Andy Martin, (Martin-Trigona) The Ass Behind The Mask

Andy Martin's (a.k.a. Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona) Dirty Tricks Do Not Fool Federal Courts 2/19/2010

2010-02-21T06:17:00.000-08:00

Andy Martin, a.k.a. Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona will stop at nothing to abuse the United States court system. In one of his most recent lawsuits filed in September 2009, Martin made some of the most bizarre claims against the Washington Post News and on of it's reporters, Google, three Maryland Judges, an entire Maryland County Government, a small video production company called ADR Productions and several individual citizens of Maryland, Oklahoma and Florida. (see lawsuit at Martin Lawsuit).

Martin then went on with his futile attempt at another run for office in the United States Senate race for the State of Illinois while many of the defendants named in his lawsuit worked on presenting motions for dismissal based on several laws which fully supported their position. Martin spent so much time concentrating on making outrageous radio ads and claims against one of his opponents and not caring about or respecting the court system and the rules which these courts have put in place, that he never responded to the court or the motions filed against his lawsuit. The courts even offered him additional time to respond and in an almost arrogant manner, he refused to respond to the olive branch offered him.

After the Honorable Judge Jeanne E. Scott granted the motions for dismissal due to Martin's lack of response to the motions, Martin claims to have never received any notice from the courts. He claims the Court sent the notices to the wrong address at his Chicago office and they sould have been sent to his New York office. He even goes as far as to claim that the Chicago mail is a month behind in delivery. This claim by Martin (link Martin's Motion to Vacate) is clearly one of his "Dirty Tricks" to try and scam the courts again. All motions have been posted on both Justia.com at http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/illinois/ilcdce/3:2009cv03295/47891/ and on the Court's "Pacer" system site (read Judge Scott's opinion below or at link Opinion). Further investigation shows that three of the defendants in this case clearly mailed certificates of service to both Martin's Chicago address and his New York address making his claims all that much more bogus.

It's nice to see that the rantings of a lunatic madman who files more frivolous lawsuits than flies in a slaughter house are dismissed by one of our most sacred institutions in the United States, our Court Systems.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

SPRINGFIELD DIVISION

ANDY MARTIN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 09-3295

)

WASHINGTON POST CO., et al., )

)

Defendants. )

OPINION

JEANNE E. SCOTT, U.S. District Judge:

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Andy Martin’s

Motion to Vacate Order of Dismissal and to Extend Time for Responses (d/e

15) (Motion to Vacate), and Motion to Clarify Notice in This Lawsuit (d/e

14) (Motion to Clarify). The Court interprets the Motion to Clarify as a

notice to the Court that future correspondence, including notices and

orders, should be sent to the Martin’s post office box in New York, New

York, listed on the Motion to Clarify. The Court allows this request and

directs the Clerk to change the address to which correspondence will be sent

to the New York post office box. The Motion to Clarify is denied to the

extent that he seeks any other relief.

Dockets.Justia.com

The Motion to Vacate states that Martin seeks relief from this Court’s

Text Order entered February 10, 2010 (Dismissal Text Order) pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59. The Dismissal Text Order dismissed

Martin’s claims against Defendants Daniel Morse, Scott Shirley, John

Gilchrist, and Montgomery County, Maryland. A Rule 59 motion is not

appropriate at this time because there has been no final judgment entered.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). The Dismissal Text Order was an interlocutory order.

Martin has alleged claims against several other Defendants that have not yet

been resolved. Notice of Removal (d/e 1), attached Complaint; see Fed. R.

Civ. P. 54(b). Relief under Rule 59, therefore, is not appropriate.

The Court, however, may reconsider any interlocutory order at any

time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). The Court, therefore, interprets the Motion to

Vacate as a motion to reconsider the Dismissal Text Order. Motions for

reconsideration, “serve a limited function: to correct manifest errors of law

or fact or to present newly discovered evidence.” Caisse Nationale de Credit

Agricole v. CBI Industries, Inc., 90 F.3d 1264, 1269 (7th Cir. 1996). Martin

has failed to demonstrate a manifest error of law or fact and has failed to

present any newly discovered evidence that merits reconsideration.

Martin filed this action in Sangamon County, Illinois, Circuit Court.

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 2 of 7

Complaint, at 1. Defendant Morse removed this action to this Court.

Notice of Removal. From December 18, 2009, to December 21, 2009,

Defendants Morse, Shirley, and Montgomery County, Maryland, filed

Motions to Dismiss on various grounds (d/e 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 12). Martin was

obligated to respond to the Motions within fourteen days of service. If he

did not do so, he was deemed to have no objection to the Motions. Local

Rule 7.1(B)(2). Martin did not respond within the required fourteen days.

This Court then specifically directed Martin to respond to these Motions by

January 18, 2010, or the Court would deem that he had no objection to the

Motions, and the Court would rule on the Motions without further notice

to the parties. Text Order entered January 8, 2010. Martin did not

respond by January 18, 2010.

Defendant Gilchrist also filed a pro se request to dismiss the case

against him. The Clerk erroneously docketed the request as an answer

rather than a motion to dismiss. The Court directed the Clerk to docket

Gilchrist’s motion correctly as a motion to dismiss and send a copy to

Martin, and the Court directed Martin to respond by February 8, 2010.

Text Order entered January 21, 2010. The Clerk then correctly docketed

Gilcrhist’s motion (d/e 13) and sent a copy to Martin. Martin did not

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 3 of 7

respond to Gilchrist’s Motion to Dismiss, or to any of the Motions to

Dismiss filed by any of these parties.

On February 10, 2010, this Court entered the Dismissal Text Order

dismissing the claims against these Defendants. The dismissal was proper.

Martin failed to comply with Local Rule 7.1(B)(2), and so, was deemed to

have no objection to any of these Motions. This Court then gave Martin

additional time to respond, but he simply failed to act. The Court sees no

basis to reconsider given his failure to comply with the Local Rules or the

orders of this Court. The Court, therefore, denies the Motion.

Martin complains that he did not receive any notices or orders from

this Court. Martin listed on his Complaint his address as a post office box

in New York, New York, and he also listed an additional address in Chicago,

Illinois. Notice of Removal (d/e 1), attached Complaint, at 17. Martin,

however, listed only his Chicago, Illinois, address on the Summons to be

served on the Defendants. Notice of Removal, attached Summons. Martin

was required to place his correct address on the Summons. Illinois Supreme

Court Rule 101(a). The Chicago address, therefore, was an appropriate

address for notices in this case. The Clerk of this Court properly sent

notices to the addresses listed on the Summons. There was no error.

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 4 of 7

1Local Rule 5.6 became effective on January 20, 2010. Emergency Order

Adopting Local Rules, entered January 20, 2010. Before that date, this Court’s

Administrative Procedures required pro se plaintiffs to seek leave of court to participate

in the electronic filing system. Administrative Procedures for Filing, Signing, and

Verifying Pleadings and Papers by Electronic Means in Civil Cases (Revised October 22,

2007), § I.B.2.

Martin complains that he requested notice by facsimile transmission

or email, but none was provided. The Complaint states under the signature

block in all capitals and bold print, “SERVICE OF NOTICES IS

RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED BY FAX OR E-MAIL.” Complaint, at 17.

This Court, however, only provides electronic notice through this Court’s

CM/ECF electronic filing system. A pro se plaintiff must secure leave of

court to participate in the electronic filing system. Local Rule 5.6.1 Martin

did not file a motion for leave to participate in the electronic filing system.

He, therefore, was not entitled to receive notice from this Court by

electronic means. Martin is proceeding pro se, and so, is responsible to

review and comply with this Court’s rules and procedures. He did not

receive electronic notice because he failed to comply with those rules and

procedures. In the future, he should review these matters more carefully.

There was no error.

Martin claims that the docket sheet for this case on the public PACER

system contains nothing after December 21, 2009, so he could not have

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 5 of 7

received notice from that source. He attaches to the Motion to Vacate a

printout from PACER dated February 15, 2010. Motion to Vacate, Exhibit

D, PACER Docket Sheet. The attached PACER Docket Sheet only shows

entries from the date of removal, November 10, 2009, to December 21,

2009. The Clerk’s computer technical staff has reviewed the docket sheet

on PACER and determined that all of the docket entries in this case are

available on PACER, including those entered after December 21, 2009.

Martin could have produced the PACER Docket Sheet attached to the

Motion to Vacate by placing date restrictions in his PACER search request

to limit the request to entries between November 10, 2009, and December

21, 2009. The PACER Service Center Transaction Receipt (Transaction

Receipt) would have stated whether Martin erroneously placed date

restrictions in his request. Unfortunately, Martin did not include the full

Transaction Receipt with Exhibit D, so the Court cannot ascertain whether

he made this specific error, or some other error, when he viewed the Court’s

docket on PACER. Again, Martin is proceeding pro se, and so, is

responsible to learn how to use PACER correctly. In the future, Martin

should review the correct procedures for using PACER if he wishes to secure

complete information through this source. Again, however, he has

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 6 of 7

presented no error of law or fact, or newly discovered evidence that merits

reconsideration. The Court sees no basis for reconsidering the Dismissal

Text Order. Martin’s request is denied.

THEREFORE, Plaintiff Andy Martin’s Motion to Vacate Order of

Dismissal and to Extend Time for Responses (d/e 15) is DENIED.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Clarify Notice in This Lawsuit (d/e 14) is ALLOWED

in part and DENIED in part. The Clerk is directed to change Martin’s

mailing address for notices, orders, and other correspondence regarding this

case to: Andy Martin, P.O. Box 1851, New York, New York 10150-1851.

The Motion to Clarify is otherwise denied.

IT IS THEREFORE SO ORDERED.

ENTER: February 19, 2010

FOR THE COURT:

s/ Jeanne E. Scott

JEANNE E. SCOTT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3:09-cv-03295-JES-CHE # 16 Page 7 of 7

Andy Martin's (aka Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona) Lawsuit Against Washington Post is Dismissed by Judge.

2010-02-14T04:59:00.000-08:00

Judge Jeanne E. Scott on 2/10/2010 dismissed a $225,000 lawsuit filed by Andy Martin against the Washington Post and several other defendants for Martin's failure to abide with a previous injunction requiring Martin to list all his previous history of litigation when filing any lawsuits. The order reads:

TEXT ORDER: The following Motions are ALLOWED: Combined Motion and Supporting Memorandum of Defendant Daniel Morse to Dismiss this Action for Plaintiff's Violation of Injunction Order Requiring Plaintiff to Disclose His Pro Se Litigation History (d/e 3); Defendant Daniel Morse's Rule 12 Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion to Transfer Under 28 U.S.C. Â§ 1404 and to Defer Briefing on this Motion (d/e 4); Motion to Quash Service of Summons and to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (d/e 7); Combined Motion and Supporting Memorandum of Defendant Montgomery County to Dismiss this Action for Plaintiff's Violation of Injunction Order Requiring Plaintiff to Disclose His Pro Se Litigation History (d/e 9); Defendant Montgomery County's Rule 12 Motion to Dismiss or, In the Alternative, Motion to Transfer Under 28 U.S.C. Â§ 1404 and to Defer Briefing on this Motion (d/e 10); Defendant Scott Shirley's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (d/e 12); and Defendant John Gilchrist's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (d/e 13). This Court ordered Plaintiff to respond to these Motions; however, he has not done so, and so, he is deemed to have no opposition to the Motions. Text Order entered January 8, 2010; Text Order entered January 21, 2010; Local Rule 7.1(B)(2). All claims against Defendants Daniel Morse and Montgomery County, Maryland, are dismissed with prejudice. All claims against Defendants Scott Shirley and John Gilchrist are dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction. Defendants Morse, Montgomery County, Maryland, Shirley, and Gilchrist are dismissed from this action. The Motion of Defendant Daniel Morse for Order Granting Leave to David P. Sanders and Wade R. Thomson to Appear Pro Hac Vice (d/e 5) is denied as moot. Entered by Judge Jeanne E. Scott on 2/10/2010. (CC, ilcd) (Entered: February 10, 2010).

