Lisa Michelle Lambert Habeus Notice of Appeal to Third Circuit September 30, 2015 Pd

[email protected]://www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com/

Blog: http://advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com/Research Blog: www.advancedmediagroupresearch.wordpress.com

Video Biography at: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=advancedmediagroup

Stanley J. CaterboneAdvanced Media Group1250 Fremont StreetLancaster, PA 17603

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

_____________________________________________________________________

Lisa Michelle Lambert : PETITIONER :

: v. : CASE NO. 14-2559

::

Lynn Bissonnette, et al., RESPONDANT : : : :

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Notice is hereby given that Stanley J. Caterbone, MOVANT in the above captioned case,

hereby files an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit from an ORDER

that failed to consider the INTERESTS AND FILINGS OF THE MOVANT, and DENIED Motion for

Summary Judgment in the above captioned case, entered in this case on the 14 th day of

September, 2015. The MOVANT requests an expedited resolution to this case considering it is

central to the HABEUS CORPUS of the PETITIONER, Lisa Michelle Lambert, filed in May of 2014.

Date: September 30, 2015 Stanley J. Caterbone, MOVANT1250 Fremont StreetLancaster, PA [email protected]://www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com/

Page 1 of 24 Wednesday, September 30, 2015

http://www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com/

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=advancedmediagroup

http://advancedmediagroup.wordpress.com/

http://www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com/

mailto:[email protected]

ISSUES TO BE RAISED ON APPEAL

Clearly the Honorable Judge Paul S. Diamond had intentions other than that of fair and eq-

uitable jurist prudence regarding this case. The MOVANT, Stan J. Caterbone, has been fighting for

his reputation, his integrity, his intellectual property, his personal property, his basic human

rights, and most importantly his constitutional rights in this court for the past ten (10) years as

pro se. The MOVANT had made a bona fide attempt to provide as much factual background to

the Honorable Judge Diamond as humanly possible in as an efficient manner as possible so as not

to clutter the courts and the dockets. You must remember the MOVANT has the burden of articu-

lating to the COURTS a 30 plus year legal quagmire. See Case No. 07-4474 in the Third Circuit

Court of Appeals.

If you review the ORDER of September 14, 2015 in an objective manner you will see that

the Honorable Judge Paul S. Diamond went out of his way not to include any reference to the ac-

tual interest of the MOVANT in this case, but rather distracted the COURT with mentions of back-

ground information in a clear and convincing effort to libel and slander the MOVANT. The last

sentence in the ORDER of September 14, 2015 reads “He has nonetheless continued to submit fil-

ings that have nothing to do with this case.” I beg to differ. In addition the MOVANT was granted

electronic filing priveledges by the Honorable Judge Joyner on September 2, 2015 in the

MOVANT'S Petition for Habeus corpus case no. 15-3984.

The following are items that are on the record in this case and should compel the said

Court to remand the Summary Judgment back to the lower court for further review, or grant the

MOVANT Summary Judgement and release Lisa Michelle Lambert from further custody.

Statement of Movant, June 20, 2015 – clerks maliciously placed this statement as the last few pages of the Movant's Amicus Filing of June 23, 2015.

“TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF THE SAID COURT:

AND NOW comes before the said court Stanley J. Caterbone, appearing Pro Se, and Ad-

vanced Media Group, as Movant, to file an Amicus in the above captioned case.

The Movant has an interest in this case as a corroborating witness to the prosecutorial mis-

conduct that was found in this court before the Honorable Stewart Dalzell in 1997. The Movant

has made several personal attempts to bring his evidence to the courts. In November of 1997

the Movant had solicited the counsel of Ms. Christina Rainville and her firm Schnader & Harrison


of Philadelphia. The Movant had arranged and delivered a letter and evidence of his own prosecu-

torial misconduct by the Lancaster County District Attorney and local authorities at Ms. Rainville’s

request. Ms. Rainville then returned a letter to the Movant that explained that Schnader & Harri-

son had made the decision that she could no longer accept any additional clients from Lancaster

County. At that time Ms. Rainville was already involved the Darrell McCrakken case of Lancaster

County.

In December of 1997 the Movant hand delivered a CD-ROM to the chambers of the Honor-

able Judge Stewart Dalzall that contained evidence of the same.

This amicus provides a voice for the movants as well as providing another perspective and

opinion that should benefit the courts; the parties; and the public-at-large. The matters presented

in this amicus have a direct relevancy in the disposition of this case as it does in the opinion and

ORDER of the Honorable Paul S. Diamond on May 22, 2014.”

