KATHLEEN KANE WAS RIGHT - Judge Paul K. Allison Letter of May 8, 2007

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE - CORRUPTION BY PUBLIC OFFICIAL - JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT - EXTORTION - KATHLEEN KANE WAS RIGHT!
amgroup01@msn.com
717.427-1621 Fax
Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant

Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
May 8, 2007
Attorneys for Mr. Donald Totaro
Attorneys for the Lancaster County Commissioners
Lancaster County Assistance Office
Lancaster County Sheriffs Department
Christine E. Munion, Esquire
FRANCIS R. GARTNER & ASSOCIATES
100 West Elm Street, Suite 200
Conshohocken, PA 19428
Phone (610) 397-4600
FAX (610) 397-4629
Direct Dial 610-397-4620
mailto:cmunion@travelers.com
RE:
Caterbone v. Totaro, et al.

CCP Lancaster County, No. CI-07-00366
Our File No. 0861963
Claim No. CDL7646
Dear Ms. Munion:

I am quite confused as to your motive and your professional qualifications. You need to
understand my situation so that you will find my outrage at your recent court filing consistent with
the truth.
Let me put this into context. Instead of me finishing my billings for my Pro Se Litigation
Accounting Ledgers, I must write you this letter so that I dont loose my mind. You see, I won 4
summary appeals in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County last week. That brings my
total to 21 criminal charges in Lancaster County that I have reversed. Since all of the fines and
costs are also now reversed and erased, I am going to complete my associated court costs and start
billing Lancaster County.
Of course, it is plain to see that if you constructed a time line of events, the criminal charges
were only fabricated to intimidate me and disrupt the many civil actions that I have filed, or were in
the process of filing. That includes a Federal False Claims Act violation, or a Whistle-Blowers action.
I can prove in the Courts, that I was a Whistle-Blower in 1987 with my information of fraud within
International Signal & Control, PLC. And I was a shareholder whom met with an ISC executive that
wanted me to consider financial proposals for my company Financial Management Group, Ltd., Now
of course, it is well documented that the fraud was recorded at around $1 Billion Dollars, and the
Whistle-Blowers Act contains provisions for considerations to range from 10 to 25 percent for me to
claim.
And of course, now I have 21 false arrests and malicious prosecutions to consider, since I
have the proceedings ending in the favor with no convictions. I believe that I can prove the other 3
items to clear the threshold for a legitimate cause of action.
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page 1 of 13
05.08.2007
I am also in the midst of finishing my claim for stolen property with Harleysville Insurance
Company for items stolen from my property at 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, Pennsylvania. All
that is required is a list of the cost and replacement values. After much research, that claim is
expected to be approximately $7,000.00 (Seven Thousand Dollars) or more.
I have my Petition to Set Aside the Sale of Real Estate being considered in the Supreme
Court of Pennsylvania and the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. I am challenging the Sheriffs Sale
because the Judgment and Foreclosure was before the Superior Court at the time of sale, and I was
illegally incarcerated in the Lancaster County Prison.
I might add that I was never served with an eviction notice, which is required by law. Oh, by
the way, when I was almost cited for trespassing on January 4, 2007, that property was still
technically my property.
Now, let me address the issue of intellectual property rights and legalities. I am in the Courts
proving that I was making the first digital movie in 1987. I am in the Courts proving that I
founded a financial firm, Financial Management Group, Ltd., that operated in as many as seven (7)
states, and was one of the most progressive in the Mid Atlantic Region with a worth of more than $4
million in 1987. I am also proving that I had developed a commercial lending business that had the
potential of a revenue stream of hundreds of thousands of dollars on an annual basis. Of course, the
banking community of Lancaster County did what they could, legal or not, to destroy that business
because I could offer cheaper mortgages.
I must also finish my appeal the Commonwealth Court of Common Pleas for my
Administrative Adjudication for Food Stamps. For Gods sake, I had policemen rob me of $743.00 in
April of 2006 during an illegal arrest.
And you want to file a Judgment against me to collect legal fees because you think the
following case is frivolous. The attached article will teach you what frivolous is all about.
AND NOW on this 16th, day of 2007, I, Stanley J. Caterbone, Plaintiff, AND Pro Se Litigant, do hereby
file before the Court an Emergency Injunction for relief against the Defendants that have conspired to Obstruct
Justice, Deny the Plaintiff of Due Process, deny his Right to Access the Courts, deny his Right to pursue United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Civil Action Case Nos. 05-2288 and 06-4734; deny
his Right to pursue Civil Complaints in the Commonwealth Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania Case No.s: CI-06-07330; CI-06-08742; CI-06-08490; CI-06-07376; CI-06-07188; CI-06-06658;
CI-06-04939; CI-06-03403; CI-06-03401; CI-06-03349, AND Superior Court Cases 1461 MDA 2006; 1462 MDA
2006; and 1463 MDA 2006.
The Defendants have conspired to falsely imprison the Plaintiff in order to execute many of these
violations.
The Defendants have committed fraud, embezzlement, and theft of the Plaintiffs Real Property,
Personal Possessions, Business Assets of Advanced Media Group, 1991 Doge Truck, and Distribution Funds in
the Foreclosure and Sheriff Sale of 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, Pennsylvania.
The Defendants have also conspired to deprive the Plaintiff of Food Stamps and a Monthly Pass for Red
Rose Transit Authority, thus leaving the Plaintiff without food and transportation. The Plaintiff is at extreme risk
of attending Hearings and Court Mandated Meetings, which may result in violations of the Plaintiffs Conditions
of the Bail Supervision Agreements, thus providing a means to re-incarcerate the Plaintiff in the Lancaster
County Prison.
The Civil Conspiracy by and of itself has been a vast campaign to defame, libel, and slander the Plaintiff
and the Advanced Media Group. Prosecutorial Misconduct and False Statement to Authorities are abundant.
Page 2 of 13
05.08.2007
The Plaintiff has and continues to experience irreparable harm in the Continuation of Criminal
Preceedings; while key evidentiary materials were stolen and are missing, and Motions for Continuances are
DENIED. The Plaintiff is malnourished, indigent, and unable to pay for postage to communicate with the Courts.
the Sheriffs Office abused its Power and Discretion in withholding Distribution Funds without any Court
Mandates or Orders.
The Plaintiff seeks all available financial remedy, and redress in accordance with state and federal statutes as
prescribed by law, and requests the Court to Continue ALL Criminal Hearings and Trials until further notice.
COMPLAINT
JULY OF 2006
July 23rd, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF speaks with Governor Ed Rendell at a Campaign Speech at Binns Park, in
Downtown Lancaster, and requests his assistance in his Civil Rights Obstruction of
Justice Complaint filed a few weeks earlier in the Office of Attorney General.
OCTOBER OF 2006
October 14th, 2006:

o
PLAINTIFF files a RICO complaint in the United States District Court against Shawn Long,
attorney for Fulton Bank, MDJ Leo Eckert, Commins, Simms, Case No. 4650.
October 17th, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF attends a Bail Supervision (of the Lancaster County Sheriffs Department) Intake
meeting at the Bail Administrators Office in the Lancaster County Courthouse
o PLAINTIFF serves the Lancaster County Sheriffs Department, the Lancaster County District
Attorneys Office, and the Lancaster County Public Defenders Office Civil Actions.
o The Lancaster County Public Defenders Office literally took the Certificate of Service signing
sheet from PLAINTIFF and PLAINTIFF immediately told Judge Joseph Madenspacher about the
incident while he walked to the Bus Terminal to go the Office of MDJ Commins. The document
was never returned even after several emails to the contrary by the Public Defender, Mr. Karl.
October 20th, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF files a Federal False Claims Act for Whistle-Blowing against ISC in the United States
District Court For The Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Case No. 06-4734.
October 26th, 2006:

o The Pennsylvania Superior Court received a Brief for the Appeal Challenging the Fulton Bank
Judgment of June 29, 2006.
October 30th, 2006:

o The Pennsylvania Superior Court sends a letter to PLAINTIFF requesting (7) more copies of the
brief, which PLAINTIFF will not receive until January 4th, 2007.
o An amended complaint to PLAINTIFFs Southern Regional Police Department Civil Action, Case
No. 06-3401, is due in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County on exactly this date.
o An Unsecured Bail Bond was revoked by Officer Adam Cramer of the Southern Regional Police
Department and (2) Bench Warrants were issued for the Arrest of PLAINTIFF by Adam Cramer
of the Southern Regional Police Department and MDJ Leo Eckert, Jr..
Page 3 of 13
05.08.2007
o
o
PLAINTIFF filed the Amended Complaint and mailed it from the Bausman Post Office Substation,
and did not go to the Lancaster County Courthouse in fear it would not get filed.
At 2:20pm (2) PA Constable arrest and apprehend the PLAINTIFF at 1250 Fremont Street,
Lancaster, PA, and take him to Magisterial District Justice Eckerts Office on the (5) Bench
warrants for summary citations and then COMMIT The PLAINTIFF to the Lancaster County
Prison, stating that an Indigent Hearing will be held within 10 days, and challenges the
PLAINTIFFS Indigent status and his Superior Court Cases. Magisterial District Justice Eckert
complains to the PLAINTIFF about being named a Defendant in Federal Case No. 06-4650, and
remarks that the PLAINTIFF may have to be taken to Dauphin County Prison for suing all of the
District Justices in Lancaster County. He also said You are not even close to getting to
the Superior Court.
NOVMEBER OF 2006
November 1st, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF appears before Judge Paul K. Allison who reinstates his Bail Bond as Secured, which
required PLAINTIFF to post $5,000 to get out of the Lancaster County Prison instead of just
signing an Unsecured Bail Bond, which should have happened, and is not released from the
Lancaster County Prison, as expected.
November 6th, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF files his first Appeal for Reconsideration to the ORDER of Judge Paul K. Allison to
Reinstate the Bail Bond as Unsecured, and Release him from Lancaster County Prison.
November 8th, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF is transported to Magisterial District Justice Leo H. Eckert, Jr., and signs a document
that was missed on October 30th, 2006, and is not given an Indigent Hearing as promised.
November 20th, 2006:

o The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania records 28 U. S. C.
2241 Habeas Corpus Petition Case No. 06-5138 (Challenging the Detainer and Imprisonment)
filed from the Lancaster County Prison on November 14th, 2006. This case is still pending.
November 30th, 2006:

o Judge Paul K. Allison Denies PLAINTIFFs Appeal to Reinstate Bail as Unsecured
DECEMBER OF 2006
December 2nd, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF files an Appeal to Judge Paul K. Allison ORDER of November 30th, 2006.
December 4th, 2006:

o the Lancaster County Sheriffs Department is ORDERED to transport PLAINTIFF to both
residences, 1250 Fremont Street, and 220 Stone Hill Road to obtain files and evidence for a
Trial, as a Pro Se Litigant and representing himself on the East Lampeter Township summary
citations. There were no Sheriff Sale Posting on 220 Stone Hill Road, and both residences look
fine
December 5th, 2006:

o The Lancaster Intelligencer Journal publishes the Story The Next Sound You Hear regarding
former business partner Tony Bongiovi, which is central to all of the litigation in the United
States District Courts. The worlds of pro audio and consumer electronics were bridged at New
York City's Avatar Studios in December, where Bongiovi Acoustics unveiled the Digital Power
Station car radio. Demonstrated by audio icon Tony Bongiovi (pictured) in Avatars Studio A
(former Power Station Studios), the patent-pending technology being manufactured by JVC
made a very impressive debut.
December 6th, 2006:

o Honda Financial repossess a Honda Odyssey stored at the St. Dennis Towing Companys facility
from August 31, 2006; the Honda was take because of the illegal repossession of the drivers
license and there were no funds available for the tow that was just a few blocks away. The
Honda was protected under the pending Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Petition and was conveniently
taken while incarcerated. The PLAINTIFF had talked to Honda Financial in August and there was
Page 4 of 13
05.08.2007
no problem with the lease, even though the PLAINTIFF had not made a payment since May of
2005. The St. Dennis Towing Company was charging $25.00 per day, and has never filed or
sent the PLAINTIFF an invoice for the storage, which is very suspect.
December 8th, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF files a Writ of Mandamus against Magisterial District Justice Leo H. Eckert, Jr, and
Mary Commins for the fraudulent activities leading to the false imprisonment of October 30th,
2006, and Bench Warrants.
December 12th, 2006:

o PLAINTIFF files for Continuances in all of the following Civil Complaints in the Commonwealth
Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania: CI-06-07330; CI-06-08742; CI-0608490; CI-06-07376; CI-06-07188; CI-06-06658; CI-06-04939; CI-06-03403; CI-06-03401;
CI-06-03349.

o The Lancaster County Sheriffs Department (Maluskus) and Chief John Fiorill tried to get
PLAINTIFF to change his address to the Lancaster County Prison and Judge Perezous refused to
get ORDER PLAINTIFF to comply with the demand and Judge Perezous CONTINUED the Appeal
Hearing because PLAINTIFF did not have any files to conduct a Trial.

o The Lancaster County Sheriffs Department (Hiem & N/A-names given by Sheriff Simone)
refused PLAINTIFF to wear his suit into the courtroom, or take his files into the Pre-Trial
Conference before Judge Farina, which caused PLAINTIFF to forget to discuss material motions
for the Trial, and caused the PLAINTIFF to be defamed by appearing in a Lancaster County
Prison uniform before the Court and in front of 20 or so other people in the Courtroom.
o On December 20th, 2006, while in the Lancaster County Prison, the Lancaster County Sheriffs
Department and Fulton Bank conduct a Sheriff Sale for 220 Stone Hill Road, Foreclosure CI-0602271, with NO notification before or after the SALE to PLAINTIFF; and sold the property to
Central Penn Settlement Company of Akron, Pennsylvania.

o Judge Paul K. Allison overturned his previous ORDER and Granted PLAINTIFF his Appeal ORDER
and signed the Unsecured Bail ORDER and the RELEASE from Lancaster County Prison.

o PLAINTIFF is RELEASED from Lancaster County Prison, and walks to the Lancaster County
Courthouse to report to Court Administration and the Prothonotary Office to get a print out of all
of the Civil Dockets for all cases in Civil Court, including the Fulton Bank Foreclosure and finds
out for the first time that the Sheriff Sale on December 20th took place.
o PLAINTIFF retrieves a check for $19.34 from Attillio Grossi, which is all the funds has available
for food, and all other necessities.
JANUARY OF 2007
January 2, 2007:
o PLAINTIFF files and records (4:09pm) a Petition To Set Aside Sale for 220 Stone Hill Road,
Conestoga in the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County and personally
serves Fulton Bank and the Lancaster County Sheriffs Department.
January 4th, 2007:

o At 1:15pm PLAINTIFF visits 220 Stone Hill Road and finds 2 unidentified individuals on his
property loading the entire contents of 220 Stone Hill Road onto 2 Penske moving trucks, to an
unidentified location, and is ordered off the Property for Trespassing. The 2 individuals said
they were from Noble Real Estate Company. Mr. Joseph Caterbone accompanied him as a
witness and driver. PLAINTIFF takes several pictures of the individuals and the Penske Trucks.
o At 1:35pm PLAINTIFF retrieves his mail from the Conestoga Post Office from dating back to
October 25th, 2006 up to the present and temporarily forwards mail to 1250 Fremont Street,
Lancaster, PA.
o PLAINTIFF visits the Lancaster County Sheriffs Office and speaks to Lt. Lancaster and Mr.
Bergman about the incident at 220 Stone Hill Road and is told that Southern Regional Police
have already responded, and would not give any information about the incident.
Page 5 of 13
05.08.2007
At 3:00pm PLAINTIFF attends the Trial for Criminal Case No. CP-36-CR-0003179-2006 (Fleeing
& Eluding filed by Sgt. Busser of Southern Regional Police Department on April 5th, 2006) in
Courtroom 1 of the Lancaster County Courthouse and moves for a Motion for a Continuance due
to the incident at the property at 220 Stone Hill Road an hour before. The Honorable Judge
James P. Cullen Denies his Motion.
January 5th, 2007:

o At 8:30am PLAINTIFF files and records an Addendum to the Petition To Set Aside Sale for 220
Stone Hill Road, Conestoga in the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County and
personally serves Fulton Bank and the Lancaster County Sheriffs Department regarding the
theft of all of his personal possessions, including business files of Advanced Media Group, and all
Legal files and evidentiary assets for all pending litigation.
o At 9:00 am the Lancaster County District Attorney Deborah Muzereus moves for A Continuance
in the Trial for Criminal Case No. CP-36-CR-0003179-2006 and the Honorable James P. Cullen
Grants a Continuance until the February Trial Schedule.
January 7th , 2007:

o PLAINTIFF files a claim with Harleysville Insurance Homeowners Policy HOAI 93468 for the theft
of his personal possessions and the property at Stone Hill Road.
o PLAINTIFF files for a Change of Venue for the Hearing scheduled for January 18th, 2007 in
Intercourse before Magisterial District Justice Leo H. Eckert, Jr.. PLAINTIFF does not have all
of his evidentiary files and no transportation because of the illegal revocation of his Red
Rose Transit Authority Monthly Bus Pass.
January 8th, 2007:

o PLAINTIFF files an Emergency Petition for Food Stamps and other in the Pennsylvania Court of
Common Pleas of Lancaster after his Food Stamps and Red Rose Transit Authority Monthly Pass
was illegally terminated, thus leaving him without food and transportation for all court
preceding.
o PLAINTIFF files for a Continuance for Summary charges by District Justice Leo H. Eckert Jr., a
Defendant in U.S. District Civil Action 06-4650, scheduled for January 18th, 2007., again for not
having access to all of his evidentiary files and without transportation.
o PLAINTIFF files and sends his Brief to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 1463 MDA
2006 for the challenge to Fulton Banks 220 Stone Hill Road Foreclosure, via U.S. Postal Priority
Mail Return Receipt No. 0306 2400 003 1072 4451; the request stated: Other - We need 7
copies of this brief, also all copies need to be bound on the left like a book and if you use
staples they must be covered with tape.
o PLAINTIFF borrows $50.00 from Joseph Caterbone for food, paper, and postage for the Superior
Court Brief.
January 9th, 2007:
o PLAINTIFF files for Continuance in all of his pending Civil Actions before the United States
District Courts for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; 05-2288; 06-4650; 06-5138; 06-4734;
06-CV-4154; 06-5117; 06-2236; 05-23059BKY.
o PLAINTIFF files for a Change of Venue and Continuance for Summary Citations (TR-00087352006; TR-0008578-2006; TR-0008721-2006; TR-0008503-2006; TR-0007528-2006) Scheduled
for a Hearing on January 23, 2007 before District Magistrate Richard H. Simms, a Defendant in
U.S. District Civil Action 06-4650.
o PLAINTIFF receives a Notice to Change the Hearing Scheduled for January 18th, 2007 from
Magisterial District Justice Leo H. Eckert, Jr. to Isaac Stoltzfus of Intercourse.
o PLAINTIFF Petitions the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County to vacate the
Bail Supervision Ordered by Magisterial District Justice Mary Commins on October 10th, 2006.
The Bail Supervision was without merit or cause.
January 10th, 2007:
o PLAINTIFF reports a theft of the Digital Recorder used containing an authentic and original audio
recording of the incident for the Case No. CP-36-CR-0003179-2006 (Fleeing & Eluding filed by
Sgt. Busser of Southern Regional Police Department on April 5th, 2006) to Officer Cole of the
Lancaster City Police Department who responded at approximately 10:25pm to 1250 Fremont
Street and filed the incident as Case No. 0701-014878.
Page 6 of 13
05.08.2007
January 11th, 2007:

o The Honorable Judge James P. Cullen Orders PLAINTIFFs Petition to vacate the Bail Supervision
as Denied Case No. 4771-2006.
o PLAINTIFF writes the following in an email to the Red Rose Transit Authority: I am having a
problem with my monthly passes. I have not received my January Monthly Pass, and my
forwarded mail has not been received from 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga. Today, your
driver Dave on the 3 8th Ward/Park City 8:35 bus made me pay him for the fare. Some
drivers let me on with my December Pass and my Letter of Acceptance from September of
2006. I never received a termination letter, and on January 5th, filed an Emergency
Petition against the Lancaster County Assistance Office to have all benefits that have been
terminated, reinstated. What is the status of my Monthly Pass? Below is an excerpt from
the Civil Action, Case No. CI-07-00150 in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster
County, Pennsylvania. The Petitioner has not received his January Red Rose Transit
Authority January Monthly Bus Pass, sponsored by the RRTA and the Lancaster County
Assistance Office. The Petitioner did receive his December Monthly Bus Pass, and
complained to the Red Rose Transit Authority Terminal Station on Queen Street,
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, on January 5th,2007. The staff worker told the Petitioner that his
Monthly Pass was deleted because he was incarcerated. The Petitioner explained that
the Red Rose Transit Authority Monthly Bus Pass was issued for a (2) year period. The
incarceration was not valid and I was released upon the Success of my Appeal, which was
signed by the Honorable Judge Paul K. Allison on December 28th, 2007.
o The PLAINTIFF, in the Pre-Trial Conference moves for a Continuance for 0004771-2006 before
Judge Ashworth and it is GRANTED.
January 12th, 2007:

o PLAINTIFF receives the following
email from Ms. Gail Parenteau, of Bongiovi Acoustics:

What is Advanced Media Group? It is our policy not to open unsolicited attachments.
What's your tel. no. I've been with Tony since 1986 and neither of us remembers what this
is. I've highlighted your type-os in red below.
o PLAINTIFF responds with the following email to Ms. Gail Parenteau: I (Financial
Management Group, Ltd.,) was at Power Station from February until July in 1987 working
extensively with Tony, Ellen, and all of the Producers from Flatbush Films in Hollywood.
Tony named me Executive Producer of the project, and that is in the budgets. Now, are you
really associated with Tony, or are you covering for someone? I have still photos, audio
recorded meetings with Bob Walters (Co-Owner of Power Station Studios), business plans
for "Mutant Mania", Tony's Digital Movie, with budgets, screenplays, joint venture
agreements, Patent and Copyright materials for Power Station Studios and Tony. I also
have documents for the Pier in Wildwood, which Tony owned. I personally authored many
of these materials with Tony, at his request. I spent many days and nights working at
Power Station on this project. I had a Navajo Chieftain twin turbo prop that I flew to
Power Station for some of my meetings, the other times me and Scott Robertson drove. I
even have another management consulting proposal that I developed for Tony in 1989,
when he wanted me to restructure Power Station from top to bottom. If, you were not privy
to these projects, then maybe you should at least talk to Tony. I was just providing a
professional courtesy to Tony, especially, since I have admitted many documents
pertaining to my claims in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania. Tony is not a Defendant in my claims. I have authored a Joint Venture
Proposal for Sony, which details the Power Station Digital Music System, and I have
noticed what Tony is doing. I will not call, for security reasons, I cannot tell who is on the
other end. You can have a legal representative or Tony forward correspondence to:
PLAINTIFF, 1250 Fremont Street, Lancaster, PA 17603.
January 13th, 2007:
Page 7 of 13
05.08.2007
o
o
PLAINTIFF visits the Red Rose Transit Authority Terminal at Queen Street again attempting to
get his January Monthly Bus Pass, which he thinks is missing in the mail.
PLAINTIFF borrows $20.00 from Richard Hobday, for food, postage, and paper; and ride home
from the Lancaster County Courthouse.
PLAINTIFF receives a letter and a Distribution Schedule from the Lancaster County Sheriffs
Office that states: On December 20,2007 your property located at 220 Stone Hill Rd. was sold
at Sheriff Sale to a third party buyer, Central Penn Property Services, Inc. for $156,000.00.
Attached, you will find a Schedule of Distribution, which we are required to do. On this schedule
you will see that there is a balance of proceeds to be paid to you, Stanley J. Caterbone. You, the
defendant, will receive this balance of $17,306.80, however, you have served Sheriff Bergman
with a petition to set aside the sale (PARCP 3132). Please note that we, the Sheriffs Office, do
not have a dated and signed copy by the court of your petition. At the advice of our
solicitor, the distribution of any payouts regarding this property will not be
made until the matter is resolved.
Fulton Bank and the Lancaster County Sheriffs Department embezzle over $50,000 in Fees,
Costs, and the Distribution of Sale associated with the Sale Proceeds of 220 Stone Hill Road,
Conestoga, PA. The Praecipe-Writ of Execution filed on July 31sth, 2006 by Fulton Bank for
Foreclosure Case No. CI-06-02271 stated: FILED. WRIT ISSUED. AFFIDAVIT OF NON-MILITARY
SERVICE. PRINCIPAL: $88,568.53; INTEREST TO 03/02/2006 AT A RATE OF $14.56 PER DIEM:
$4,442.96; NEGATIVE ESCROW BALANCE: $1,096.38; LATE CHARGES: $317.20; ATTORNEYS'
FEES: $3,000.00; TOTAL: $97,425.07. FILED BY SHAWN M. LONG, ESQ.
PLAINTIFF receives a letter from the Superior Court of Pennsylvania regarding the Fulton Bank
Foreclosure Challenge, notifying him that AND NOW, this fourth day of January, 2007 the
appeal in this matter is DISMISSED for failure to file a brief. This DISMISSAL is highly
suspect considering that the Superior Court placed no time conditions on receiving the
additional (7) Copies and it was received several days AFTER PLAINTIFF had already mailed the
required (7) Copies and fulfilled the obligations to the Superior Court, thus furthering the fact
that Fulton Bank and the Sheriffs Office of Lancaster County held an illegal sale on December
20th, 2006.
PLAINTIFF receives DENIED on an ORDER from Change of Venue and Continuance for the
Hearings for January 18th, 2007, signed by Judge Dennis Reinaker of the Pennsylvania Court of
Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
Page 8 of 13
05.08.2007
SUPPORTIVE CASE LAW:

For Emergency Injunction
PRO SE & IN FORMA PAUPERIS
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Commonwealth v. Haggentstaller, 699 A. 2d 767 (Pa Superior, 1997), Pro Se Appellant sought review of
Conviction for violation of County for violation of County ordinance with Rule of Appellant Procedure, court
conducted a thorough, independent review of the record, and found sufficient evidence to sustain the
conviction.
Hempfield Township v. Hapchuck 153 Pa. Comwlth. 173620 A. 2d. 668 (1993) Pro Se Brief failed to comply
with Pa. Rules of Appellate Procedure, but the failure to comply did not substantially impede the Courts
ability to review the issues presented and therefore considered the merits of the case.
Pa. R. App. P. Rule 552, 561 Indigent 16.2 In Forma Pauperis, Griffen v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 76 S. Ct.
585, 100 L. Ed. 891 (1956) states Indigent has right to free Trial Transcript for Appeal of Right.
DUE PROCESS
In Pederson v. South Williamsport Area School District, the courts interpreted due process, as Essentially
fundamental fairness is exactly what due process means. Furthermore, the United States District Courts in
Perry v. Coyler (1978, 524 F 2d. 644) have concluded the following: Even the probability of unfairness can
result in a defendant being deprived of his due process rights.
The first issue to address is that of the Plaintiffs right to due process, as prescribed by law. In Pederson v.
South Williamsport Area School District, the courts interpreted due process, as Essentially fundamental
fairness is exactly what due process means. Furthermore, the United States District Courts in Perry v.
Coyler (1978, 524 F 2d. 644) have concluded the following: Even the probability of unfairness can result in
a defendant being deprived of his due process rights.
CIVIL RIGHTS
_____________________________________________________________________________________
1983 Civil Rights Acts and 18 U.S.C.A. Acts state the following: The underlying purpose of the scheme of
protecting constitutional rights are to permit victims of constitutional violations to obtain redress, to provide
for federal prosecution of serious constitutional violations when state criminal proceedings are ineffective for
purpose of deterring violations and to strike a balance between protection of individual rights from state
infringement and protection from state and local government from federal interference, 18 U.S.C.A.
241, 242; U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 2, 53; Amend. 13, 14, 5, 15, 2: 42 U.S.C.A. 1981-1982, 1985, 1988,
Fed. Rules Civil Proc. Rule 28, U.S.C.A.
In Ascolese v. Southeastern Turnpike Authority, C 925 F. supp. 351, the case supports the notion that One
of the principal purposes of 1983 was to give remedy to parties deprived of Constitutional Rights,
privileges, and immunities by Officials abuse of his or her position, that is to provide remedy against
individual officials who violate Constitutional Rights, 42 U.S.C.A. 1983.
CIVIL CONSPIRACY
_____________________________________________________________________________________
In the case of United States v. Holck, 389 F. Supp. 2d. 338, criminal responsibility defines single or multiple
conspiracies by the following: Governments, without committing variance between single conspiracy
charges in an indictment and its proof at trial may establish existence at continuing core conspiracy which
attracts different members at different times and which involves different subgroups committing acts in
furtherance of an overall plan. This illustrates the legal analysis of the 1987 conspiracy to cover-up my
International Signal & Control, Plc., whistle blowing activities.
Under Pennsylvania Law, conspiracy may be proved by circumstantial evidence that is by acts and
circumstances sufficient to warrant an inference that the unlawful combination has been in front of facts
formed for the purpose charged. See Walcker v. North Wales Boro, 395 F. Supp. 2d. 219. In the same
case the following was supported: Arrestees allegations that the township (Conestoga) and its police
officers were acting in concert and conspiracy and with the purpose of violating arrestees constitutional
rights by subjecting him to unreasonable force, arrest, search, and malicious prosecution and the two (2) or
more officers acted together in throwing arrestee to the ground (April 5th, 2006 and August 4th, 2006) and
Page 9 of 13
05.08.2007
forcing him to take two (2) blood tests and holding him in custody. The preceding pleaded civil conspiracy
claims under Pennsylvania Law.
In order to state a claim for civil conspiracy and a cause of action under Pennsylvania Law, a plaintiff must
allege that two (2) or more persons agree or combine with lawful intent to do an unlawful act or to do an
otherwise lawful act by unlawful means, with proof of malice with intent to injure the person, his/her
property and or business. In the case of United States v. Holck, 389 F. Supp. 2d. 338, criminal
responsibility defines single or multiple conspiracies by the following: Governments, without committing
variance between single conspiracy charges in an indictment and its proof at trial may establish existence
at continuing core conspiracy which attracts different members at different times and which involves
different subgroups committing acts in furtherance of an overall plan.
1983 Civil Rights Acts and 18 U.S.C.A. Acts state the following: The underlying purpose of the scheme of
protecting constitutional rights are to permit victims of constitutional violations to obtain redress, to provide
for federal prosecution of serious constitutional violations when state criminal proceedings are ineffective for
purpose of deterring violations and to strike a balance between protection of individual rights from state
infringement and protection from state and local government from federal interference, 18 U.S.C.A.
241, 242; U.S.C.A. Const. Art. 2, 53; Amend. 13, 14, 5, 15, 2: 42 U.S.C.A. 1981-1982, 1985, 1988,
Fed. Rules Civil Proc. Rule 28, U.S.C.A.
ANIT-TRUST
_____________________________________________________________________________________
The Following violations constitute a legitimate Anti-Trust violation under Title 15 of the Federal Statutes.
In private Anti-Trust actions, Plaintiff, in addition to proving violations and an injury, must also show that a
violation and an injury must also prove that the violation was direct and material to the cause of injury
suffered; however, the Plaintiffs burden in causations issues is not as heavy as the Plaintiff only needs to
show a casual relation with reasonable probability to a fair degree of certainty (Anderson Foreign Motors,
Inc. v. New England Toyota Distributors, Inc., D.C. Mass 1979, 475. Supp.).
SHERIFF SALES
Rule 3132 Setting Aside the Sale states: Upon petition of any party in interest before delivery of the
personal property or of the sheriffs deed to real property, the court may, upon proper cause shown, set
aside the sale and order a resale or enter any other order which may be just and proper under the
circumstances.
That is just plain outright corruption at its best.
If I could, I would make sure everyone in Lancaster County and beyond know the truth about what has
happened to me. But then again, that is all Ive been trying to do for the last twenty years (20)! And you keep
covering up the truth.
Tell Don, I dont think he is fit to be a credible Lancaster County Judge.
Respectfully,
Stan J. Caterbone
cc:
Enclosures
Page 10 of 13
05.08.2007
amgroup01@msn.com
717.427-1621 Fax
Stan Caterbone
Advanced Media Group
220 Stone Hill Road
Conestoga, PA 17516
March 1, 2007
Paul K. Allison
Judge, Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas
Lancaster County Courthouse
50 North Duke Street
Lancaster, PA 17602
Re:
CI-07-00366; Motion for Reconsideration of order dated January 24,2007 is DENIED.
Dear Mr. Allison;

Enough is enough. What do you think you are doing with my civil litigation? On February 27th, 2006
you denied my Appeal for Reconsideration to proceed In Forma Pauperis for the civil action CI-07-00366, and
demanded that I pay $112.00 in Court Filing Fees or the case will be dismissed. Why is it that you are above
the law and I am beneath it?
You are the most inexpensive Attorney the Defendants of CI-07-00366 could buy.
On January 24th, 2007 you denied my In Forma Pauperis Application because upon determining that
the action for which in forma pauperis status is sought to enable its filing without the payment of costs is
frivolous, the pro se plaintiffs petition is DENIED.
Dauphin County recently GRANTED my In Forma Pauperis Application on February 21, 2007. I have
been granted In Forma Pauperis status in the United States District Court for the Eastern District Court Third
Circuit Court of Appeals. I have been granted In Forma Pauperis status in the Pennsylvania Superior Court. I
have been granted In Forma Pauperis status in the Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas at least twenty
times in the past year. I also meet the criteria for In Forma Pauperis status in the Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania for my case against Fulton Bank (MT 71 2007); my legal challenge to the judgment that was
executed in August regarding the Foreclosure and Sheriff Sale of December 20, 2006. This was my residence
and property at 220 Stone Hill Road, Conestoga, where all my possessions were stolen.
On February 20TH, after Judge Paul K. Allison ruled that the civil action was frivolous, Fulton Bank filed
Preliminary Objections, and I filed the following Plaintiffs Answers To Defendants Fulton Banks Preliminary
Objections To Plaintiffs' Complaint for civil action CI-07-00366, which despite your Opinion, is legally entitled to In
Forma Pauperis status. The pleading includes the following:
Fulton Bank: Although not entirely clear, Plaintiffs appear to be alleging in the Complaint that
the
Defendants, including Fulton Bank, conspired to deprive Plaintiff, Stanley Caterbone of his due
process and civil rights and possibly to violate the antitrust laws.
My Answer:
1. PLAINTIFF Stanley J. Caterbone was illegally imprisoned on October 30, 2007 until
December 29, 2007, and the decision by the Honorable Judge Paul K. Allison on December
28, 2007 to release Defendant Stanley J. Caterbone proved that Judge Paul K. Allisons
decision on November 1, 2006 to reinstate the unsecured bail bond as secured was at least
erroneous and with possible malice and misconduct.
2.
Defendants knowingly conducted a Sherriff Sale on December 20, 2007, while PLAINTIFF
Stanley J. Caterbone had successfully filed an Appeal (MDA 1463 2006) the Judgment and
Foreclosure to the Pennsylvania Superior Court with no decision or opinion yet rendered.
The Defendant was still in the midst of the Superior Court Appeal. DEFENDANT Fulton
Page 11 of 13
05.08.2007
Banks attorney Shawn M. Long was copied on all Superior Court correspondence. That is a
violation of due process and access to the Court.
3.
The matter is being litigated, now in both the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, and also the
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in case number MT 71-2007. The Sheriff sale of December
20, 2006, was a direct cause of the PLAINTIFFs loosing all possessions accumulated
throughout his lifetime, automobile, evidentiary materials and files (dating back to 1983)
to all present and past litigation, including those civil complaints against Fulton Bank in the
United States District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, due to at least theft by
deception. That litigation in Federal Court includes violations of anti-trust laws.
4. The fact that the PLAINTIFFs no longer contains all Court related materials are a violation of
due process, access to the Courts, and obstruction of justice.
5.
The PLAINTIFFs have reported the theft of the possessions and evidence to law
enforcement (PA State Police, Lancaster County District Attorney, Southern Regional Police,
Lancaster County Detectives, Lancaster County Sheriff Department) and have an open claim
with Harleysville Insurance Company relating to the same, number M0-702274.
6.
Fulton Banks Attorneys maliciously filed a No Trespass Notice against the DEFENDANT,
Stanley J. Caterbone, on September 7, 2006, without any cause, in an effort to slander,
libel, harass; and violate his access to the Court, by impeding his ability to hand deliver
Service upon Fulton Bank.
Fulton Bank: Plaintiffs' Complaint fails to state a claim against Fulton Bank upon which relief can be granted.
Accordingly, Fulton Bank files the following Preliminary Objections:
My Answer:
In addition to the Answer to Number 5, There are several claims against Fulton Bank upon
which relief can be granted. The PLAINTIFFs lost the right to proceed with the Appeal process
to the judgment and the foreclosure, and the Fair Market Value, as detailed in 2006 Form 1099A, was listed at $250,000. The loss in equity of an additional $94, 000, (Fair Market Value less
Gross Sale Proceeds of $156,000) was extortion due to the illegality of the Sheriff Sale and the
Illegal detention. In addition, the DEFENDANT Fulton Bank charged legal fees and costs for the
Foreclosure in excess of $25, 000, which is out of the ordinary and excessive.
As stated, loosing all possessions accumulated throughout his lifetime through illicit means is
frivolous? Extortion of funds is frivolous? A Sheriff Sale that is under Appeal in the Superior Court of
Pennsylvania and is not stayed until an opinion is rendered is frivolous? You are incompetent, at least, and
criminal at most, if I may be so blunt.
I have no money to pay the $112.00 of Court fees. I eat at food kitchen at the Episcopal Church next
to the Lancaster County Library in the mornings. I am waiting for my appeal hearings for my Food Stamps and
Bus Pass, which were suspiciously terminated before I got illegally locked up at the Lancaster County Prison, in
October. I have very little food to eat. I owe $50.00 to Magisterial District Judge Ballentine tomorrow, and do
not know how I am going to pay her. I have applied at McDonalds for a job at least five times, and countless
other local companies.
I was lucky and made $40 shoveling snow, enough to pay for my Superior Court postage, and some
bread.
Is this all retaliation for the Affidavit that I filed in the Lisa Michelle Lambert case, which I took
exception at the prosecutorial misconduct?
Or, is this in retaliation for my whistle-blowing activities in 1987, against International Signal & Control?
Or, could it be because of my support of the Lancaster County Convention Center?
Yesterday, in the elevator of the Lancaster County Courthouse, Magisterial District Justice Bruce Roth
(whom I never met) asked who I was and said Oh youll probably sue me, you sue everyone. I emphatically
stated that I have never sued anyone without just cause, and he yelled at me right in front of a Lancaster
County Sheriff. This was totally uncalled for, and was libelous. Is this the strategy in Lancaster County to
discredit my litigation by pretending that my civil actions are frivolous?
Let me start from the beginning of my problems with you people in the Lancaster County Courthouse.
The following is from an email to Mr. Bergman, Lancaster County Sheriff on May 6, 2005 after I filed a lawsuit
Page 12 of 13
05.08.2007
against Drew Anthon of the Eden Resort Inn for announcing his intention to withhold the county hotel room tax
for the development of the Lancaster County Convention Center.
May 6, 2005 - After arriving at your office, she said she could not accept my check from my non-profit
foundation, Project Hope, which was the same account which the original check was from. After a heated
discussion, and verbal abuse from your sheriffs, I paid $150 cash, upon which I was immediately literally
picked up by 2 of your sheriffs and thrown out of the courthouse and onto the streets and told to
"Get out of here".
Please study and review the enclosed attached documents.
County Courthouse will not get away with this criminal conspiracy.
You and your cronies at the Lancaster
Respectfully,
Stan J. Caterbone
cc:
Enclosures
Page 13 of 13
05.08.2007
LancasterOnline.com: News
: Judge OF
Allison
stricken
in New Jersey
http://local.lancasteronline.com/6/208346
OBSTRUCTION
JUSTICE
- CORRUPTION
BY PUBLIC OFFICIAL - JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT - EXTORTION
- KATHLEEN KANE WAS RIGHT!
LancasterOnline.com
Judge Allison stricken in New Jersey
He remains hospitalized after stroke and heart attack
By PAULA WOLF, Staff writer
Sunday News
Published: Aug 19, 2007 12:16 AM EST
LANCASTER COUNTY, PA - Lancaster County
Court Judge Paul K. Allison has suffered a stroke
and a heart attack.
Commissioner Dick Shellenberger said an e-mail
was sent Friday to the commissioners stating that
Allison was stricken on Wednesday while
vacationing, and that he was in stable condition.
Princeton, N.J.
Former county Commissioner Jim Huber, who

