be held

accountable when they don't or in the alternative, they are a protected class and above the

law. By failing to grant Mischler relief, this Court of Appeals would be affirming that

judges, attomeys, and circuit court clerks can ignore the law, any law at will. She asks

that you reinstate her constitutional rights by granting her petition.

Sincerely submitted

. d.,.,, {W,:&*\-x-1, ' Y+ \Amy Miscpipr1120 PalmYourtOkeechobee Florida, 34974

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

It is hereby certified that a true copy to the foregoing Petition for Original ProceedingPursuant to CR 76.36 was served via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, this 3'o day of August,

20II, upon the following: David Deskins, P.O. Box 1002, Pikeville, KY 415A2 and

Jonah Stevens, P.O.Box 1286, Pikeville, KY 41502. \

i{ -t r. .1

Amy Misc{*r '-^

t8l

-_ _l: ." :: l r:.1' ; I

,:Sd.,=,:.j-:i,..rliE-:'_--:"- : :.:ir)'i-- - :- --::.-iai::'r. ' '

:'f." ,, ': 'l:lii:r'i. f .- --

'1;i,.;;g.'.':r .ir/::]. t:+r !t- -

a.-'- ::'

.'].':': .1}il'./E/1ft/NE,P'?'CEZE.rt

J C 1 t 4 H f, EE,f I-E fiTtV,9

d-:t t &ii*/ GH WE4!, ? H AF-'fg*F{l'{K y,P{KE CIECAff- C'Llt/E?

E4/t{E'vDlYl^ftCNA Crf2/l/ NO. oZ-D - 002 C2- C0/

EESFCfiDEtfr'

& 6 * s e F* A * * A 4 & *A t*& I t, ** tF ** * I I I * I & # * e I &

IVte legu/ar,fudge ber@ dt.rqu/t12'ed /o prcvde rz l/te abot'e "rff'/er/p;oreerft;ig b..)' i:ec.s'o;?

af il?J-26A,0/5 (2).' {CIRCLEO},Q @,t, (b), (c), (./)/, /e}2, (dE_ {d)4; (t}'

,ary't.rttt'f i.r,frercb-y otdereA,'cesry1er/ to rfte AtieJ',Regnna/ rttr/ge o///te Orr/er af rfte ,St4Tzsene

Cau;/ of f{enrucfit enter€d Ocfob€/'28 /98J e.fectre Derernbsr-1, /983, /br rfie ar-^t/9fr;t1€nl o/'

i,,-fnecnlrti,y'ge. 1he /o/lorl*ry rtbnnafnn u'finat/ted (o/?c?tn///g lhe e/tot't' srt'lcy'

i:.vt:;rsavi* (.r).' --Cefi&rflkryv A.f Courr fr?:e. DtE ta Hon.r'o:tait ,trevent het/t& a,oruEtuvttg

o!,te{ri(J'&€/bt€tfi/.r_Coil/1._ __*-__-___-_;

, 7 ?:.,'/,r s qf ca,rr:.' ilatne,rric

Dare St:i.'

7a be tnet/ b.tt (ruryl /./udgd

E r *inared C. asfi .fi sa e.'

- Dtt'osce Acltbn

1

/iiI

s?FE1____......U7

CountyCouri

dpening JudgeCurrent JudgeClosing Judge

Case HistorvMISCHLER, Al\lty VS, STEVENS, JONAH

Case# 02-D-00202-001

PIKEDISTRICT Court

COM. RUSH FRED HATFIELD .,.

HON. LARRYTHOMPSON ,

HON. LARRY THOMPSON

Generated: 07 /18/201 1 l2:22:21PM

Page #

01122t2002 Document FiledORDER FOR EMERGENCY PROTECTION

a7/22/2002 Docurnent Filed . .

COMPLAINT / PETITION

07/2212002 Surnr4ons Filed - STEVENS, JONAH @00a00o14898PERSONAL SERVICE

07/22/2002 Case FiledFAMILY COURTDOMESTIC VIOLENCE

07 t2s/2002 Document FiledORDER - OTHER-

,ISSIGNMENT FOR SPECIALJI]DGE COPIES MAILED BY JG TO JUDGE PAXTON

08/02t2002 Document Fi]edRETI'RN OF SERVICE

certifierl nti! sent to judge

aa02/2002 Document FiledORDER SETTING TRIAL /HEARNG

set for 8-7-2 at 9;00

08/0s/2002 Scheduled EventDOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Aug 5 2002 at 00:00

a8t0712a02 Scheduled EventDOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Aug 7 2002 at 09:00 AM

0910912Q02 Case 49 Days

DrsMrssED.(Juv)09/0912002 Document Flled

ORDER-DOMESTIC VIOLENCE-DISMISSED

0912312002 Document FiledORDER- OTHER

. .'

order dismissed os to child custod| "

06/1012008 DocumentFiledCORRESPONDENCE

FROM AivtY MISCHLER REQUESTING COPY'S OF FILE IN 2002. WAS SENT CM 6-l 0-2008

"tHE PIKE C\RCU\.[

rs ninure'uuIO\STR\C.i

DISTRICT Cpurt 02-D-00202-001

ffif EXH|B|TB ')^

Page i of

tftI tllilfi l]lt ilil ililt llil ililfit f llilr lllll llll llllr ii| li f ill llti lllll llll llll

DAvroDssrrxbCrncurr Counr Cr,enx

Connronrvnalrn on KoxrucrvOrrrca oF CrRcur" Corfi." Carnn

P.O. Box 1002I Prxrvrlr,s, Kaxrucrv 41502-1C02'p 606-433-?55? f606-433-7044

Pixn Ciecutr CounrPrxsDrsrnrcr Counr

To Arrry,

I haye researcheii the file in case number A2-D-A02A2-AU & 02-D-AA202-A02 for an order appointing

the special judge Julie Paxton and r,vas unable to locate one. Hower.er there is one in case number 02-

D-00202-003. i have certified you the case history in these cases for you too review I arn sorry it has

taken so long to respond.

#^ww"wK. Halll D.C.

h{oot