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMNT filed on September 3, 2015

“MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMNT

Given the preponderance of evidence associated with the MOVANT'S AMICUS and STATE-

MENTS, the courts must conclude that In The United States District Court For The Eastern District

of Pennsylvania, Federal Judge Stuart Dalzall’s findings of April 14, 1997, in the Lisa Lambert case

identifying acts of prosecutorial Misconduct, now, by virtue of the MOVANT'S AMICUS and STATE-

MENTS, now discloses evidence of a bona fide pattern of prosecutorial misconduct, in the Com-

monwealth of Pennsylvania and in the County of Lancaster.

Criminal law may determine if these disclosures would warrant investigations of a possible

criminal enterprise. The MOVANT'S AMICUS and STATEMENTS is of material interest to the

Habeus Corpus filed by Lisa Michelle Lambert in May of 2014, for the very fact that this MOVANT'S

AMICUS and STATEMENTS compromises the very same integrity of the court, which would tip the

scales of justice even further from the peoples deserving rights.

In the truthfulness of MOVANT'S AMICUS and STATEMENTS, The Commonwealth must con-

cede and immediately release Lisa Michelle Lambert from incarceration in order to balance the

scales of justice, which no other act could accomplish. The Commonwealth must yield the criminal

culpability of Lisa Michelle Lambert to the superior matter of restoring the integrity to the courts;

by it’s own admission of wrongdoing, assuring the peoples of it’s commitment to administer

equalities of justice, not inequalities of justice, balancing the scales of justice. Anything less,

would take the full scope of jurisdiction out of the boundaries of our laws, negating our democra-

cy and impugning the Constitution of the United States.


In addition the MOVANT must be restored to whole by administering SUMMARY JUDGE-

MENTS in cases 05-2288; 06-4650; and all other cases filed by the MOVANT in this court. SUM-

MARY JUDGEMENTS must also be administered in Case No. 08-13373 in the Lancaster Court of

Common Pleas, and other cases filed by the MOVANT in that said court.”

AFFIDAVIT OF 1998 TO HONORABLE JUDGE STEWART DALZELL

“I, Stanley J. Caterbone being duly sworn according to law, make the following affidavit

concerning the years during which I was maliciously and purposefully mentally abused, subjected

to a massive array of prosecutorial misconduct, while enduring an exhaustive fight for the

sovereignty of my constitutional rights, shareholder rights, civil liberties, and right of due access

to the law. I will detail a deliberate attempt on my life, in 1991, exhibiting the dire consequences

of this complaint. These allegations are substantiated through a preponderance of evidence in-

cluding but not limited to over 10,000 documents, over 50 hours of recorded conversations, tran-

scripts, and archived on several digital mediums. A “Findings of Facts” is attached herewith pro-

viding merits and the facts pertaining to this affidavit. These issues and incidents identified herein

have attempted to conceal my disclosures of International Signal & Control, Plc. However, the

merits of the violations contained in this affidavit will be proven incidental to the existence of any

conspiracy.

The plaintiff protests the courts for all remedial actions mandated by law. Financial consid-

erations would exceed $1 million. These violations began on June 23, 1987 while I was a resident

and business owner in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and have continued to the present. These

issues are a direct consequence of my public disclosure of fraud within International Signal & Con-

trol, Plc., of County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, which were in compliance with federal and state

statutes governing my shareholder rights granted in 1983, when I purchased my interests in In-

ternational Signal & Control., Plc.. I will also prove intentional undo influence against family and

friends towards compromising the credibility of myself, with malicious and self serving accusations

of “insanity”. I conclude that the courts must provide me with fair access to the law, and most

certainly, the process must void any technical deficiencies found in this filing as being material to

the conclusions. Such arrogance by the Courts would only challenge the judicial integrity of our

Constitution.”

1. The activities contained herein may raise the argument of fair disclosure regarding the scope

of law pertaining to issues and activities compromising the National Security of the United States.