The lawsuit may be seen in it's entirety in our September 22, 2009 posting at Another Frivolous Lawsuit Filed by Andy Martin.

All orders pertaining to Martin's lawsuite may be seen at Justia News

Martin now faces several lawsuits against him in this case for defamation of character for his frivolous claims.

Earlier this month Martin failed to secure the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in Illinois after receiving only 5% of the votes in the February 2, 2010 primary.

Does Andy Martin Suffer From "Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD)?

2010-01-30T05:44:00.000-08:00

Do you feel that Andy Martin (a.k.a. Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona) suffer from the following:

"Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the diagnostic classification system used in the United States, as "a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy."

Andy Martin Should Drop Out Of Senate Race

2010-01-30T05:13:00.000-08:00

January 28, 2010

Dear Mr. Martin,

As leaders of many of the pro-family groups in this state, we want to thank you for your willingness to put your personal life on hold in order to run for Senate. We know it is a sacrifice and we are grateful to you for that.

We have a common purpose. We all love our country and our state and are concerned about the moral and fiscal chaos we’ve seen at home and in the nation’s capitol. We are certain your motivation to get in this race was to change that.

But we ask you now to consider doing something difficult in the best interest of the state and the nation. Patrick Hughes is the only conservative candidate who has enough support to beat the very liberal and well-funded Mark Kirk. Even if we can unite conservative voters in the state, it will still be an uphill battle. But it is certain that Mark Kirk will prevail if all current candidates remain in the race.

We implore you to drop out of the race and throw your support behind Patrick Hughes as soon as possible. We are asking Kathleen Thomas, Judge Don Lowery and John Arrington to do the same. As it stands now, we will be doomed to yet another Democratic victory in the fall if we don’t have a strong conservative candidate to face them in November. Voters will stay home if Mark Kirk wins.

If you will do this, we as family leaders in the state will remember your demonstration of selflessness in this race in the future.

If you can respond to this letter, we will send out a press release praising you for this move. Voters won’t forget what you did.

With respect….sincerely,

Phyllis Schlafly Founder and President of Eagle Forum*
David Smith Director of the Illinois Family Institute*
Sandy Rios President of Culture Campaign*
Ralph Rivera Director of Illinois Citizens for Life PAC*
Bob Van Den Bosch Founder of Concerned Christian Americans*

*Organizations and titles for the purposes of identification only

------------------------------------
January 30th news conference details:

Anthony R. Martin-Trigona and the Champaign Carny Killing

2010-01-19T04:36:00.000-08:00

Irv Leavitt

on December 30, 2009 7:20 PM |

THIRTY-TWO YEARS AGO, I heard one of the funniest lines in a long career of writing about other peoples' troubles. It was uttered on the steps of a county courthouse by a lawyer who came to hear another brilliant law school graduate -- one denied an Illinois law license for an alleged shaky mental state -- accuse him of fixing a case.
The courthouse-steps press conference had been called by Anthony R. Martin Trigona, a brainy but bizarre local character. Among his targets that day were a Champaign County prosecutor and a defense attorney he maintained had conspired to assure a murderer was acquitted.
After Martin-Trigona wound down, the defense attorney, Robert Isham Auler, gathered the local press and said, "For the first time in my life I have sympathy for the Philistines in the Bible. We both were assailed by the jawbone of an ass."
The reason for this stroll down memory lane is that Anthony R. Martin-Trigona calls himself Andy Martin these days. That's the same back-of-the-pack Illinois U.S. Senate Republican primary candidate who ran a political ad on WBBM radio challenging an opponent to tell if he's gay.
He said that opponent owes an explanation for supporting the gay side in civil rights issues, anathema to ultra-conservatives like him.
He wasn't always so conservative, however.
Five years ago, he called himself pro-gay rights.
Both as Martin-Trigona and Martin period, he has run unsuccessfully for many political offices in Illinois, Florida and Connecticut, and twice for President of the United States.
When he held his 1977 press conference, he was, as now, running for the U.S. Senate, but as a Democrat.
He said then, "I stand for the people of this state and against the rich bankers and powerful Republican lawyers, and they are trying to destroy me before I can get to the Senate and destroy their corrupt way of life."
In those days, it seemed everybody was trying to destroy Martin-Trigona, according to the great man himself. Those people included Auler and me and just about anybody else whose name he could spell, and some he couldn't. He was always suing somebody.
The case he accused Auler and the others of fixing was the prosecution of the late Kistler "Sailor Bill" Killingsworth, a legendary Columbus, Ga. tattoo artist who came through Champaign County with a carnival, and pumped many bullets into a fellow carny while on a break.
It was a fascinating case, delving into the strange world of itinerant carnival workers, each with a weirder nickname than the last. I was then the Daily Illini crime/criminal courts reporter, as well as the local UPI stringer, and I remember the delight with which the UPI rewrite man accepted my calls.
"Oh man, it's the story with all the crazy names," he groaned one time.
Sailor Bill looked like a goner at the start of his trial for killing Jimmy "The Wop" Wilson. There were witnesses, stories of conflicts between the two men, a recovered ivory-handled murder weapon, and Killingsworth's long record as a guy who wasn't shy about mixing it up.
Auler dressed up Sailor Bill in high-collared shirts and long, tightly-buttoned sleeves to hide as many tattoos as possible. He did as complete a job as humanly possible attacking witnesses. But it was way too apparent that Killingsworth, 55, had done the shooting.
I called up Auler today to help refresh my memory of how he made that problem go away.
"Look, Sailor Bill shot this guy," the Urbana attorney said. "So I sent somebody to research the dead guy, and it turns out he's a real scumbag, a dangerous person."
It would be nice for Auler if the local officials who knew Wilson in Georgia would come up to Champaign County and testify why Killingsworth should be so afraid of him that he'd be justified in shooting him full of holes when confronted.
"There's no way we're going to testify for the defense," Auler said he was told.
But his investigator -- a convicted parking meter thief -- couldn't get a job anywhere in town but with Auler, and he wanted to make sure he kept it.
He found out that the local Georgia cops' worst problem was an outlaw motorcycle gang. So the Parking Meter Bandit romanced a female gang associate, and, amazingly, succeeded in finding out a lot about the bikers. He tipped the cops where evidence of drug sales and violent mayhem could be found. Local problem solved.
Back in Champaign County, I sat stunned as a Georgia prosecutor and a police lieutenant took the stand as Sailor Bill defense witnesses, testifying convincingly that anyone in their right mind would fear Wilson.
It was the first time I ever saw a killer jump up and leave a courtroom a free man. But I never thought the fix was in, because I saw the Georgia witnesses testify so convincingly. And anyone who read the stories in three local dailies the next day would have known it, too.
But Martin-Trigona had axes to grind in the courthouse before he ever heard of Sailor Bill. He was under siege by the local system for contempt charges, mostly stemming from insults hurled at judges trying to settle complaints from tenants of his run-down campustown apartment buildings.
The contempt cases went on for years, mainly because, it seemed, Martin-Trigona just didn't know how to apologize and move on from intemperate remarks like "I hope they are paying you well for this fixed case" and "Do I get a transcript of this hearing before it is doctored?"
Such unnecessary legal entanglements have followed him wherever he's gone. Everybody's a crook. Everybody's got something terrible to hide.
You may have noticed that I didn't mention the name of the candidate Martin challenged with the WBBM radio ad. If you don't know, you can find out easily enough. I don't care if the guy is gay or not, but I'm not going to be a part of the attack.
And don't think the attack has no substance. It does.
Tuesday, I received an e-mail from a far-right GOP group that, while disowning Martin, made sure I got a big pile of rumors to wade through. And they were making the almost identical points that Martin did.
And don't imagine that Martin is impotent. In a 1998 run for the U.S. Senate from Florida -- while a fugitive from justice on a local contempt charge -- he was the biggest vote-getter in Miami-Dade County and collected a third of the statewide vote.

Andy Martin History

2010-01-19T04:27:00.000-08:00

Link to Original Article at Illinois Senate Race 2004

Martin has a storied history including multiple Senate and Presidential runs. He drew national attention during the 2000 Presidential Race when he ran an ad accusing Bush of taking cocaine:

ANDY MARTIN, REPUBLICAN FOR PRESIDENT: George Bush had a cocaine problem. His brain suffered from alcohol abuse. Don't trust Bush with your vote until he trusts you with the truth about his past. Bush wants to regulate the Internet because he is angry at the Web site gwbush.com. He wants to bomb Iraq. Bush is dangerous, and he wants to be president.

He verbally sparred with FOX News Bill O’Reilly over the ad. O’Reilly called it, “the most unfair political ad I have ever seen in my 25 years of political reporting.” Martin responded by saying he would run the ad everywhere in the country and that he would beat President Bush.

Martin’s website states the following about his military experience:

Andy comes from a family with four generations of clandestine and special operations service. He is a member of The Special Forces Club (U.K.) and an associate member of the Special Forces Association. He has been associated with Afghanistan, Cambodia, China, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Saudi Arabia and South Viet-Nam.

He came back from Iraq in April and held a press conference in New York where he claimed he found Saddam:

On April 30, 2003, I held a New York news conference at which I said Saddam was in Baghdad. This was based on my extensive original research, including the use of local Baghdad dogs (called affectionately the Royal Baghdad Canine Constabulary).

My prediction on April 30th is a matter of record. Subsequent events have proven me correct. The U.S. government is finally paying some attention. Almost two months after I first investigated bomb craters for evidence of Saddam's death, the American military replicated my research. July 9th the New York Post reported Special Forces troops were searching downtown Baghdad, close to where I had originally pinpointed Saddam's location. My investigative efforts and April 30th prediction have been fully confirmed and vindicated.

Throughout his press releases he claims to be the following, “military security and intelligence consultant and a specialist in cyber war tactics,” a “respected voice in America's intelligence community,” and the host of “Andy Martin's America" and Out2.com column which are “are fulcrums of foreign policy debate, political analysis and contemporary commentary on the Internet.”

He also states that he was assistant to former Illinois U.S. Senator Paul H. Douglas, and that he was known as a maverick that fought Daley Machine corruption and helped light the fire that led to Operation Greylord. Martin is a graduate of the University of Illinois and U.I. College of Law.

His press releases include the following statements:

Sharon is the 'new Hitler.' He is a bloodthirsty murderer who kills without conscience. Israel has become a pariah nation under his leadership; not one nation in the world supports Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people.

Ariel Sharon is becoming the Adolph Hitler of the 21st century," says Martin. "He slaughters human beings for sport, while his demented mind slips slowly into societal madness.”

I have asked President Bush to ban travel by Americans to Israel," says Martin. "The recent tragedy in Jerusalem, and former President Clinton's offer to 'carry a rifle for Israel' mandate emergency restraint by the U.S. Government.

I favor abolition of child support and reinstatement of Victorian
principles of divorce. The parent who can support the kids gets custody.

A news story out of the New Times Broward-Palm Beach written July 31, 2003 said this of Martin:

Martin, of course, is mad. Quite mad. He's an enigma wrapped in a riddle who probably should be wrapped in a straitjacket. The would-be senator is one of the most prolific and compulsive lawsuit filers in the United States, a first-class shadow-dwelling fugitive from justice, and a perennial also-ran political candidate whose stance on the issues has changed about as often as Michael Jackson's proboscis.

Martin claims his English grandfather fought with T.E. Lawrence against the Turks before joining a British military intelligence unit and disappearing for good.

The Illinois Supreme Court, however, refused to admit him to the bar, pointing to a military psychiatric exam that allegedly found him to have personality defects that include delusions involving both paranoia and grandeur.

