In the Supreme Court of Ohio
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO John Michael Fitzpatrick, ^ 7 - 1231 Relator, v. Petition For Writ Of Mandamus Original Action Hon. Kathleen Aubry, Respondent. PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS John Michael Fitzpatrick, Relator 7309 Fall Creek Lane Columbus, Ohio 43235 614.678.4559 [email protected] Hon. Kathleen Aubry, Respondent Wyandot County, Ohio Common Pleas Court Judge 109 South Sandusky Street Upper Sandusky, Ohio 43351 419.294.1727 1. On the 5`h day of July 2007, Scott Williams, Plaintiff in Williams v. Williams, case no. 06 DR 0105, filed in the Common Pleas Court of Wyandot County, Ohio, a motion seeking to bar contact between 27 month old Neil Franklin Williams and John Michael Fitzpatrick. See plaintiffs motion exhibit one. See defendant's opposition exhibit two. 2. On the 6`h day of July 2007, Common Pleas Court Judge Kathleen Aubry granted Plaintiff's motion barring contact between the minor child and Relator, casting a false light on John Michael Fitzpatrick as a promoter of sexual deviancy. See Judgment exhibit three. 3. Plaintiffs Motion cited the sexually explicit contents of a videotape production by Relator entitled "HOW SAY YOU, JURY NULLIFICATION IN AMERICA" which was twice cablecast in West Hollywood, California and has not been the subject of crin-unal court proceedings nor been found obscene. Judge Aubry stated she "viewed the tape and found that interspersed in a long discourse with a First Amendment Attorney, were clips of pomographic material which appeared to be gratuitous and unnecessary to understand the topic." Perhaps Judge Aubry is so familiar with images of bestiality and transsexual oral copulation that mere mention would suffice (absent the images themselves), but most members of the viewing (and voting) public are not that well informed. Page 2 4. Judge Aubry's negative film critique in the form of an Ohio Common Pleas Court Order has meted severe punishment on the producer of a legal, albeit controversial, political video production, without due process of law being afforded to Relator, namely, facing his accuser, hearing charges and speaking in his own defense prior to a ruling against his freedom, monies and good name. 5. Relator is a cohabitant (with the mother of the minor child who is the subject of a nine month long custody dispute) and was forced to leave his home and pay for a hotel during a scheduled weekend visitation between mother and child because of Plaintiff's false allegations and Judge Aubry's improvident court order. 6. In Judge Aubry's order it was also stated "it will be necessary to have further hearings to determine if John M. Fitzpatrick is a suitable person to have contact with the parties' minor child" Relator is not a party in Williams v. Williams and therefore cannot now defend hiinself against further injury from these spurious allegations in the Wyandot Court. 7. Respondent has a constitutional duty to follow due process. Relator has suffered severe damage from a civil court order based on false allegations of immoral & illegal conduct with no opportunity for defense. Granting the Writ of Mandamus will enable Relator to defend himself against those allegations as a Defendant-Interpleader in Williams v. Williams as allowed under Civil Rule 22. Page 3 8. Relator asks the court to review the criminal obscenity test(s) in the U. S. Supreme Court decisions Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) and Pope v. Illinois, 481 U.S. 497 (1987) and New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982) and Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002). Two Video productions by Relator, "ORGY-TV" & "SJR 41" have been found obscene in 1996 in a civil proceeding in Portland Cable Access v. Fitzpatrick, Multnomah County, Oregon civil case no. 9511-08352 (the first Obscenity ruling in Oregon in over 10 years), which Relator chose not to appeal having Achieved his political objective of securing an obscenity ruling in the ultra-liberal Oregon Court system of the Mid-Nineties. See exhibit four. (ultra-liberalism demonstrated by the Oregon Court of Appeals in 1994 legalizing child pornography in Oregon. The Oregon Supreme Court corrected this error in State v. Stoneman 323 OR 536, 920 P2d 535(1996) 3 months after the Portland Cable Access decision and 4 months before a November 1996 vote on a constitutional Amendment placed on the ballot by the Oregon Legislature in Senate Joint Resolution 41 citing "ORGY-TV". ) WHEREFORE, Relator requests a Writ of Mandainus from the Supreme Court of Ohio causing the Hon. Kathleen Aubry, Respondent and Wyandot County, Ohio Common Pleas Court Judge to join John Michael Fitzpatrick, Relator as Defendant-Interpleader under Civil Rule 22 in Williams v. Williams, 06 DR 0105. Respectfully submitted, John Michael Fitzpatrick, Relator Page 4 AFFIDAVIT OF RELATOR SUPPORTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS Now Comes John Michael Fitzpatrick, I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS is true and correct dated this 9th day of July 2007 in Franklin County Ohio, FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. John Michael Fitzpatrick, Relafor & Affiant Swom to and subscribed before me this 9°i day of July 2007 in Franklin County Ohio KAEL LEATHER Notary Public, State of Ohio My Cammission Expires 04-24-10 Certificate of Service I certify that a copy of this PETITION FOR WRTT OF MANDAMUS and AFFIDAVrr OF RELATOR SUPPORTING PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS was sent by ordinary U.S. mail to Respondent, Hon. Kathleen Aubry, 109 South Sandusky Street, Upper Sandusky, Ohio 43351, Jason Miller Counsel for Plaintiff at his law offices 109 E Franklin Street, Kenton Ohio 43326, and, Megan Williams, Defendant Pro Se at her home 7309 Fall Creek Lane, Columbus Ohio 43235, on this 9`h day of July, 2007. Exhibit 'One IN THE WYANDOT COUNTY COMMON PLEAS COURT, DOMESTIC RELATIONS DIVISION SCOTT WILLIAMS CASE NO. 06 DR 0105 18710 TWP. IIWY. 82 FOREST, OHIO 45843 PLAINTIFF vs. MOTION FOR MODIFICATION MEGAN E. WILLIAMS AND/OR CLARIFICATION OF 7309 FALLCREEK LANE TEMPORARY ORDER COLUMBUS, OHIO 43235 DEFENDANT Now comes Plaintiff, by and through he undersigned counsel, and submits the following Motion for Modification and/or Clarification of the Temporary Order in this Court. Currently, this Court ordered temporary visitation between the minor child and the Defendant every other weekend from Friday evening to Sunday evening. New factors and information have come to light regarding Defendant's paramour, John Michael Fitzpatrick, that Plaintiff asserts are important for the Court to consider. As such, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court order that the Defendant be restrained from facilitating contact between the child, Neil Williams, and her paramour, John Michael Fitzpatrick. In the final hearing dated June 27, 2007, Mr. Fitzpatricl, testified that he ran for Oregon state senate and worked as a television producer in California, prior to moving to Ohio. An intemet search on Mr. Fitzpatrick revealed that those television productions challenged United States' obscenity laws. This information came directly from a weblog entry submitted on www.roryoconnor.ora by Mr. Fitzpatrick himself and connected to his personal email address. The entry went on to say that "[i]nMultnomah County Circuit Court in Oregon, in 1996, two ofMr. Fitzpatrick's cable television productions, `ORGY-TV' &`SJR41', which both included unedited scenes of Sado-Masochism and necrophilia, were found obscene and banned in the United States by court order." Further, the entry confirmed that "[i]n 1998, John Michael Fitzpatrick ran for the Republican nomination for United States Senate in Oregon and won a county placing second in a three way race with 27 percent ofthe vote statewide." This is exactly what Mr. Fitzpatrick testified to in the final hearing. A copy ofthis weblog entry is attached hereto. As such, Plaintiff is understandably compelled to order Defendant that the minor child is to have absolutely no contact with John Michael Fitzpatrick based on the aforementioned items and incorporate the same into any existing order. Clearly, the prohibition of such contact is in the best interest of the minor child. Respeptf6lly submitted, ON M. MILLER, (00741235) ttorney for Scott Williams WETHERILL, SCHWEMER, MARKLEY & SCHWEMER 109 E. Franklin St., Kenton, OH 43326 Phone:419-673-4176 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify I caused a copy of the within Motion for Modification and/or Clarification of Temporary Order to be served on Megan E. Williams at 7309 Fall Creek Lane, Columbus, Ohio 43235, by mailing a copy to said Megan E. Williams by regular US Mail ostage prcpaid, this 5"' day of July 2007. Feedback Page 1 of 2 8. 8 john fitzpatrick Says: 30 March 2005 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE WEST HOLLYWOOD, CA: City of West Hollywood public access cable television cablecast today a 45 minute program without edit or interruption entitled 'HOW SAY YOU : JURY NULLIFICATION IN AMERICA' featuring an interview with First Amendment lawyer Clyde Dewitt of Los Angeles. Integral to the interview on obscenity law in the United States were unedited clips of pornographic material including MF intercourse, interracial group sex, transsexual oral copulation, bestiality, gang rape, golden shower, facial, enema and simulated child pornography. In Multnomah County Circuit Court in Oregon in .1996, two of Mr. Fitzpatrick's cable television productions, `ORGY-TV' & `SJR41', which both included unedited scenes of Sado- Masochism and Necrophilia, were found Obscene and banned in the United States by court order. The Supreme Court of the United States denied Certiorari on 17 March 1997 http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2004/O1/01/feedback/ 7/5/07 Feedback Page 2 of 2 upholding the Ninth Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals and the U.S.