Judge Jeff Almquist Santa Cruz County Superior Court Disorder in the Court Under Inept, Corrupt Judge Jeff Almquist Watsonville california

Almquist is a shill for those with money who leverage their resources to influence a verdict, buying the judge’s favorite lawyers who are adept at manipulating the simpleton and receive favors. This judge is an arrogant bully, negligent in his duty and unconcerned with fact finding and justice. He is ignorant about the law and either oblivious to or sympathetic with fellow sociopaths. He has violated federal law to obstruct justice, abetted criminal activity, and prior, he received remuneration as a public official in exchange for support. This judge is bought and paid for. He was not voted into office; he was hastily appointed by a governor on his way out after being recalled from office for corruption scandals. No one ran against him after his appointment expired because of corrupt local politics. 

Almquist violated my civil rights, federal laws, local rules of the court and used intimidation, bullying, threats and retaliatory acts to disadvantage me and undermine my ability to ever get a fair hearing and trial. Almquist uses his court as his personal pulpit; he is mysogynistic, cruel toward victims of crime who are deeply affected by their experience and he rules in favor of the party who repeatedly makes the most outrageous accusations in their declarations. Almquist has a God complex; he continually over-reaches his jurisdiction. On multiple occasions, this judge violated the law and the rules of the court to rule on issues that he had no right to take under consideration in his court. 

Almquist has committed "fraud upon the court”. [Bulloch v. United States, 763 F.2d 1115, 1121 (10th Cir. 1985): "Fraud upon the court" has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery can not perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication." Kenner v. C.I.R., 387 F.3d 689 (1968); 7 Moore's Federal Practice, 2d ed., p. 512, ¶ 60.23. The 7th Circuit further stated "a decision produced by fraud upon the court is not in essence a decision at all, and never becomes final.”]