Through the years, he made the ballot for numerous local and federal races in Illinois, New York, and Connecticut. After following his mother down to Florida, he's been as busy as ever, running for governor twice, the state Senate, a couple of flings for the presidency, and three times for the U.S. Senate.

Martin never won a race, but he made some headlines. In 1994, he was found to have broken election laws when he accepted a $50,000 campaign loan from Mom. While Martin is cagey about his finances, I think that loan, plus a courtroom admission that Mom pays his rent and telephone bills, gives a clue about who finances his many far-flung ventures. When I asked him about his net worth, he said it's about zero.

The AP reported in January 20, 2000 that the Florida Supreme Court the following about Martin "Nearly everything Martin files is malicious," the justices wrote. "It appears that Martin's inability to refrain from the 'tactic of injecting personal insults into proceedings' was the main reason why the Illinois Supreme Court refused to allow his admission to that state's bar." AP also reported that Martin spent time in jail:

In 1996, a judge jailed Martin for remarks during a hearing on a restraining order to keep him away from a television station and two cameramen who had scuffled with him.

Martin had called the hearing "a kangaroo court" and "a circus proceeding," but the final straw came when he accused the judge of being "bought and paid for" by the TV station's lawyers.

This seems to be corroborated by Martin himself who issued a statement about the imprisonment:

Andy Martin wrote the lawsuit [against then Secretary of State Katherine Harris] on a prison typewriter on Rikers Island, America's worst penal colony. He is in a maximum-security cell with multi-murderers with a $1 million bail. That compares with $25,000 if he had only killed a few people.

In his ‘92 bid for Senate he report $1,060 in contributions $500 of which came from his mom. The only contributions ever reported to the FEC
He ran for Illinois Senate in 1980 as Anthony R. Martin-Trigona
Martin's current address listed on his website is:
440 N. Wabash Avenue, Suite 3010
Chicago, Illinois 60611

This is located in a 50 floor luxury apartment building next to the Chicago River.

He also has an address listed at:
REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE for US SENATOR
1574 S. Ocean Lane Suite 111
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl, 33316
Tel. (888) 320-ANDY (2639)
This is luxury condo located on the beach in a zip code which the average home goes for $855,000.
In 1998, Martin received 33.6% of the statewide vote in the U.S. Senate statewide primary, carried Miami-Dade County by a landslide. Election Results
The McKenna campaign has made copies of Martins petitions, it remains to be seen whether anyone will challenge him.
Calls made to numerous numbers all led to the same voice mail system and calls have not been returned.

Illinois U.S. Senate Republican Candidates Debate

2010-01-14T06:41:00.000-08:00

LIVE streaming video of Candidates Debate

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/livenow?id=7211914

The debate begins at 7:00 PM CST on Thursday, January 14, 2010.

Andy Martin: Mark Kirk's Secret Agent Man?

2010-01-07T17:30:00.000-08:00

Click on title to go to original story

By Bill Pascoe | January 7, 2010

If I were a Birther, or a Bircher, or Mel Gibson playing Jerry Fletcher in "Conspiracy Theory", I'd be convinced that Andy Martin's campaign is being secretly funded by allies of GOP rival Mark Steven Kirk.
Kirk, of course, is the liberal Republican congressman who represents Illinois' 10th Congressional District -- Chicago's North Shore suburbs (which you've seen in the background if you ever watched "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" or "Risky Business" or the CBS summer replacement series "Swingtown") -- and is now running for the GOP nomination for the Senate seat once held by Barack Obama.

Martin, for those readers outside the listening range of Chicago radio stations WLS, WGN, and WBBM, would be described properly as a "gadfly," except that I actually know and like some gadflies, and I wouldn't want to insult them.

He is a perpetual candidate for office whose Wikipedia entry is so wildly amusing that three weeks ago, he filed a lawsuit against -- wait for it -- Wikipedia itself, claiming that it is "a tax-exempt protosocialist scam that seeks to harass Republicans, conservatives and Obama opponents."

So, with that as our background, why would a conspiracy theorist believe that Kirk's allies are secretly funding Martin's campaign?

Because last week, Martin aired radio ads declaring that a well known conservative donor in Illinois says there is a "solid rumor" that Kirk is gay. And yesterday, Martin upped the ante, swapping out that ad for a new radio ad, declaring that Kirk is a "de facto pedophile."
Even in the cesspool that is Chicago politics, this is strong stuff.

Nobody I know buys the content of the advertising. In fact, just about everybody I know -- myself included -- thinks it's some of the most repugnant stuff they've ever heard aired in a campaign.

These ads are so inflammatory that, surely, any reasonable person could see that they do nothing but damage whatever kind of a "campaign" Martin had put together for himself.

More importantly, in an odd turn, the ads actually help Kirk.

To understand how, we have to back up just a bit.

Consider:
The National Republican Senatorial Committee wants this seat badly. This is the seat, after all, that is currently held by Roland Burris. Given the national controversy over then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich's decision to appoint Burris, the NRSC, appropriately, almost feels entitled to the seat.
From the beginning, Kirk is the guy they wanted in the race. His liberal-to-moderate record -- he scored a 48 on the American Conservative Union rating in 2008, and a 40 in 2007 -- made him, in the eyes of Washington-based GOP strategists, just the kind of "centrist Republican" they thought would be needed to win a statewide race in Illinois.

For months, Kirk played coy. He would express interest, but refuse to commit -- clearly, he was worried about Democratic Attorney General Lisa Madigan jumping into the race on the other side of the aisle. Why give up a House seat he had held onto in two tough re-election campaigns in 2006 and 2008, just to lose to the 800-pound gorilla of Illinois politics?
So when Kirk voted for the cap-and-trade environmental bill -- he was one of only eight Republicans in the House to do so -- many of those same Washington-based Republican strategists took it as a sign he wouldn't be running for the Senate after all.

The NRSC, approaching desperation, began discussions with then-Illinois GOP chairman Andy McKenna (whose previous run at statewide office -- coincidentally, for the same Senate seat, in 2004 -- had ended in a disappointing fourth-place finish in the GOP primary).

Then Madigan announced she wouldn't be running for the Senate, and Kirk immediately declared a mulligan. He started calling allies, telling them he'd decided to get in, after all. But McKenna saw Kirk's vote for cap-and-trade as a massive liability (especially in a GOP primary), and made strong noises about challenging Kirk for the nod. Kirk made clear to the NRSC that the committee had to get McKenna out of the Senate primary, or he wouldn't get in. Eventually, McKenna backed off, and decided to run for the GOP nomination for governor instead.

So NRSC leaders ultimately got the candidate they wanted -- a Republican congressman from the North Shore suburbs, whose liberal voting record includes not just the vote for cap-and-trade, but strong support for abortion rights (Kirk earned a 100 percent rating from both Planned Parenthood and NARAL), an "F" rating from the NRA (and an "F-" from the Gun Owners of America!), and votes against the ban on "partial-birth" abortion and against defending traditional marriage.

Perhaps more importantly for an Illinois Republican primary, Kirk also voted to authorize funding to transfer enemy combatants from Guantanamo Bay.

The NRSC may have had influence over McKenna, but the committee had little influence over others in Illinois who were interested in the GOP nomination -- like Patrick Hughes and John Arrington and Kathleen Thomas and Don Lowery.

By all accounts, it's difficult to find much evidence of campaigns being mounted by Arrington, Thomas, and Lowery.

Hughes, on the other hand, is a different matter.
A Hinsdale developer, Hughes announced in August 2009 that he would challenge Kirk for the GOP nomination.

He launched his first TV ad this week, and his appearance before the Chicago Tribune editorial board shows a candidate who is thoughtful, reasonable, and conservative -- and one who knows how to define a contrast between himself and his opponent.
He began his campaign by putting his money where his mouth is, with a $250,000 contribution to kick-start things. The grass-roots enthusiasm for his candidacy appears to be growing -- on Tuesday, in Homer Glen (a southwest suburb of Chicago), 500 people showed up at a meet-and-greet hosted by the Will County Tea Party Alliance, and the campaign almost ran out of yard signs. As I write this on Thursday, he's got a crowd of 100 who've braved a Chicago snowstorm to attend a fundraising lunch in Lake Forest (a North Shore suburb in Kirk's back yard).

But he faces the same chicken-and-egg problem all underdog, underfinanced campaigns face when it comes to taking on the big dogs -- people who should be his natural allies say, "We'd love to be helpful, but you need to show us some metrics that show you can win." No one wants to be the first to plant a flag; even among many conservatives, there's a tendency to want to wrap oneself in the strength provided by numbers.
Kirk, of course, is acting like there's no primary, because it's to his benefit to sneak this one in under the radar. He's making few campaign appearances, skipping the kind of local joint candidate forums that are the bread and butter of primary campaigns. He's paid for no television ads, no radio ads, no direct mail, and only one walk piece. He's hoping that his superior name identification, combined with what will likely be low primary turnout for the Feb. 2 primary, can lead him to victory without having to drain any of his precious campaign resources -- resources he thinks he'll need for a bruising fall general election campaign.

So Kirk would be happy if the Illinois media didn't write a single article about the contest between now and Feb. 2; failing that, his next highest wish is to have nothing written about Hughes, the one conservative challenger who looks like he could actually mount a sustained challenge to Kirk's nomination.

Given that there's a donnybrook going on in the contest for the GOP nomination for governor -- a contest which features no fewer than six serious candidates, and which has provided much entertainment for the political class in Illinois -- Kirk isn't asking for much. He's just trying to keep his head down and keep everyone's attention focused on the governor's race instead of the Senate primary, and whatever you do, don't write about Hughes.

That's why Martin's outrageous ads help Kirk -- they suck up what little media oxygen is in the room for the Senate contest. Hughes can't break through in earned media if the story of the day is Andy Martin and his whacko ads.

It's almost enough to make you think ... nah, not even Machiavelli would have come up with this kind of scheme.

Of course, Machiavelli probably would've lost a race for Alderman.

Andy Martin, GOP Senate Candidate, Calls Opponent Mark Kirk A "De Facto Pedophile"

2010-01-07T08:05:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/
An already ugly race in the Republican primary for Illinois' 2010 Senate seat only got uglier Wednesday, as candidate and noted mud-monger Andy Martin released an ad calling his opponent, Rep. Mark Kirk, a "de facto pedophile."

Martin's campaign suggests that Kirk knew about Rep. Mark Foley's indiscretions with young male pages, and allowed them to happen. As such, Martin claims, Kirk "should be disqualified from holding public office."
The 60-second radio spot was accompanied by a lengthy press release from Martin's campaign explaining the claim. It's the second in a series of what he calls "bunker busters," accusations that are meant to explode Kirk's hidden secrets and campaign hopes.

A week ago, Mr. Kirk announced a "solid rumor" that Kirk was homosexual. That announcement led to his official rebuke by the Illinois GOP, whose chairman Pat Brady called his claims "bizarre" and "hate-filled."
But no amount of flak is likely to slow down Mr. Martin. He made a name for himself as one of the early proponents of the "birther" movement; he claimed that President Obama locked his white grandmother in a closet to hide his mixed racial background; and he once described a bankruptcy judge as "a crooked, slimy Jew, who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race."

The third "bunker buster" is expected next week in anticipation of the Feb. 2 primary.

Jack Roeser Speaks for Himself

2010-01-06T18:23:00.001-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/

Posted: January 06, 2010

By Jack Roeser

When there is an unauthorized use of your name, by discredited Senate candidate Andy Martin in this case, the old adage is "don't wrestle in the mud with a pig, you just get muddy and the pig likes it."

However, Martin continues to run his ad, and its subject is so salacious it won't die down.

Martin has a long reputation for running for office, suing people, and making irresponsible statements. I have no connection with Martin and I don't like what he does. I resent his unauthorized use of my name in his ad. WLS radio says they can't legally stop it.

Martin plucked out one of the many bad positions taken by Senate candidate Mark Kirk that I had enumerated. The list includes carbon tax and trade, abortion support, opposition to marriage being one man and one woman, his NARAL support rating, and a rumor of homosexuality which he lifted into his ad and named me as the source.

The rumor has had wide circulation in Washington, D.C. and Illinois. We didn't start it, and mentioned it only in a long list of things that should be cleared up by Mark Kirk before the primary election. The Republican Party should not be again stuck with a scandal such as that of former Florida GOP Congressman Mark Foley which led to extensive Republican loses in 2006. Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert also saw his reputation damaged as a result of his failure to responsibly handle the broad issue of homosexuality and public service.

Recommended reading: "Do We Have a Right to Know If Candidates Are Gay? "

Jack Roeser is the Chairman and founder of Otto Engineering Inc., and the Publisher of Champion News.

Roeser wants nothing to do with Martin ad

2010-01-06T17:00:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/
By MIKE DANAHEY mdanahey@scn1.com

Andy Martin's political ad questioning the sexual orientation of Mark Kirk, the Republican Party's front-runner in the U.S. Senate race in Illinois, continues to run in the Chicago market. But on Tuesday, local businessman Jack Roeser, who is quoted in the ad, said he is having his attorney look into getting the spot off the radio and/or having his name removed from it.
"I have nothing to do with that SOB," Roeser said about Martin. "His reputation precedes him. I don't like being quoted by him, and I don't support anything he does."
Roeser, founder of Otto Engineering in Carpentersville, also is involved with the nonprofit Family Taxpayers Foundation and is publisher of the for-profit, right-leaning Web site www,Championnews.net.
Roeser said his closest contact with Martin was a few months ago and limited to a phone call. Martin never asked for or sought his permission to include anything he said in any campaign material, Roeser noted.
In the ad in question, Martin says he is "fighting for the facts about Mark Kirk. Illinois Republican leader Jack Roeser says there is a 'solid rumor that Kirk is a homosexual.' Roeser suggests that Kirk is part of a Republican Party homosexual club."
Roeser admitted to making such comments on a radio show, "but they are rumors." And Roeser noted that he doesn't condone anyone talking about their sexuality in public, being a heterosexual bragging about his conquests or a homosexual marching in a gay pride parade. Both are "just plain nuts. Such things should be kept private."

The Champion News Web site does hold a "Kick Mark Kirk to the Curb" section, where readers can "learn more about this 'Republican' only a Democrat could love," and discusses Kirk's "pro abortion, pro homosexual, pro cap and trade, pro spending" views.
Roeser said his attorney had called a radio station about pulling Martin's spot, which it cannot legally do. Chicago's WBBM radio, one of the stations airing the ad, said federal law requires it to provide candidates with reasonable access and run political ads "without censoring them."
Roeser said his attorney also is looking to see if he can stop Martin from using Roeser in the ad without his permission.

As a result of the ad, which began to run after Christmas, the Republican Party already has said it no longer would consider Andy Martin a legitimate candidate.
"His statements are consistent with his history of bizarre behavior and often-times hate-filled speech, which has no place in the Illinois Republican Party," said GOP chairman Pat Brady.
Last week, Kirk campaign manager Eric Elk issued a statement saying the ad "is degrading to the political process. The people of Illinois deserve better." Elk said the ad's allegation that Kirk is gay is not true.
Martin, formerly Anthony Martin-Trigona, has a long record of running unsuccessfully for public office, making unsubstantiated allegations and suing officials and journalists he dislikes. The federal courts have sanctioned him for repeatedly filing frivolous lawsuits.

With Associated Press reports.
Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Andy Martin Attacks Gay Community Again!

2010-01-03T07:07:00.000-08:00

Independent Senate Candidate Andy Martin Continues His Gay Bashing Tone of Voice!

In Martin's latest blog titled: "U. S. Senate candidate Andy Martin exposes media lies and corruption in Chicago", Martin removes any doubt about his view on the gay community with more of his gay bashing statements.

After Martin was rightfully blasted by the public and media for his attack ad on December 28, 2009 accusing senate candidate Mark Kirk for being a closet homosexual, he released a statement which read:

“Let me be clear. Homosexuality is not the issue.
Every person is entitled to privacy, and everyone is
entitled to equal protection of the laws..."

Martin now releases his latest blog with statements like:

"The homosexual scandal in Republican Party politics is just in its early stages."

"Martin says that local media used a crooked local political leader who supports gay bars and Mark Kirk to attack Martin’s campaign, without telling viewers/listeners/readers the truth."

Well let's look at his last statement. Does he have a problem with people who support gay bars? Is there really such a thing as a homosexual scandal? If so, does Martin believe in a heterosexual scandal? In my opinion, these are little trigger statements which lead me to believe Martin is attacking the gay community just as he has previously attacked the Jewish community.

Martin continues his blog by saying:

"Pat Brady is a Mark Kirk stooge, and a supporter of holding Republican (John McCain) events in gay bars. The advertisement which prompted Mr. Brady to come forward and oppose my campaign concerned Mark Kirk's homosexual issues."

"During the 2008 campaign Mr. Brady, as “John McCain leader for Illinois,” sponsored a “bar event” in “Boystown,” the homosexual neighborhood in Chicago. Would viewers/listeners/readers have liked to know Brady had a history of sponsoring homosexual activity in the Republican Party? You be the judge:"

Wow! If it looks like a rat and it smells like a rat is it not a rat?

Now here's the "Bombshell" as Andy Martin would say:

"...vote no to continuing corruption of the Illinois Republican Party

by former Speaker Dennis Hastert’s homosexual operatives."

"If you want to fight political and moral corruption in Washington,- please vote for me."

He ends his blog with this:

"MONDAY: Who is John McGovern and what is his connection

to Mark Kirk and the “homosexual GOP culture…in Illinois.”

I guess we will all have to tune in on Monday, January 4, 2010 to see how Martin will blast more holes into the bottom of his already sinking ship.

I do have to side track here and point out a statement Martin made in his blog. He says:

"Not many real Republicans would support a candidate backed

by a crooked, violent psychopath like Pat Brady."

Crooked, Violent Psychopath. These are words normally reserved for those describing Martin himself. Hmmm!

Facebook Group "Andy Martin, Political Suicide"

New York Times James Warren Calls Andy Martin "Lightweight"

2010-01-02T05:58:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-york-times-james-warren-calls-andy.html

...thanks to zealots on its right flank and Andy Martin, a bomb-throwing lightweight.

Mr. Martin is the vessel of the venom. He is a frequent candidate with a history of stridently anti-Jewish comments. As a law school graduate named Anthony Martin-Trigona, he was rejected for entry to the Illinois bar due to a psychiatric finding of a “moderately severe character defect manifested by well-documented ideation with a paranoid flavor and a grandiose character.”

click on story headline to read the whole story...

News Report on Andy Martin's Attack Ad

2010-01-01T19:51:00.000-08:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrD4yJDeW7I

Click on story headline to watch video.

Illinois Republican Party Disavows Statements Made by Mr. Andy Martin

2009-12-28T12:48:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/

IL GOP Chairman Statement Regarding Andy Martin Accusations
12/28/2009

"The Illinois Republican Party disavows the statements made today by Mr. Andrew Martin in his statewide radio advertisements. His statements today are consistent with his history of bizarre behavior and often times hate-filled speech which has no place in the Illinois Republican Party. Mr. Martin will no longer be recognized as a legitimate Republican Candidate by the Illinois Republican Party."

Pat Brady, Illinois Republican Party Chairman

________________________________________

In addition, it has been brought to our attention that Mr. Martin’s sources are now denying any such statements or allegations.

According to Raymond True, a leader of the Republican Party in Lake County:

"Mr. Martin did not contact me in any way before making his announcement. The comments attributed to me are completely false. I request through the media that Andy Martin cease and desist from making any additional statements that are incorrectly attributed to me."

How To Stop an Andy Martin Lawsuit (part 2)

2009-12-28T07:39:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/

This is another motion filed by Montgomery County, Maryland in a lawsuit which Martin had filed.

How to Stop an Andy Martin Lawsuit

2009-12-28T06:12:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/

If you are one of the lucky ones to be slapped with an Andy Martin lawsuit, please read on and discover the simplest way to defend yourself against this unethical litigator.

The following motion is all you need to quickly put an end to any of his frivolous lawsuits.

John Biver of Champion News on Andy Martin

2009-11-16T05:22:00.000-08:00

http://andymartin-conspiracytheory.blogspot.com/

An important ‘fyi' for voters regarding perennial candidate Andy Martin
Posted: November 12, 2009

By John Biver

Martin had been described by state psychiatrists as having a "moderately severe character defect manifested by well-documented ideation with a paranoid flavor and a grandiose character."

-- From the Wikipedia entry on Andy Martin

I read this in Dave Diersen's email this morning:

"Is Champion News' John Biver exaggerating Patrick Hughes' campaign cash?"

Along with it was a link to a website by perennial candidate Andy Martin.

I did speak with downstate radio talk show host Scott Doody the other day but I said no such thing. I have never spoken to Pat Hughes or any members of his campaign team about how much money he was raising or how much he planned on raising.

To read more about Andy Martin for the purpose of understanding how he processes information, I'd refer readers to this Wikipedia entry:

Andy Martin (U.S. politician)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Martin_(U.S._politician)

One of the quintessential Martin quotes is this one from the New York Times:

In another motion, filed in 1983, Mr. Martin wrote, "I am able to understand how the Holocaust took place, and with every passing day feel less and less sorry that it did."

Enough said.

For entertainment purposes only, click here and here to watch videos of Andy Martin in action.

Post Script: This afternoon I had another good conversation with Scott Doody, who reiterated what I already knew - poor Andy Martin got it wrong.

John Biver is the Editor of Champion News.

Also, here's an entertaining video of what another reader put together on Martin's big conference this past Spring: "watch video"

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit Decision Against Andy Martin

2009-10-18T05:44:00.000-07:00

The Following Is A Decision Reached By The United States Court Of Appeals, Second Circuit In New York With Reference To Andy Martin's Frivolous Lawsuits.

795 F.2d 9
In re Anthony R. MARTIN-TRIGONA.

Nos. 85-5023, 85-5024, 85-5025, 86-5010, 86-5003, 86-5009,
86-7091, 85-5063, 85-5077, 86-5004, 86-5007,
86-5015, 86-5018, 86-5022, 86-5023,
86-8015, 86- 5024, 86-5025,
86-5026, 86-5017, 86-5014.

United States Court of Appeals,
Second Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 16, 1986, and April 16, 1986.
Decided July 9, 1986.

Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, pro se.

Before MANSFIELD, PIERCE and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Before us are various motions and petitions submitted by Anthony R. Martin-Trigona, pro se, seeking, inter alia, leave to appeal various orders entered in his bankruptcy proceeding, reinstatement of appeals that have been dismissed, or other relief. We generally dispose of such motions by unpublished order, but on this occasion we issue a published opinion discussing his conduct and the consequences thereof in the future.

Martin-Trigona's propensity for generally meritless, usually vexatious and often scurrilous resort to legal processes has been documented in our prior decisions. See, e.g., In re Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d 1254, 1256-57 & Appendix C (2d Cir.1984), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 106 S.Ct. 807, 88 L.Ed.2d 782 (1986). In June, 1984, we affirmed the power of the district court to enjoin him from bringing a variety of actions without leave of court and also issued an injunction governing appeals to this court.1 Id. at 1264. Under the latter injunction, Martin-Trigona must move for leave to take an appeal within twenty days of the notice of appeal, and must indicate the grounds supporting his motion. Id. If a motion for leave is not filed within twenty days of the notice, the appeal is dismissed. Id. Leave to appeal is granted if we conclude that Martin-Trigona has standing to appeal, that this court has jurisdiction over the appeal, and that the appeal has colorable merit. These restrictions were entered pursuant to our inherent power to protect our jurisdiction from conduct that threatens our ability to carry out Article III functions. Id. at 1261-62.

The injunction has been effective in preventing Martin-Trigona from using legal processes to harass "anyone who so much as crosses his path in the federal courts." Id. at 1263. However, it has been only partially effective in preventing Martin-Trigona from overburdening this court with frivolous filings and from diverting scarce judicial resources away from litigants with good faith federal claims. Since June 18, 1984, the date of our opinion concerning the injunction, Martin-Trigona has filed over 100 appeals or petitions for appellate relief in this court. In 15 cases no leave of court was required. In 67 cases in which leave of court was required, 35 were dismissed for failure to seek leave, leave was denied in 26, and leave was granted in 6. Twenty-one matters in which leave of court is required are disposed of by this opinion.

The burden imposed by Martin-Trigona on this court is clear. His submissions are so multitudinous and complex that the clerk's office must assign administrative responsibility for Martin-Trigona's filings to one person. No other litigant in this court requires such special consideration. In addition, motions law clerks must analyze each of his motions. This is no easy task. Martin-Trigona's motions rarely cite relevant legal authority or state the facts clearly or directly. Further, in his motions for leave to appeal, he often attaches only the first page of the district court order appealed from. This failure to submit adequate supporting papers further increases the burden on the court. The hours spent by the staff of this court on Martin-Trigona filings are roughly the equivalent of the work of one full-time employee. Even so, this does not include the considerable time spent by the judges and their staffs after the matters are referred to them.

The motions pending before us illustrate the frivolous nature of typical Martin-Trigona submissions. For instance, in Docket No. 86-5004 Martin-Trigona seeks leave to appeal from an order awarding attorney's fees to the bankruptcy estate in connection with an action by the trustee to clear title to certain property in the estate. In his motion for leave, Martin-Trigona characterizes the award as one made directly to the attorney for the bankruptcy trustee, and claims that such an award cannot be made without notice to all creditors, as required by 11 U.S.C. Sec. 330 (Supp. II 1984). The record reveals, however, that the fees were awarded not to the attorney, but to the estate--the exact relief Martin-Trigona has requested. The appeal for which leave is sought is thus utterly frivolous. We deny the motion for leave to appeal.

Similarly, in Docket No. 86-5009 Martin-Trigona seeks leave to appeal the district court's denial of his motion requesting removal of the bankruptcy trustee for fraudulent misrepresentations to the court, and requesting that substantial sanctions be levied against both the trustee and his attorney. The essence of Martin-Trigona's claim, set forth in papers captioned "Motion for Leave to Appeal Bizarre Order," is that the trustee and his attorney misrepresented the fact that an initial meeting of creditors had taken place on December 13, 1982. Martin-Trigona claims he had no notice of this meeting, and submitted with the motion a recent letter from the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court stating that a meeting scheduled for that date actually never took place. The record reveals, however, that creditors did not attend a scheduled meeting because Martin-Trigona had announced beforehand that he would not attend. The inconsistency between the trustee's position and the Bankruptcy Clerk's position is whether one characterizes the events by saying "No meeting was held," or by saying "A meeting was held but no one came." Martin-Trigona himself is the only party guilty of misrepresentations to the court--his claim that he had no notice of the December 13, 1982 meeting is contradicted by a letter the trustee has submitted as part of his opposition papers to the motion before us. In that letter, dated November 30, 1982 and addressed to the Bankruptcy Judge, Martin-Trigona acknowledges receipt of notice of the December meeting and states his intention not to attend. Exhibit A, Opposition to "Motion for Leave to Appeal Bizarre Order." The motion for leave to appeal in No. 86-5009 is thus also utterly frivolous and is denied.

The other motions, Docket Nos. 85-5023, 85-5024, 85-5025, 86-5010, 86-5003, 86-7091, 85-5063, 85-5077, 86-5007, 86-5015, 86-5018, 86-5022, 86-5023, 86-8015, 86-5024, 86-5025, 86-5026, 86-5017, 86-5014, are also frivolous and are denied.

Because our injunction has not prevented Martin-Trigona from burdening this court with frivolous proceedings, we believe it necessary once again to exercise our inherent power to protect our jurisdiction from such vexatious conduct. See In re Martin-Trigona, 737 F.2d at 1261. Rule 38, Fed.R.App.P. and Rule 11, Fed.R.Civ.P. authorize the assessment of damages in favor of an opposing party for the filing of frivolous appeals or pleadings. As a consequence of the injunction, virtually all of Martin-Trigona's frivolous motions are unopposed before us, and thus these rules may not apply. However, our power to defend our ability to carry out our constitutional functions in no way depends upon the rights of private parties to relief. 737 F.2d at 1261. No litigant has the right to monopolize judicial resources and thus indirectly to obstruct other litigants asserting good faith claims. Absent the power to deter tactics like those employed by Martin-Trigona, a small number of litigants could paralyze this court. Our role here is thus not that of a dispute settler but that of an independent branch of government protecting its jurisdiction. Id. at 1261.

In future cases, therefore, we will impose monetary sanctions on Martin-Trigona if he files frivolous papers or proceedings. Once such a sanction is levied, the clerk shall accept no further papers from Martin-Trigona, who does not have in forma pauperis status in this court, until that monetary obligation is satisfied. See, e.g., Johl v. Johl, 788 F.2d 75 (2d Cir.1986) (per curiam); Schiff v. Simon & Schuster, Inc., 766 F.2d 61, 62 (2d Cir.1985) (per curiam). This is the only way to make the sanction effective and protect the processes of this court from abuse. Schiff, 766 F.2d at 62.

Martin-Trigona has pointed out that the injunction in this court has never been made permanent. We now order that this be done.

Motions denied. Permanent injunction is to be entered.

It is so Ordered.

Andy Martin Is in Contempt Of 2009 Court Order

2009-10-16T12:40:00.000-07:00

DISTRICT COURT OF MARYLAND FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY

27 COURTHOUSE SQUARE, ROCKVILLE, MD 20850

*0601 sPO 14762009*

Case No. 0601 SPO1 4762009
Date: 1011412009 3:08 P.m'

SCOTT ALAN SHIRLEY vs ANDY MARTIN

SHOW CAUSE ORDER

Upon consideration of the petition for contempt in this matter, it is ORDERED:

That ANDY MARTIN appear in person before this Court on 11/9/2009 at 1:30 p.m' and show cause, if any he or she may have, why he or she should not be found in contempt of this Court's Order of 8/24/2009, and why other relief should not be granted as necessary, provided that a copy of the Petition for Contempt and this Order shall be served on or before 11/6/2009.

The conduct alleged to have been committed in violation of the court order is as follows:
RESPONDANT HAS CONTACTED THE PETITIONER ON 09/30/2009 AT WORK EMAIL
RESPONDANT CONTINUES TO MAKE CONTACT

Service shall be made in the following manner:

__ Regular Mail
__ Certified Mail, return receipt requested
_X_ Law enforcement officer, sheriff or constable
__ other _______________________________

PLEASE SEE ATTACHED
PC/PO8 (Rev. 1212004) Page 1 of 2

TO THE PERSON ALLEGED TO BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT AND FOR WHOM JAIL HAS BEEN REQUESTED:

1. lt is alleged that you have disobeyed a court order, are in contempt of court, and should go to jail until you obey the Court's order.

2. you have the right to have a lawyer. lf you already have a lawyer, you should consult the lawyer at once. lf you do not now have a lawyer, please note:

(a) A lawyer can be helpful to You by:

(1) explaining the allegations against you;

(2) helping you determine and present any defense to those allegations;

(3) explaining to you the possible outcomes; and

(4) helping you at the hearing.

(b) Even if you do not plan to contest that you are in contempt of court, a lawyer can be helpful.

PC/POB (Rev. 1212004)
provide a lawyer for you. You must contact the Public Defender at least 10 business days before the date of the hearing. The court clerk will tell you how to contact the Public Defender or you may look in a telephone directory.

(d) lf you want a lawyer but you cannot get one and the Public Defender will not provide one for you, contact the court clerk as soon as possible.

(e) DO NOT WAIT UNTIL THE DATE OF YOUR HEARING TO GET A LAWYER. lf you do not have a lawyer before the hearing date, the court may find that you have waived your right to a lawyer, and the hearing may be held with you unrepresented by a lawyer.

3. IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR FOR THE HEARING, YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO ARREST.

Any reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities should be requested by contacting the court prior to the hearing date.

PC/DV8 (Rev. '1212004) Page2 of 2

Why Is Andy Martin Useless?

2009-10-09T19:14:00.000-07:00

Well, basically he does not work, he's a bigot who thinks that the white man is the only man who should exist and he is mentally unstable. He honestly believes he could win as senator of Illinois in 2010. His baggage leads us all to a different conclusion.

He constantly tries...yes TRIES to sue people or businesses with no success. He has been found guilty on several occassions of various law violations against others. One example is the following videos. Andy Martin Goes To Jail and Andy Martin Attacks News Crew.

Look at his latest campaign ad Andy Martin Ad.

We the people will never put a nut in office like Andy Martin.

Andy Martin's Dirty Tricks. DO NOT VOTE FOR HIM IN 2010

2009-09-24T18:25:00.000-07:00

The dirty tricks are really being played by Andy Martin. Look at his record. Jail time, lies (lots of them), disconnect with reality, frivolous lawsuits, ANTI-Semitic statements and physical violence against others. Just look at these videos.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BFnuhaU458Y

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaxIoQljADw

Martin has been declared to have mental issues making him not worthy of being admitted to the Illinois bar association. he wasn't admitted but should be committed.

He is a danger to society and himself. It's a matter of time before he really hurts someone or possibly kills someone based on his mental state.

Another Frivolous Lawsuit by Andy Martin.

2009-09-22T04:50:00.000-07:00

In an Illinois lawsuit submitted in September 2009, Martin details his accusations against Maryland residents and authorities.

His conspiracy theory of Obama Operatives runs deep into his mind with this one. Please keep in mind that this man is running for a senate seat in Illinois. The lawsuit below reads exactly as he submitted it to the courts.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
FOR THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT OF ILLINOIS
SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS

IN CHANCERY
CASE NO. 09 CH 737

ANDY MARTIN,

Plaintiff,

vs.

WASHINGTON POST COMPANY,
DANIEL MORSE, SCOTT SHIRLEY,
D/B/A/ ADR PRODUCTIONS,
GOOGLE, INC.,
JOHN GILCHRIST,
A/K/A JOHN BORLAZA,
JIM BROSEMER,
MONTGOMERY COUNTY,
MARYLAND,
JOHN J. MCCARTHY,
JOHN DOE AGENT OF MARK and/or
KIRK BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
WILLIAM G. SIMMONS,
EUGENE WOLFE, CHERYL MCCALLY,

Defendants.

