William Hamel, Admitted Criminal Subpoenaed To Testify, Motion To Quash Denied; Thus CRIMINAL HAMEL, Allowed Out Of Doing Prison Term On Conditional Discharge MUST Testify
December 6, 2013 § 1 Comment
As per our last installment we told you of the ecourts website deliberately being given, and thus reflecting erroneous information to the public. As promised we’ve gotten our hands on some other documents. Therefore, here we cite further proof as in a September 23 ,2013 Decision, the Motion to Quash, (the Subpoena filed for the testimony of Confessed Criminal, William Hamel) — is denied. (Photos below)
And below is the Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Bronx Criminal Division Docket # 4794 -09. We think these are numbers Hamel will never forget. By the way, the “09” stands for the year Hamel was indicted.
For the readers who don’t know, it is against the law to violate a Subpoena. In other words, everyone who is subpoenaed, other than members of the Press, via the Shield laws–must testify.
We will post the laws via http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/CVP/23/2305 and courtesy of findlaw.com
N.Y. CVP. LAW § 2305 : NY Code – Section 2305: Attendance required pursuant to subpoena; possession of books, records, documents or papers –
“(a) When person required to attend. A subpoena may provide that the person subpoenaed shall appear on the date stated and any recessed or adjourned date of the trial, hearing or examination. If he is given reasonable notice of such recess or adjournment, no further process shall be required to compel his attendance on the adjourned date. At the end of each day’s attendance, the person subpoenaed may demand his fee for the next day on which he is to attend. If the fee is not then paid, he shall be deemed discharged. (b) Subpoena duces tecum; attendance by substitute. 1. A subpoena duces tecum may be joined with a subpoena to testify at a trial, hearing or examination or may be issued separately. “
And there are no other exceptions, Ladies and Gentlemen. And don’t let anyone tell you differently. It is against the law to invent one’s own legislation to express anything other than the laws regarding Subpoenas quoted above. When one doesn’t obey a Subpoena, no matter who it is, is breaking the law. And we add that if one or some assist in the avoidance of of a Subpoena they are in collusion, (in the commission of the violation of the law.
And notice, given there are certainly no exceptions THIS LAW DOES NOT SAY: This law does not apply to known and admitted criminal William Hamel! And beyond that, the law doesn’t excuse any lawyer from being subpoenaed either.
Ergo, given the laws that are very prominently posted on the internet for everyone to see, (To the tears and depression of Roy Bean Sherman, Dinkes & Schwitzer, and Godosky & Gentile!), and since the Motion to Quash for his being Subpoenaed was denied months ago,—LOOK AT THAT DATE, 9/23/13, –how is it that Criminal William Hamel has not shown up to testify? According to the County Clerk’s Office he has not come in to do so. And of course he would come in with the rest of his alleged strong arm, gang. Remember, Hamel is a known criminal as he is an admitted criminal–(Hamel is an admitted criminal as he was discovered as being such while in the commission of the crime by the investigative arm of among other agencies as the Criminal Enforcement and Financial Crimes Bureau) and his cohorts have acted allegedly in league with him, (Allegedly?, Yeah right).
Is the fact that Hamel hasn’t come into testify it because he’s a criminal and has threatened, this “Special Referee” with repercussions of bodily harm? It’s quite possible. We can’t think of any other reason than her being fearful of bullying tactics. (Well, actually we can but we’ll save it…..)
Way beyond that however, is that, it is not the assignment/job or within the capacity or part of the calling of any lawyer or for that matter any person acting pro se to hypothesize who is going to testify when some person in charge thinks that despite the filing of a Subpoena compounded by his own Order Denying the Motion to Quash the Subpoena, (Photo above), that either he can choose and/or he can assign someone else to choose who will respond to same or any Subpoena! In fact it is very much in violation of the law.
This case was referenced and erroneously by Judge Roy Bean Sherman, as it says above in the Decision. How coincidental–and we know no such things exist,–when Roy Bean Sherman, Dinkes & Schwitzer and Godosky & Gentile are involved! Take a gander at what the record says:
Under Filed by it says Plaintiff. But then in the next column, it says “Relief Sought“: it says: Quash Subpoena.–Now c’mon folks, since the Plaintiff has filed the Subpoena, the Plaintiff is NOT going to ask for Relief to Quash it.
- Lastly, when someone/anyone is Subpoenaed they must appear to testify. Should the opposing side in the case come forth with a Motion to Quash, (the Subpoena), and it is denied,–as in this case, the Subpoenaed person must appear to testify – anyway. Otherwise, the Subpoenaed person/ and their Counsel, the Judge/Special Referee are breaking the law.
- And should any of the guilty parties in this case feel or deem any of our articles inflammatory we again wholeheartedly welcome if not challenge their rebuttal and/or denial of the Court documents we have posted.–Please rebut. We will again be so pleased and glad to publish and post every syllable of every word you want to rebut with!
BY THE WAY. WE DO HOPE WILLIAM HAMEL WON’T BRING ANY WEAPONS INTO THE KINGS COUNTY SUPREME COURT HOUSE AND THAT HE ISN’T ALLOWED IN THROUGH THE ATTORNEY ENTRANCE WITH ANY OF THE HONEST PEOPLE IN THE PROFESSION SINCE HE COMMITTED SERIOUS CRIMES TO WHICH HE PLEADED GUILTY. (see photo above)
We promise our Readership, that should Hamel not obey his Subpoena and thereby the law, by not appearing, we will instantaneously, within 48 hours, post it–WE PROMISE!
THE INTERNET IS SO MUCH MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD!