Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff Counsel Pro Se, wrote to the judge:

jph13@psu.edu

December 20, 2010

Richard J. Holwell

1. S. District Judge
2. S. District Court: S. D.N. Y.
3. S. Courthouse

500 Pearl Street

New York, NY 10007

Re: Julian  Heicklen v. U. S. Department of Homeland Security et. al.

      Case #10 CV 2239 (RJH)(JLC)

Dear Judge Holwell:

1. Dismissal of the criminal cases

Rebecca Mermelstein, Assistant U. S. Attorney, has notified Judge Pitman in her letter of November 22, 2010, that the U. S. Attorney has dismissed all criminal charges against me for activities in front of your courthouse.  Perhaps your thugs, i. e. officers of the Department of Homeland Security, will return the property that they stole from me.

In her letter, Ms. Mermelstein also suggests that the court initiate jury tampering charges against me.  I welcome such an opportunity to expose the lying that you judges give in your instructions to jurors.  The opportunity is appealing to explain to the jury that its duty is not to uphold the law, but to see that justice is done.  In the cases against me which Ms. Mermelstein dismissed, she nullified the law.  Perhaps she should be a codefendant in the jury tampering case, because she tampered with the jury by denying it an opportunity to uphold the law.

2. Denial of default judgment against Bellevue Medical Center

In your ORDER of November 2, 2010, you denied default judgment against Bellevue Medical Center and its employees, because the summons was not served correctly through error of the clerk of court.  You requested that I again serve Bellevue and its employees.  What chutzpah!  It would cost me about $300 to serve those Defendants again.  The Court made the error, it should correct it by having the federal marshals do the service.  They will have nothing else to do now that presumably they will not be spending their time arresting me or anyone else who asserts Constitutionally protected rights.

3. Instructions to stop contacting Judge Holwell

In your ORDER, you also instructed me not to contact you again.  This is the second time that you issued such an instruction.  As long as you are the presiding judge in this case, you will receive correspondence from me.  If you want it to stop, recuse yourself from the case, as I have requested previously. 

3. Order to file an amended complaint, to obtain identities of John Does from defense counsels, and contact the Bankruptcy court to lift  stay on St. Vincent

In his ORDER of November 15, 2010, Magistrate Judge James L. Cott, who is assisting you in this case, issued three instructions to me:

1. I was ordered to file an amended complaint with the additional incidents added to the original complaint.  I will be happy to comply after I receive the identities of all the John Doe Defendants, including those from the ambulance crews (including the NY City Fire Department) from the Defendants’ counsels. The amended complaint will include Michael Blumberg, New York City Mayor, to remove any immunity issues suggested by the New York Fire Department.
2. It costs me about $3500.00 to serve all of the Defendants.  If I have to serve before knowing all he names of the John Doe Defendants, I will have to serve again, at another cost of $3500.  This is an unreasonable burden.  Therefore, I will wait until I have received the names of all the John Doe Defendants before the next service of summons.
3. I was informed that if I wish to learn the names of the John Doe Defendants, I must request that information from the Defense Counsels.  I have done that through copy of a letter that I sent to Judge Cott on September 8, 2010.  Mr. Pellegrino, Counsel for the federal Defendants provided the names of the John Doe Defendants.  The other counsels did not provide any information about the John Doe Defendants.  I submitted Motion Papers to Judge Holwell on October 8, 2010, to issue an ORDER to see that it is done.  There has been no response to those papers.  
4. Through copies of this letter, the counsels are requested again to submit the names, positions, dates of participation, and addresses where they can be served.
5. Again I am asking Judge Holwell to respond to my motion papers by ordering the Defense Counsels to provide the identities of the John Doe Defendants.
6. Judge Cott further states that in order to lift the automatic stay.of this case as to defendant St. Vincent’s Hospital, I must make such a request directly to the Bankruptcy Court.  This is a ridiculous request.  St. Vincent’s Hospital does not owe me any money.  I have no standing in the bankruptcy claim.  I am not an attorney nor a litigant.  Probably I would never get a response from the Bankruptcy Court.  If I do get a response, it will deny my request, if for no other reason than I do not have standing.  The bankruptcy Court would be acting properly, and I would expect no other action.  It is Judge Holwell that must lift the stay, not the Bankruptcy Court.

4. False claim of independent actor for the hospitals

Robert Drucker, Counsel for New York Downtown Hospital, has moved that the Court dismiss it as a Defendant, because it is an independent actor.  Mr. Drucker has committed perjury.   

I have distributed literature on 12 occasions in front of the U. S. District Courthouse in Manhattan.  I have been arrested 9 times.  The proper procedure for police is to take the arrestee to a magistrate.  This happened twice.  On 7 occasions, I was taken to hospitals (3 times to NY Downtown Hospital, 3 times to Bellevue Medical Center, and once to Saint Vincent Catholic Hospital).  On one occasion, I was arrested, my literature and sign confiscated, and released.  On one occasion, I was not arrested, just robbed.  On another occasion, I was ignored.  

In addition I was arrested at the U. S. District Courthouses in Springfield, MA, and in Newark, NJ.  In neither instance was I taken to a magistrate.  Instead I was taken to a hospital.

The purpose of the hospital visits is to perform what is euphemistically referred to as extraordinary rendition.  In each incident, the hospitals, ambulance personnel and the police knew that I had no medical problem. The hospitals are in collusion with the police to perform torture. At the hospitals, I have been sodomized, had a plug driven up my left nostril (extremely painful), had my corneas “dusted” with a brush, beaten black and blue on my chest, and forcefully injected with thorazine on two occasions against my expressed wishes.  Two days after one of these hospital visits, I saw my physician, who looked at my chest and exclaimed: “Did the police do that to you?”  I answered: “No, it was not the police.  It was the hospital personnel.”

1. Request for new filing date of December 30, 2010

In his letter of November 29, 2010, Counsel Robert M. Drucker states that the Defense Counsels have agreed that Plaintiff should submit his amended complaint on or before December 30, 2010.  Of course this is impossible.  Until I get the names of the John Doe Defendants, I cannot act.  I am willing to agree to a filing date of 30 days after receiving the names of all the John Doe Defendants, including those from the New York City Fire Department and St. Vincent’s Hospital.

6. Relationship to the Court

In the event that you are considering a contempt of court charge against me, you have misjudged the situation.  My feeling toward this court is not contempt.  It is hatred, intense hatred. You and your colleagues have destroyed my country.  This letter is being released to the public, so that it will be aware of what occurs in our courts of injustice.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.  It is the time of year for serious introspection.

Sincerely yours,

Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff

Counsel Pro Se