COMPLAINT

Introduction

The 1972 Watergate Conspiracy began as a “third-rate burglary,” and culminated in a national scandal exposed by the Washington Post. This lawsuit arises out of a mini-Watergate scandal, in which a small—time huckster and extortionist, Scott Shirley, has combined with Plaintiff’s political opposition to harass Plaintiff’s professional and political activity using Maryland judges as adjuncts to the criminal conspiracy. At this time, the full dimensions and all of the identities of the co-conspirators are unknown. In due course, they will be exposed. This time, rather than exposing the conspiracy, the Washington Post appears to be part of the political machinations to violate the law.
COUNT ONE

[OWNERSHIP CLAIM]

1. Jurisdiction and venue
a. This court has general common law jurisdiction of the controversy.
b. Substantially all of the operative activity of the defendants is targeted at and “purposefully directed” against the Plaintiff in Illinois. Therefore, this Court has personal jurisdiction.
2. The parties
a. Plaintiff Andy Martin (“Plaintiff”) is a candidate for United States Senator. He is a world-respected Internet publisher and columnist, see e.g. ContrarianCommentary.com. Martin is Illinois’ most durable and independent corruption fighter (see http://www.andymartin.com/) and has helped send corrupt politicians and judges to jail.
b. Defendant Washington Post Company and its employee Daniel Morse are involved in some fashion with defendant Scott Shirley, as well as possibly other Kirk/Obama-related defendants, in a civil conspiracy directed at Plaintiff in Illinois.
c. Defendant Scott Shirley, d/b/a ADR Productions, is involved in both a civil and criminal conspiracy to harass and obstruct Plaintiff’s professional and political activity, as set forth in this Complaint.
d. Google, Inc. is the owner of YouTube and has been broadcasting Shirley's bogus attack ad, using Plaintiff’s pirated intellectual property on the Internet.
e. John Gilchrist, a/k/a John Borlaza, is a person whose full role in the matters sub judice is still not clear.
f. Montgomery County, Maryland is a defendant based on the failure of the county to protect Plaintiff’s right to file a consumer complaint without fear of harassment from the corrupt governmental structure of the county.
g. John J. McCarthy is the State Attorney of Montgomery County, and has refused to investigate the violations of Plaintiff’s rights by Shirley and others.
h. John Doe agent of Mark Kirk, and/or Barack Hussein Obama, is a person or persons unknown whose identity will be revealed during the course of this lawsuit.
i. William G. Simmons, Eugene Wolfe and Cheryl McCally are “chumbolone” members of the district court in Montgomery County who have been aiding and abetting Shirley in his extortion and harassment scheme against the Plaintiff.
3. Factual allegations
a. The Washington Conference involving Barack Obama
A. Plaintiff organized an April 3-4, 2009 Washington, DC conference concerning Barack Obama and his missing birth certificate [see www.NationalConferenceonObama.blogspot.com].
B. At some point Plaintiff was contacted by defendant John Gilchrist/John Borlaza (hereinafter “Gilchrist/Borlaza”) who asked if Plaintiff had made arrangements to tape his conference.
C. Gilchrist/Borlaza offered to pay to tape Plaintiff’s conference. While Plaintiff does not remember all of the details of the contacts with Gilchrist/Borlaza, it was agreed between Plaintiff and Gilchrist/Borlaza that Gilchrist/Borlaza would find someone to tape Plaintiff's conference and assume the cost of said taping, but that the conference and the product of the conference belonged to Plaintiff.
D. At no time did Gilchrist/Borlaza claim to own either Plaintiff’s intellectual property (the conference) or the evidence of that property (the tapes).
E. Gilchrist/Borlaza apparently hired defendant Scott Shirley (“Shirley”) to tape the conference. Plaintiff met Shirley at the Capital Hilton in Washington, DC and Shirley could not have been more cordial and cooperative.
F. After the conference ended, and while final editing was being discussed, Shirley prepared a “trailer” or prevue from Plaintiff's copyrighted material. In fact, as set forth in Exhibit A, Plaintiff said the following to Shirley: “Could you please add the copyright sign and notice copyright by Andy Martin 2009 on the trailer...John and I agreed that I would hold the copyright rights to the material. The same notice should go on any and all of the segments we post on the net.” (Exhibit A).
G. Shirley replied “Andy, Here’s the link for the video with changes (Donate to…and © copyright…).(Exhibit A).
H. The ownership of the copyright for Plaintiff’s materials is not in dispute.
b. The Conference editing process and new work
A. Shirley’s “trailer,” which he is now misusing in violation of his contractual responsibilities, was an excellent piece of work.
B. Plaintiff spoke with Shirley on the phone about editing a Hawai’i film that he was producing in May, and Shirley unhesitatingly agreed. Plaintiff had no reason to suspect Shirley was a crook, crackpot or double agent for Kirk/Obama.
C. Gilchrist/Borlaza asked Plaintiff to edit the Conference tapes and Shirley sent Plaintiff the approximately two hours of tapes to edit. Plaintiff did so and returned his copies to Shirley.
D. On May 15th, Plaintiff e-mailed Shirley and said “I have two tapes from Honolulu…” (Exhibit B)
E. Shirley replied “You may send the tapes however you see fit…I will look for them. I hope your trip was a successful one. (Exhibit B, 2 pages).
F. On May 20, 2009 Plaintiff e-mailed Shirley(Exhibit C, 2 pages) “Hi Scott—Is it possible you can make a copy and send the [Hawai’i] originals back to me…Re: April, Washington, DC conference—do you have a rough date when you can finish editing?...I want to give you all the time you need to do a good creative job…”
G. Shirley replied (Exhibit C), “I will make copies as soon as my computer is freed up…The first project should be done next week if everything goes well. I’m sorry for the delay…I have no problem with the added work…With regards to the Hawai’i project...”
H. Shirley and Plaintiff had previously spoken and Plaintiff had agreed to bear any cost overruns.
I. In July, 2009, Shirley said the “first project” was nearly completed and would be ready “next week.”
J. Shirley never completed any project, never made any copies and never rendered any bill to Plaintiff.
K. Plaintiff became increasingly concerned, and eventually increasingly suspicious, as Shirley became unreachable, refusing to respond to phone calls or e-mails.
c. Scott Shirley begins acting bizarrely
A. At no time was Plaintiff ever in the State of Maryland, and the only communication Plaintiff had with Shirley related to his non-performance of a contract and Plaintiff’s desire to seek the return of his property.
B. When Shirley did not return phone calls or respond to e-mails concerning the missing tapes, Plaintiff eventually complained to Montgomery County Maryland (Exhibit D) and the Greater Washington Better Business Bureau (“BBB”)(Exhibit E).
C. Shirley responded to Plaintiff’s complaints with a bizarre and delusional letter, Exhibit F, and the filing of a bogus “peace bond” claim predicated on Plaintiff’s BBB/Montgomery County consumer complaints.
d. Maryland judges enter the picture
A. No reasonable person could listen to Shirley’s claims without realizing that he was seeking to create a controversy to escape his contractual obligations and to resell Plaintiff’s property for a higher price to corrupt representatives of Mark Kirk and/or Barack Hussein Obama.
B. Shirley’s own “complaint” to the defendants admitted he was responding to Plaintiff’s complaint to the BBB (Exhibit E).
C. In his detailed multiple responses to the BBB Shirley never made any claim that he had ever been threatened in any way by Plaintiff.
D. Shirley knew what he was doing when he went shopping for judges in the highly partisan Democratic Party-dominated Maryland judiciary.
E. The defendants then began demanding that Plaintiff suspend his campaign for the U. S. Senate, fly to Washington and attend a kangaroo count session involving accusations by someone whose claims were facially delusional, and appear before one of the corrupt defendants (McCally). McCally, Wolfe and Simmons have since played musical chairs with the controversy.
F. Shirley, through his new sponsors and behind-the-scene political influence from Democrats, was using Maryland’s Democratic judges to politically harass Plaintiff and to attempt to interrupt his Senate campaign with fraudulent proceedings in the Maryland courts.
e. The Washington Post enters the fray
A. On August 25, 2009 Plaintiff received a call from defendant Dan Morse (“Morse”), a Washington Post employee in Rockville, Maryland. While Plaintiff does not recollect Morse’s original call completely, he remembers Morse suggesting Morse had been in the courthouse and stumbled over Plaintiff’s case. Morse gave no indication he had interviewed Shirley, received documents from him or done any research involving Plaintiff.
B. Not knowing that Morse and Shirley had been conspiring by e-mail and otherwise (presumably in person), Plaintiff initially furnished Morse with approximately 90 pages of documents.
C. Morse then recorded a phone call with Plaintiff which ran for over an hour.
D. Rather than being interested in Shirley’s machinations, Morse was interested in defendant Brosemer, whom Morse claimed had told Morse that Plaintiff attacked him (Brosemer). Brosemer’s claim was utterly fictitious, and part of the aftermath of Brosemer’s firing by Scripps-Howard Broadcasting after he attacked Plaintiff at WPTV-TV 13 years ago.
E. Brosemer’s claims to Morse were false and defamatory.
F. After Plaintiff complained to Morse’s editors, Morse called Plaintiff a third time; Morse said he had initially received an e-mail from Shirley a week earlier, as well as some of the same documents that Plaintiff later faxed in good faith.
G. Throughout the lengthy taped conversation(s), Morse was obsessed with peripheral events in Plaintiff’s life going back almost 40, 35 and 25 years, none of which bore the remotest relationship to Shirley’s conspiratorial activity. There was no way Morse’s questions would have fitted in any “news hole” of the Washington Post allocated to the Maryland suburbs.
H. Either knowingly or unknowingly, wittingly or unwittingly, Morse was acting in concert and conspiracy with Shirley, and acting in furtherance of the Kirk/Obama scheme to politically harass Plaintiff’s campaign for the U. S. Senate.
I. Given the opportunity to deny or clarify or explain Morse’s conspiratorial, fraudulent and bizarre “research” spanning decades in Plaintiff’s life, the Washington Post has remained mute and through silence essentially admitted that Morse was acting as a political saboteur and not as a bona fide reporter for the Post.
f. The true purpose of Shirley’s conspiracy is revealed