The Plaintiff will successfully argue that due to the criminal record of International Signal & Con-

trol, including the illegal transfer of arms and technologies to an end user Iraq, the laws of disclo-

sure must be forfeited by virtue that “said activities posed a direct compromise to the National

Security of the United States”.; the plaintiff will argue that his public allegations of misconduct

within the operations of International Signal & Control, Plc., as early as June of 1987 ;demon-


strated actions were proven to protect the National Security of the United States.. The activities

of International Signal & Control, Pls., placed American troops in harms way. The plaintiff’s actions

should have taken the American troops out of harms way causing the activities of the Internation-

al Signal & Control, Plc., to cease and desist. All activities contained herein have greatly compro-

mised the National Security of the United States, and the laws of jurist prudence must apply to-

wards the Plaintiff’s intent and motive of protecting the rights of his fellow citizens. Had the plain-

tiff been protected under the law, and subsequently had the law enforcement community of the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the County of Lancaster administer justice, United States

troops may have been taken out of harms way, as a direct result of ceasing the operations of In-

ternational Signal & Control, Plc., in as early as 1987.

2. The plaintiff will successfully prove that the following activities and the prosecutorial miscon-

duct were directed at intimidating the plaintiff from continuing his public disclosures regarding il-

legal activities within International Signal & Control, Plc,. On June 23, 1998, International Signal

& Control, Plc was negotiating for the $1.14 billion merger with Ferranti International, of England.

Such disclosures threatened the integrity of International Signal & Control’s organization, and Mr.

James Guerin himself, consequently resulting in adverse financial considerations to all parties if

such disclosures provided any reason to question the integrity of the transaction, which later be-

came the central criminal activity in the in The United States District Court For The Eastern Dis-

trict Of Pennsylvania.

3. The plaintiff will prove that undo influence was also responsible for the adverse consequences

and fabricated demise of his business enterprises and personal holdings. The dire consequences

of the plaintiff’s failed business dealings will demonstrate and substantiate financial incentive and

motive. Defendants responsible for administering undo influence and interference in the plaintiff’s

business and commercial enterprises had financial interests. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

as a taxing authority, Lancaster County had a great investment who’s demise would facilitate

grave consequences to it’s economic development. . Commonwealth National Bank (Mellon) would

have less competition in the mortgage banking business and other financial services, violating the

lender liability laws. The Steinman Enterprise’s, Inc., would loose a pioneer in the information

technologies industries, and would protect the public domain from truthful disclosure. The plaintiff

will also provide significant evidence of said perpetrators violating common laws governing intel-

lectual property rights.

4. Given the plaintiff’s continued and obstructed right to due process of the law, beginning in

June of 1987 and continuing to the present, the plaintiff must be given fair access to the law with

the opportunity for any and all remedial actions required under the federal and state statutes. The

plaintiff will successfully argue his rights to the courts to rightfully claim civil actions with regards


to the totality of these activities, so described in the following “Findings of Facts”, regardless of

any statute of limitations. Given the plaintiff’s genuine efforts for due process has been inherent-

ly and maliciously obstructed, the courts must provide the opportunity for any and all remedial

actions deserving to the plaintiff.

5. Under current laws, the plaintiff’s intellectual capacity has been exploited as means of discred-

iting the plaintiff’s disclosures and obstructing the plaintiff’s right to due process of the law. The

plaintiff has always had the proper rights under federal and state laws to enter into contract. The

logic and reason towards the plaintiff’s activities and actions are a matter of record, demonstrated

in the “Findings of Facts”, contained herein.. The plaintiff will argue and successfully prove that

the inherent emotional consequences to all of the activities contained herein have resulted in Post

Traumatic Stress Syndrome. The evidence of the stress subjected to the plaintiff, will prove to be

the direct result of the activities contained herein, rather than the exhibited behavior of any men-

tal deficiency the plaintiff may or may not have. The courts must provide for the proper interpre-

tations of all laws, irrespective of the plaintiff’s alleged intellectual capacity. The plaintiff success-

fully argue that his “mental capacity” is of very little legal consequence, if any; other than in it’s

malicious representations used to diminish the credibility of the plaintiff.

6. The plaintiff will demonstrate that the following incidents of illegal prosecutions were purpose-

fully directed at intimidating the plaintiff from further public disclosure into the activities of Inter-

national Signal & Control, Plc., consequently obstructing the plaintiff’s access to due process of

the law. Due to the fact that these activities to which the plaintiff’s perpetrators were protecting

were illegal activities, the RICO statutes would apply. To this day, the plaintiff has never been con-

victed of any crime with the exception of 2 speeding tickets. The following report identifies 34 in-

stances of prosecutorial misconduct during the prosecutions and activities beginning on June 23,

1987 and continuing to today.

7.Given the preponderance of evidence associated with this affidavit, the courts must conclude

that In The United States District Court For The Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Federal Judge

Stuart Dalzall’s findings of April 14, 1997, in the Lisa Lambert case identifying acts of prosecutori-

al Misconduct, now, by virtue of this affidavit, now discloses evidence of a bona fide pattern of

prosecutorial misconduct, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and in the County of Lancaster.