belongs to the same church as Allison, also said
the judge had a heart attack and is hospitalized in
Huber said he's known Allison, a lay leader at Westminster

Presbyterian Church, for many years.
Allison had been scheduled to be back in court this week, said a
source who asked not to be named. His casework will be divided
among the other judges.
Attempts to reach family members for comment were unsuccessful.
In his second 10-year term on the bench, Allison, 70, is stepping
down at the end of this year, having reached the mandatory
retirement age for judges.
He was assistant county solicitor before being elected a judge in
1991, and had been in private practice for almost 30 years.
A native of North Adams, Mass., Allison is a graduate of Williams
College and the University of Pennsylvania Law School.
Paula Wolf is a staff writer for the Sunday News. She can be reached by
e-mail at pwolf@lnpnews.com.
2004-2007 Lancaster Newspapers
PO Box 1328, Lancaster PA 17608, (717) 291-8811

Terms of Service Privacy Policy
1 of 1
8/19/2007 3:25 PM

KATHLEEN KANE WAS RIGHT - Judge Paul K. Allison Letter of May 8, 2007

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

KATHLEEN KANE WAS RIGHT - Judge Paul K. Allison Letter of May 8, 2007

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE - CORRUPTION BY PUBLIC OFFICIAL - JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT - EXTORTION - KATHLEEN KANE WAS RIGHT!

Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant

Caterbone v. Totaro, et al.

Dear Ms. Munion:

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

July 23rd, 2006:

October 14th, 2006:

October 17th, 2006:

October 20th, 2006:

October 26th, 2006:

October 30th, 2006:

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

November 1st, 2006:

November 6th, 2006:

November 8th, 2006:

November 20th, 2006:

November 30th, 2006:

December 2nd, 2006:

December 4th, 2006:

December 5th, 2006:

December 6th, 2006:

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

December 8th, 2006:

December 12th, 2006:

December 13th, 2006:

December 20th, 2006:

December 28th, 2006:

December 29th, 2006:

January 4th, 2007:

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

January 5th, 2007:

January 7th , 2007:

January 8th, 2007:

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

January 11th, 2007:

January 12th, 2007:

email from Ms. Gail Parenteau, of Bongiovi Acoustics:

January 13th, 2007:

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

SUPPORTIVE CASE LAW:

PRO SE & IN FORMA PAUPERIS

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

CI-07-00366; Motion for Reconsideration of order dated January 24,2007 is DENIED.

Dear Mr. Allison;

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

You and your cronies at the Lancaster

ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP

Former county Commissioner Jim Huber, who

Huber said he's known Allison, a lay leader at Westminster

2004-2007 Lancaster Newspapers

PO Box 1328, Lancaster PA 17608, (717) 291-8811

Você também pode gostar