A. Shortly after coconspirator William Simmons entered yet another bogus order in furtherance of the civil rights conspiracy, Shirley’s missing trailer surfaced on the Internet as an attack video against Plaintiff’s campaign for the U. S. Senate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLq0rP4QXWE.
B. Shirley used Plaintiff’s property, which Shirley and his coconspirators had stolen from Plaintiff, to attack Plaintiff’s U. S. Senate candidacy.
C. Shirley’s farce in Montgomery County courts had been and continues to be a charade to use Maryland judges as part of Shirley’s political conspiracy to harass and attack plaintiff, initially with bogus legal proceedings and, when that approach failed, with attack ads which were based on the theft and misuse of Plaintiff’s intellectual property.
D. Shirley, who had initially appeared to be an honest businessman performing a helpful service for Plaintiff’s conference, has completed the transformation to crook and political smear artist.
E. Shirley refuses to return Plaintiff’s tapes while continuing to misuse them himself.
F. It is not yet clear with whom Shirley is acting in concert, but his associations will be revealed in due course. Most likely, Shirley has sold himself to agents of defendant Mark Kirk or Barack Hussein Obama, acting individually or in conjunction with Kirk who is Obama’s “favorite Republican.”
G. Gilchrist/Borlaza has disappeared from the scene and may himself have been an Obama operative.
4. Legal claim
a. Shirley is holding Plaintiff’s original tapes and refuses to return them to Plaintiff.
b. On information and belief, no one else claims any copyright or ownership of the tapes.
c. Despite the fact that Shirley makes no claim to ownership of Plaintiff’s tapes, and appears to be a crooked businessman, Shirley has been able to file his perjurious claims with Maryland authorities and enlist the notoriously compromised Maryland judiciary in his Democratic Party/Kirk/Obama dirty tricks campaign against Plaintiff.
d. Plaintiff seeks an order directing Shirley and anyone else with possession of any of Plaintiff’s tapes or copies thereof, which includes the third parties to whom Shirley has given the harassment material, to return the tapes to Plaintiff.
5. Demand for judgment
a. Plaintiff seeks money damages as the Court or a jury may impose, as follows:
A. Money damages from Shirley in the amount of $25,000;
B. Money damages from Brosemer in the amount of $25,000, as well as a finding that Brosemer’s claims were defamatory and without any basis in fact.
b. Plaintiff seeks any and all declaratory and equitable relief to which he may be entitled from all of the defendants, jointly and severally, known and currently unknown (“John Doe agent of Mark Kirk and/or Barack Hussein Obama”).
COUNT TWO
[§§ 1983-1985 CIVIL RIGHTS CONSPIRACY]
1-3. Plaintiff repeats and realleges ¶¶ 1-3 of Count One and further pleads:
4. Legal claim
a. Federal law protects the right of persons to seek public office, see e.g. 18 U.S.C. § 245 (b)(1)(A).
b. Shirley, who appears to have begun his relationship with Plaintiff acting as an honest local businessman, has morphed into a political crook who is working to corrupt the local judiciary in Maryland and Google, Inc. (YouTube), all as part of someone’s plans to disrupt Plaintiff’s campaign for the U. S. Senate. The dirty tricksters are most likely Kirk’s and/or Obama’s supporters.
c. The actions of the defendants constitute a classic civil rights conspiracy, using bogus legal proceedings and other activity to corrupt local Democratic Party officials in order to harass a federal candidate of the Republican Party, all “under color of” state law.
5. Demand for judgment
Plaintiff seeks any and all relief to which he may be entitled under Count One, not to exceed $70,000 in aggregate money damages.
COUNT THREE
[CONVERSION]
1-3. Plaintiff repeats and realleges ¶¶ 1-3 of Count One and further pleads:
4. Legal claim
a. Shirley has converted Plaintiff’s intellectual property and directly or indirectly through agents is using Plaintiff’s property to attack Plaintiff on the Internet:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLq0rP4QXWE.
b. Shirley’s conduct and that of his coconspirators constitutes the common law tort of conversion.
5. Demand for Judgment
Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to the Illinois common law of conversion, as well as the relief in Count One not to exceed $70,000 in aggregate money damages.
COUNT FOUR
[PRIMA FACIE TORT]
1-3. Plaintiff repeats and realleges ¶¶ 1-3 of Count One and further pleads:
4. Legal claim
a. Illinois courts have adopted the concept of prima facie tort, see Pendleton v. Time, Inc., 339 Ill.App. 188, 89 N.E.2d 435 (Ill.App. 1st Dist. 1949) as originally recognized in Advance Music v. American Tobacco, 183 Misc. 855, 51 N.Y.S. 692, aff’d 296 N.Y. 79, 70 N.E.2d 401 (N.Y.).
b. The defendants’ ongoing activity is a classic case of prima face tort, because their activity represents the quintessential type of political dirty tricks using judges and corrupt public officials that are universally condemned by American society.
5. Demand for Judgment
a. Plaintiff seeks the same relief as sought in Count One.
COUNT FIVE
[BREACH OF CONTRACT/THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY]
1-3. Plaintiff repeats and realleges ¶¶ 1-3 of Count One and further pleads:
4. Legal claim
a. Throughout the controversy which Shirley has manufactured, Shirley has claimed he only had a “contract” with Gilchrist/Borlaza.
b. In point of fact, District of Columbia law follows traditional third-party beneficiary contract law, Western Union v. Massman Construction, 402 A.2d 1275, 1277 (Dc App. 1979).
c. Although Gilchrest/Borlaza was paying for the work, he did not claim any interest in either the intellectual property or the evidence of the intellectual property (the tapes) that was being created by the Plaintiff.
d. Shirley has constantly cooked up imaginary defenses having no basis in law to frustrate Plaintiff’s contractual ownership rights in the original tapes, all in violation of the three-party contract agreed to between the parties.
e. Plaintiff has a right as a beneficiary to seek possession of his tapes.
5. Demand for Judgment
a. Plaintiff seeks the same relief as sought in Count One.
DATED: August 27, 2009
Respectfully submitted,

ANDY MARTIN

Motions Filed In This Lawsuit

Andy Martin In Contempt of Peace Order 2009?

2009-09-20T05:31:00.000-07:00

Is it possible that Andy Martin has violated the Maryland peace order issued against him on August 24, 2009?

Sources tell us that on September 16, 2009, Martin contacted the "Petitioner" of the peace order requesting work from the petitioner. Terms of the peace order require Martin to have no contact "In person, by telephone, in writing, or by any other means." Under those terms, Martin is in contempt of the peace order.

Now, the real question seems to be, is there a willingness of the courts to expedite Martin to Maryland for such a violation? The answer may be yes. It seems Martin has filed suite against three judges in that court and the states attorney for Montgomery County. He claims they are conspiring with Obama operatives against his 2010 Illinois senate campaign by originally ordering a final peace order against him in the first place (you can view Martin's suite at http://andyforussenator.blogspot.com/2009/09/andy-martins-lawsuit-against-washington.html). Would they like to meet the man who claims they are involved in some sort of Obama scheme against him? Maybe.

The bottom line seems to be this; Martin loves to file frivolous lawsuits against anything that moves. This time, it seems a legitimate court order was brought against him and he is now in violation of that order. He should be held accountable for his actions and brought before the court to answer to his actions. Will he learn his lesson? Probably not.

Andy Martin In Handcuffs

2009-09-19T17:05:00.000-07:00

Watch Andy Martin Go To Jail.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaxIoQljADw

Now You Know!

Watch The Real Andy Martin for U.S. Senate In Action.

2009-09-15T12:58:00.000-07:00

Andy Martin takes matters into his own hands in these two videos from the mid 90's. Watch and listen as he falls apart.

Andy Martin Attacks News Crew

Andy Martin in Contempt of Court

I would not want him as my candidate.

Illinois Senate Candidate, Andy Martin Denied Consumer Fraud Claim Against Maryland Business.

2009-09-02T11:05:00.000-07:00

U.S. Senate Candidate,
Andy Martin Has Lost
Another Battle in His Claim
to "National Conference Tapes"

It didn't take long for the Montgomery County, Maryland Office of Consumer Protection to determine that Illinois Senate candidate, Andy Martin, is up to his old tricks filing frivolous claims which he obviously had no right to file in the first place.

In the case which Mr. Martin claimed that Maryland business owner, Scott Shirley of ADR Productions had stolen the tapes where the company had filmed Martin during his so-called "National Conference on Barack Obama's Missing Birth Certificate and College Records", the complaint was dismissed as having no merit to constitute fraud. Martin had claimed fraud by Shirley and demanded that the tapes, which are the property of ADR Productions, be given to Martin for free. Martin claimed to have been a customer of the production company but it was determined that he actually had never been a customer. "We never had a contract with Mr. Martin and we never had offer and acceptance of any money. The real fraud is Mr. Martin lying about being our customer, which he had claimed, to Consumer Protection and the Better Business Bureau." Shirley stated.

It seems Martin continues to be on the short end of the stick as his conspiracy theory flames seem to be burning out. It was one week ago today that ADR Productions had won a victory in court when they granted a final protection order against Martin for harassment. I'd say it's a 0 and 2 count with only one more strike 'til your out Mr. Martin.

Shirley says he will be glad to offer a sync license for use of the footage contained in the tapes. He estimates that the total cost for the full three hours of tape would run in the area of $10,000. He has also considered just destroying them due to the content contained within the tapes.

Andy Martin...There Is No "Stolen Tape" Conspiracy!

2009-08-28T07:11:00.000-07:00

ANDY MARTIN COMPLETELY FABRICATES STORY TO PUT HIMSELF IN THE SPOTLIGHT...

Mr. Martin has fabricated the story of the so-called "Stolen Tapes" The tapes which he refers to are NOT and have NEVER been his property.

ADR Productions was hired by an individual from another state back in March 2009 to film what was titled "National Conference on Barack Obama's Missing Birth Certificate and College Records". The conference turned out to be Mr. Martin talking before 4-6 people in a hotel room in Washington, DC. He outlined his conspiracy theory on President Obama and the State of Hawaii. He announced a boycott of Hawaii and it was over.

Mr. Martin was not a part of the contract between ADR Productions and the client. After ADR Productions fulfilled the contract obligations with the client, Mr. Martin requested that the video footage be edited further to his likings. ADR Production refused to contract with Mr. Martin to work on his project.

Now, keep in mind that the production company owns "Intellectual Property Rights" to anything they film and the original contract was not with Mr. Martin.

Mr. Martin would not take a hint when his calls and e-mails kept going unanswered by ADR. He then started threatening the company with frivolous lawsuits and complaints with the BBB and Consumer Protection. He claims he is the owner of the tapes in question. ADR Productions had no choice but to send a registered letter to Mr. Martin asking him to leave them alone. The owner of the company then had to file a "Peace Order" against Mr. Martin. This is when it got crazy.

Mr. Martin was so upset that he was refused services and issued a peace order that he went off the deep end with a concocted story about how he owned this video footage and it was stolen by the owner of ADR. He claims that the owner of ADR Productions, it’s client, the judge who issued the protective order and the Washington Post, (for covering the story), are all Obama Operatives and now Mark Kirk Operatives working to destroy his run at the Illinois senate in 2010. This reads like a Robert Ludlum book.

This is strictly Mr. Martins way of drawing attention to himself in a time where he is feeling neglected by the world around him. Don’t forget, only 4-6 people showed up to hear his so-called “National Conference”. I would feel neglected too.

The bottom line…Martin has proven he is not playing with all 52 cards in the deck. The tapes are just ramblings of a “mad man” and the tapes belong to the production company which has a great reputation among it’s customers and the Washington Metropolitan area. It was just unfortunate that ADR Productions got involved in the project from the start.

This story really is not as sensational as Mr. Martin would like it to be. I do believe the readers of this information are smart enough to figure out fact from fiction among all of Mr. Martin’s writings and ramblings.

God Bless America.

Court Orders Andy Martin To Stop Harassing ADR Productions. A Court Battle He Couldn't Win!

2009-08-25T19:06:00.000-07:00

On August 24, 2009 in a Montgomery County, Maryland courtroom, Judge Simmons order Andy Martin to not have any contact with ADR Productions and the company owner, Scott Shirley due to "clear and convincing evidence...the Respondent (Mr. Martin) committed the following act: Harassment."

As we know, the loss in court makes Mr. Martin very upset. He was actually stupid enough to criticize the court prior to the hearing. Would you expect less from a man who has had an unfavorable psychiatric evaluation?

Mr. Martin actually believes that Mr. Shirley, Montgomery County and Judge McCally, who issued the original order, have conspired with President Obama and what Mr. Martin calls "Obama Operatives" to destroy his dreamed up run for senate in Illinois. Guess what Andy? You have been running since 1976 and you have NEVER won. You couldn't win class clown if you tried.

The good news is Mr. Martin did not get locked up so we won't have to worry about him walking around naked and staging hunger strikes like he did the last time he was locked up. Ewwww, the vision I just got.

As you have probably guessed, Andy wants to sue everyone involved including the guy that empties the trash at night in the courthouse. They are all "Obama Operatives". Yeah right. I'm sure the people of Maryland are really concerned about his candidacy so much that they are spying on him and reporting back to President Obama on a shoephone or shortwave radio watch.

Don't get me wrong, Mr. Martin can sound eliquent when his listeners are drunk. But seriously, drunks have better things to do, don't they? Just check out this video we came across of Mr. Martin at his so-called National Conference on Barack Obama's Missing Birth Certificate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLq0rP4QXWE, then decide how well he speaks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Martin_(U.S._politician)

2009-08-18T08:29:00.001-07:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Martin_(U.S._politician)

Protective Order Against Andy Martin

2009-08-17T11:28:00.000-07:00

It seems our sources are correct when they indicated Mr. Martin has been instructed by Maryland courts to stop harassing a production company there. On August 24, 2009, Mr. Martin will appear before the Maryland District Court in Montgomery County to answer to harassment charges. Our sources indicate Mr. Martin has already sealed his fate by accusing Judge McCally of being an Obama operative and trying to bring down his senate run. This seems like hot air since Mr. Martin has not even registered with the Illinois RNC as a candidate.

Andy Martin's Silence

2009-08-13T18:31:00.001-07:00

All is quiet on the Andy Martin front. He seems to be licking his wounds for now as he ponders his fate among the sane. Rumor has it that he will be in Maryland soon to face charges of harassment. If this is true, we will find out and give you full details.

Andy Martin Digs Hole for Himself.