Criminal law must now determine if these disclosures would warrant investigations of a possible

criminal enterprise. This affidavit is of material interest to the Lambert case, for the very fact that

this affidavit compromises the very same integrity of the court, which would tip the scales of jus-

tice even further from the peoples deserving rights.. In the truthfulness of this affidavit, The

Commonwealth must concede Lisa Michelle Lambert to balance the scales of justice, which no

other act could accomplish. Commonwealth must yield the criminal culpability of Lisa Michelle

Lambert to the superior matter of restoring the integrity to the courts; by it’s own admission of

wrongdoing, assuring the peoples of it’s commitment to administer equalities of justice, not in-


equalities of justice. Balancing the scales of justice. Anything less, would take the full scope of ju-

risdiction out of the boundaries of our laws, negating our democracy and impugning the Constitu-

tion of the United States. The plaintiff must be restored to whole.”


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LISA MICHELLE LAMBERT, : Petitioner, : : v. : Civ. No. 14-2559 : LYNN BISSONETTE, et al., : Respondents. : :

O R D E R

I previously dismissed Petitioner’s pro se motion for habeas relief so that she could file a

counseled motion. (Doc. No. 3.) She has not yet done so. On June 23, 2015, Stanley

Caterbone—who has nothing to do with Petitioner, her motion, or this case—filed a pro se

amicus brief in support of the dismissed motion. (Doc. No. 4.) Caterbone neither sought leave

to file, nor indicated that he had received the Parties’ consent to file an amicus brief. Fed. R.

Civ. P. 29(a).

The amicus brief—although providing some arguments in apparent support of the

dismissed motion—essentially focuses on the damages Caterbone allegedly suffered from “his

years of torture as a victim of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control” or as a “victim of gang-stalking or

organized stalking by more than 100 people.” (Doc. No. 4 at 7, 9). He also includes a lengthy

discussion of the “perplexing question of Stan Caterbone’s intelligence, or lack thereof,” and his

work on a “digital movie” that is “directly responsible for the development of the ‘internet.’”

(Id. at 16-26). In addition, he details thirty governmental attempts at “mind control,” including:

1) “Blanketing my dwelling and surroundings with electromagnetic energy”; 2) “Invading my

thoughts via remote sensing technologies”; and 3) “Making me mentally ‘hear’ others’ voices

Case 5:14-cv-02559-PD Document 15 Filed 09/14/15 Page 1 of 3


Page 2 of 3

through the microwave hearing effect.” (Id. at 27-30.)

Caterbone’s involvement in the matter did not end with his amicus brief. On July 6,

2015, he filed with this Court an email that he had sent to the Lancaster Police, asserting that he

has “synthetic telepathy.” (Doc. No. 5.) On September 2 and 3, 2015, Caterbone moved for

“summary judgment.” (Doc. Nos. 8, 9.) On September 3, 2015, he moved to file a copy of his

motion for reconsideration of the denial of his petition to proceed in forma pauperis in

Pennsylvania state court, (which had been “dismissed as frivolous”). (Doc. No. 10.) On

September 9, 2015, he also moved to file: 1) an email exchange with the subject “Muslims Using

My Situation to Fight Against the USA”; 2) a Wikipedia article on “Entrapment”; and 3) an

exhibit of billing statements of his estimated fees for his 2007 work on wholly unrelated federal

and state court cases. (Doc. Nos. 11, 12, 14.) On September 9, 2015, Caterbone called my

Chambers, demanding to speak with me, and then abruptly hung up.

I have already denied Caterbone’s request to file documents electronically. (Doc. No. 9.)

He has nonetheless continued to submit filings that have nothing to do with this case.



Page 3 of 3

AND NOW, this 11th day of September, 2015, it is hereby ORDERED that Mr.

Caterbone’s Motions for Summary Judgment (Doc. Nos. 8, 9) and Motions to File Exhibits or

Statements (Doc. Nos. 10, 11, 12, 14) are DENIED as frivolous. It is FURTHER ORDERED

that Stanley J. Caterbone may no longer submit filings—whether electronic or in paper format—

in the above-captioned case. The Clerk shall not docket any such filings without my approval.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Paul S. Diamond _________________________ September 11, 2015 Paul S. Diamond, J.

















Documents

Lisa Michelle Lambert Habeus Notice of Appeal to Third Circuit September 30, 2015 Pd