Upload
walshie50
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Former Husband is hit with an injunction for protection from his political blog by Former Wife's attorney. Why was the court calling this Injunction a Domestic Violence Injunction ? I know why.. do you ?
Citation preview
LIL Ep2013
JANIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORLI 44Mg!:35
FIRST DISTRICTFjç r
-, J
Mr. Daniel F. Walsh,(Appellant)
vs.
Ms. Diane L. Paull(Appellee)
CASE NO. 1D12-1070
LT. Case No. 2012-151-DVXX
MOTION FOR A WRITTEN OPINION
The Appellant, Mr. Daniel F. Walsh, request this court to issue a full written opinion in
order to facilitate his desire for discretionary review in the Supreme Court of Florida.
Rule 9.330(a) requires the movant for such relief to specifically state why, if a written
opinion were written, the Supreme Court would likely exercise its discretionary
jurisdiction to grant further review. The Appellant feels it would be in the public's best
interest with the facts and material evidence put forth in this appeal that the Florida
Supreme Court use its discretionary authority in deciphering the fmal outcome of this
case. It appears the Florida First D.C.A. lacks the courage in upholding the United
States Constitution by affirming this appeal involving an injunction for protection for
repeat violence taken from a political blog without supplying a reason for doing so. In
fact, without a written opinion it appears this court is actually promoting criminal
behavior within the court system itself. It is evident that by affirming the lower courts
decision without a written opinion one may view this decision as not only
counterproductive in reforming the Florida laws that govern Domestic Violence and all
subsections thereof, but appears to be deliberate. The Florida First DCA has apparently
chosen to sweep such important legislative reform under the carpet, thus making one
think perhaps the "culture of corruption" stretches beyond the Appellant's hometown of
Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, a.k.a.. "kids for cash".
Why a written opinion would be of great public importance is listed as follows:
1). Included within the body of both the Appellants Initial Brief and Mr. Walsh's Reply
Brief is material evidence of perjury and fraud over the past (4) years orchestrated by
the Petitioner of this injunction, and illustrates the real motive(s) of why this injunction
was filed in the first place. This is the main issue at hand, and this decision is directly
related to on going proceedings that are now pending in another jurisdiction.
2). This is not your typical injunction for protection against repeat violence case which
makes it of great public importance, and would suggest further review by the Florida
Supreme Court. Mr. Walsh was ordered to have a psychiatric evaluation based on
comments from a political blog of 3 1/2 years. If this injunction taken from a public blog
can be construed as being threatening and dangerous, then Mr. Walsh ask this court in its
own written opinion to show case law that would substantiate such fmdings. Are such
comments on ones blog which the Appellee herself commented, any more threatening
than a local Jacksonville police officer who recently commented publicly that he would
volunteer to shoot the President of the United States (2012-11-16/story/jacksonville-
detective-resigns-after-threats-directed-president)?
2.
3). A written opinion by this court will benefit many innocent people particularly men
who are falsely accused in cases of Domestic Violence. The majority of all Domestic
Violence Injunctions during divorce in Florida are bogus, and the Florida Legislature is
well aware of this (http ://www. fathersandfamilies. orglhistorv-strategy-and-missionl).
4) A written opinion is of great importance to the Media, and their interest in this case
since we are now violating ones civil liberties, and the right of free speech. Also, we
mustn't forget the Federal Bureau of Investigation who were made aware of the
Appellee's deceptive behavior years before this injunction was issued. Finally, we must
not forget those families with children that must witness a Mother or Father taken from
their home because of another's hidden agenda based on false accusations.
5) A written opinion would be of great public importance for all to see in determining
whether the Florida First DCA itself is complicitous in this case. Mr Walsh could have
motion to vacate this injunction as the Higher Court well knows, but instead elected to
see what this Higher Court would do in this situation. The issue we are confronted with
is the factual evidence this court has received showing that the Appellee, Diane Paul! has
violated the law prior to when this injunction was filed which in essence has created a
pattern of unethical behavior for which one cannot ignore. And yet, it is the Appellant
that is being punished as if he were the perpetrator in all of this. Our intentions are to
prevent the abusiveness on the part of petitioners who use these injunctions as swords
rather than shields, and a written opinion would ultimately reverse such threatening
behavior, thus setting a precedence for future cases.
3,
Wherefore, Mr. Walsh respectfully ask this court for an order allowing Mr. Walsh
(appellant) a Motion For A Written Opinion based on Ms Paull's (Appellee) criminal
behavior, and the opportunity of reforming Florida Statute(s) 741.30 and 784.046.
Daniel F. Walsh (appellant)2656 Stern Drive SouthAtlantic Beach, Florida 32233(904) 235-1764Date: December 28, 2012
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify a copy of the foregoing was sent by U. S. first class mail to the (Appellee),
Ms. Diane L. Paull, 2510 South 2' Street, Jacksonville Beach, Florida 32250
Special Agent Joe Noone, The Federal Bureau of Investigation, P.O. Box 1104,
Scranton, Pennsylvania 18503
First Coast News, 1070 East Adams Street, Jacksonville, FL 32202