2009-08-12T12:55:00.000-07:00

Mr. Martin has taken his conspiracy theories to a new level and completely discredited himself as evidenced by his letter to Eric Holder at the Dept. of Justice (see yesterday's post). No one here is taking Mr. Martin serious about his fiction spun stories which seem to come straight from a Robert Ludlum novel. The title of such a book would most likely be "The Martin Conspiracy".

The sad part about Mr. Martin is the fact that he actually believes his stories are true. He ends up wasting a great deal of our State and Federal resources on his demented ideas and law suits. In 12 days Martin will go before the Judge which he made the following statement about "Judge McCally is either professionally incompetent as a judge, in that she signs serious court orders which are facially bogus, or she is a political hatchet operator who is acting in concert and conspiracy with Shirley and his Obama-related operatives. No sensible judge would act the way she did." We will keep you updated on how this turns out.

You have to feel bad for a man who is slowly spinning down the toilet bowl.

Andy Martin's Letter to Eric Holder

2009-08-11T20:27:00.000-07:00

Below is a letter that Mr. Martin sent to the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder on August 10, 2009. It clearly shows that Andy Martin has completely lost all his marbles.

"Dear General Holder and SAC Grant:

I believe my campaign for the U. S. Senate has become the target of criminal activity by supporters of President Barack Obama. That is not to say Mr. Obama himself is aware of the activity of his agents or supporters.

In order to alert you to the dirty tricks operation which is being conducted against me, and the latest acts of harassment and intimidation, I am formally filing a complaint with your offices and asking than an investigation be initiated. The actions of Judge Cheryl McCally appear outrageous. She issued a “peace order” because I filed a complaint against a dishonest business with the better business bureau. Judge McCally’s behavior is suspect.

Maryland state courts have no personal jurisdiction over me. I have not set foot in the state in decades.

The U. S. Attorney General, of course, is a political associate and appointee of the president. Therefore because the following facts invoke memories of Watergate-style dirty tricks, I wanted the highest levels of the Department of Justice to be alerted to what was transpiring at the lower reaches of President Obama’s political apparatus.

1. The applicable criminal law

Title 18, § 245 (b) “Whoever, whether or not acting under color of lawor interferes with, or attempts to inure, intimidate or interfere with- (1) (A) campaigning as a candidate for elective office��

2. Background facts – 2008

During the recently-concluded presidential campaign, Barack Obama’s campaign leaders determined that my activity posed a threat to his election. Obama supporters accused me of being at the center of a “vast right-wing conspiracy and I probably cost Obama millions of votes by relentlessly publicizing the facts, or rather the missing facts and false facts, about his past.

My book “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” generated great controversy and my writing because the basis for books by other authors as well.

The Obama campaign then began a campaign of harassment and intimidation. In particular, Robert Gibbs appeared on Fox News to smear me with false accusations of racism based on a judicial proceeding which was over a quarter of a century old and which had no relationship to the 2008 presidential campaign.

In addition, I believe that Obama supporters also published a false “biography” of me on a web site. We are planning litigation to determine who was behind the bogus biography.

I have continued to actively oppose President Obama’s policies, as well as continued to shed light on his birth origins and links to organized crime figures in Chicago.

3. Current facts related to this criminal complaint

a. In April, I convened a conference at the Capitol Hilton in Washington, DC on Barack Obama’s missing birth certificate and educational records. The conference has a separate blog:
nationalconferenceonobama.blogspot.com/

b. Prior to the conference I was contacted by a person who identifies himself as John Borlaza, but who apparently is fact John Gilchrist B/G, 3305 Peoria Avenue, Beggs, OK 74421. B/G asked if anyone was going to tape the conference. I said no and authorized Mr. Borlaza/Gilchrest to look for a taping service at his expense. B/G located Scott Shirley of ADR Productions in Rockville.

c. It was understood at all times, as the documents confirm, that I was the copyright owner of the conference material. Mr. B/G was making payment, but I was the intended third party beneficiary of the agreement for payment between Shirley and B/G.

d. I met Mr. Shirley at my conference and his firm taped the two days of proceedings. Our interaction could not have been more pleasant. Mr. Shirley noted that he was one of the “few people” who could have taped the sessions, because his sympathies were (I’m not sure exactly what words he used) neutral to conservative.

e. After the conference ended, Mr. Shirley prepared a “trailer” or prevue of the conference, indicating that more of the conference was coming. The trailer was a very creative work and I was favorably impressed. Mr. Shirley has since removed this trailer from the Internet. Approximately 3,000 persons viewed the trailer. Mr. Shirley clearly identified me as the copyright owner in his material. (If someone sees this letter and has downloaded the trailer from the YouTube video, perhaps they will provide a copy of the trailer to me, and I will provide it Holder and Grant.)

f. Mr. Shirley and Mr. Borlaza asked me to provide “edits” of the conference so the final version of the meetings could be prepared for posting on the Internet. Mr. Shirley sent me a watermarked copy of the original materials; I prepared the edits and sent them to him at the beginning of May.

g. Because I was impressed with Mr. Shirley’s creativity in preparing the trailer, I asked him if he would be interested in editing a video movie which we were gong to shoot in Hawai’i. Mr. Shirley said he was interested and I should send my tapes to him, which I did on my return from Hawai’i in mid-May. (The Hawai’i tapes were returned at the end of July after my complaints.)

h. I heard nothing further from Shirley for a month, so I sent him an e-mail, to which he did not respond. I also called him in mid-June, asking about his progress on both projects. He told me he would be done with the Hawai’i project in “about a week and I said “fine He said he would then complete the Washington conference and I asked him to do so as soon as possible. Once again, our conversation could not have been more pleasant, and I had no reason to suspect Shirley was engaged in a conspiracy seeking to defeat my copyright rights.

i. During July the “Obama birth certificate” issue exploded in the nation’s media, and Mr. Shirley was still silent. I did not hear from him about either the Hawai’i or Washington projects. I began to contact him by phone and e-mail because his fax machine does not work. Mr. Shirley did not respond.

j. When Mr. Shirley refused to respond, I filed complaints with the Washington, DC Better Business Bureau, as well as the Montgomery County Office of Consumer Protection (see enclosed).

k. In response, Mr. Shirley replied to the BBB (as of today I have not yet seen a response to the Montgomery County complaint) and said he was willing to sell me the original tapes. I responded to the BBB, and also contacted Mr. Shirley.

l. On Friday, August 7th I received a bizarre Express Mail communication from Shirley telling me not to contact him and attacking me because of my criticism of the president. Mr. Shirley or someone behind him was seeking to convert a simple business transaction into a political dispute. Unfortunately, I apparently neglected to file this letter when I left town, but I will provide it to you when I get back to my principal office. The letter was bizarre.

It became apparent to me that Mr. Shirley was no longer engaged in a simple commercial transaction, but had joined forces with Obama agents to misappropriate my copyrighted material. He is actively obstructing my use of the conference records in interstate commerce and as part of my political campaign.

m. Saturday, August 8th at about 4:15 P.M. a Cook
County Deputy Sheriff appeared at my door, forced her way in, and served me with a Maryland Court order signed by Judge Cheryl Ann McCally. A copy of Judge McCally’s bizarre documents accompany this letter. Shirley committed a criminal act in the Maryland courts when he falsely attested that he claimed he was in “reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death (See attached). This was a perjurious claim, since other than threatening Mr. Shirley with legal process, I have never threatened him personally in any manner.

n. What is interesting is that in his detailed
reply to the BBB, Mr. Shirley never mentioned any threats from me, and certainly no threats amounting to a “reasonable fear of serious injury or death He concocted these claims for Judge McCally. This perjurious claim was concocted in order to procure the issuance of a bogus court order from Judge McCally, and to harass and intimidate me and disrupt my campaign for the U. S. Senate. I have had to put my campaign on hold while I respond to McCally’s bogus order.

o. I will be filing a civil lawsuit against McCally, Montgomery County, Shirley and Gilchrist, as well as Obama’s “John Does” who are now manipulating Shirley. Shirley is acting in a manner that reflects he is obviously being manipulated or controlled by unidentified persons. Either they went to Shirley to buy my tapes to obstruct my copyright, or he went out trying to resell my tapes to Obama sources. Either explanation constitutes criminal interference with my intellectual property. I do not know who is involved.

Outrageously, Judge McCally gave me two business days to disrupt my campaign, leave Chicago and appear in her court. This is intentional harassment by a judge whose impartiality and integrity are now subject to serious question.

p. Mr. Borlaza/Gilchrist made clear at all times that I was the owner of the copyright and, ultimately, of the tapes which contained my copyrighted material. I have not heard from B/G for a couple of months. He appears to be an increasingly suspicious presence and may in fact be an Obama operative or supporter. I don’t know.

q. Judge McCally ordered me to suspend my
campaign, leave Chicago and appear in her courtroom with two days notice. This is a significant interference with my campaign. Judge McCally is either professionally incompetent as a judge, in that she signs serious court orders which are facially bogus, or she is a political hatchet operator who is acting in concert and conspiracy with Shirley and his Obama-related operatives. No sensible judge would act the way she did.

r. Because Mr. Shirley’s accusations were patently false and perjurious, he committed a criminal act in the Montgomery County District Court. I am contacting the prosecutor’s office to proffer charges.

4. Request for federal criminal investigation

a. Barrack Obama and is supporters are not going to be allowed to use the federal and state judicial machinery as part his plan to harass his political opponents, either directly or indirectly through the use of fronts such as Shirley.

The idea that Obama operatives have conspired to essentially take control of a person such as Mr. Shirley, and to seek to obstruct my access to my intellectual property, all of which related to Obama’s missing birth certificate, is as close to a Watergate-style conspiracy as I have seen in a long time.

I bear the president no ill will, but I am a political opponent who is a candidate for his former senate seat. The idea that he is taking people like Shirley and using them to harass me with perjurious accusations is a federal criminal matter.

As I indicated at the beginning of this letter, Obama himself may be unaware of the actions of his operatives. But he is responsible for their conduct. This latest episode comes as a part of a continuing pattern of dirty tricks by Obama’s associates directed against me personally, and my professional and political activity.

I therefore ask that you open a criminal investigation, and appoint either the Northern District of Illinois or District of Maryland to conduct a criminal investigation of Shirley, Judge McCally and their associates.

I also ask to be called before one of the grand juries sitting in one of those districts to testify about the facts of this episode.

Please feel free to contact me for further information as it becomes available.

Respectfully submitted,

ANDY MARTIN"

You make the call as to how sane Mr. Martin is.

President Obama or Andy Martin???

2009-08-11T09:38:00.000-07:00

As you know, Andy Martin is on a personal path of destruction to try and discredit our President of the United States, Barack Obama. Mr. Martin has no basis for all the claims he has made against the President and should never be taken seriously. Mr. Martin's delusions are exactly that...DELUSIONS. I would be careful as to what type of books Mr. Martin checks out of the library.

Any internet check on Mr. Martin leads right back to his mental status as a crack-pot who wants the spotlight put on himself but it never turns out to reflect on him in a positive manner. You don't have to be smarter than a 5th grader to figure this out!

Do yourself a favor and avoid feeding into his sick demented mind which only feeds his mental illness as demonstrated in his actions over the past 30+ years.

Andy Martin for Senate 2010 (No Way)

2009-08-07T12:00:00.000-07:00

Write or call Andy Martin and let him know he is a fraud and crazy man. If you don't know who he is you're lucky. Let the truth be known, he is just short of being committed to a mental institution. Check out this bit of information on him. Note the crazy things he has done. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Martin_(U.S._politician) . ...more to come.

Look for the next blog on how Andy tries to bring down a small business because they did not want to do business with him. Who Would?

2009-08-07T10:53:00.000-07:00

Andy Martin (A.K.A Anthony Robert Martin-Trigona) believes the world is out to get him. More later.