My Quest for Justice in America and what I found instead: Judge Michael R. Hogan's Intentional Obstruction of Justice.

Judge Michael R. Hogan demonstrated prejudice against my concerns throughout the history of my case in the United States District Court. This became clear to me during the pretrial conference on August 14, 2009 and in his Orders #243 and #260.

I stood before him during the pretrial conference expecting decorum and respect for our laws and I was shocked at his abuse of his power. My case was two years old. This was the first time that I had a hearing in the presence of Judge Hogan. My heart and mind were wide open and I was hopeful that justice would be served when I entered the Court. I had worked very hard to provide the court with the proof of all of my claims in the format required.

I actually hurt for this man by the time I left the Court because he had somehow lost sight of the great honor and responsibility that the position of Federal Judge carries.

It was clear that Judge Hogan had not read the documents I had submitted that proved that children in Corvallis, Oregon were being harmed by James Hackett's and the Linn Benton Housing Authority's illegal placements of sexual predators, drug dealers and other dangerous felons in their housing, that my claims tolled the Statute of Limitations because of Administrative claims through the United States' Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity and that the laws that James Hackett intentionally violated were one of my protected activities for a Retaliation Claim through the Court and had been provided to Judge Hogan in a timely manner more that one year before the pretrial conference.

Because Judge Hogan had not read my submissions, he did not know of the federal statutes enacted by Congress to protect children in HUD funded neighborhoods. These laws were created to make it a violation of federal law to fund housing for those with a life time registration as a sex offender and also those who are actively dealing methamphetamine or creating a hostile living environment through their drug and alcohol use or violent criminal activity. Judge Hogan should have known that these laws exist without my guidance. I had provided the laws to him in their entirety on May 7, 2008 in Document 87 on pages 7 and 8 and in at least six other submissions to the court prior to the pretrial conference. This is public information and is on the Federal Government's PACER website for the federal courts.

Judge Hogan told a falsehood in his order #260 where he wrote that the laws do not exist and that I had not provided them to the court. For a federal judge to lie even once in a case in federal court should be grounds for his removal. There is no integrity in the court if our federal judges may lie.

Long before I filed my case for Retaliation against James Hackett and the Linn Benton Housing Authority, Congressman Peter DeFazio's office suggested I file a case through the office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity in Seattle, Washington for the same claims, so I did. These claims were still open administratively on August 20, 2007 when I filed my case in District Court and this tolls the Statute of Limitations for these claims. I turned in a copy of my administrative claim through Fair Housing with my initial papers to the United States District Court on August 20, 2007 so Judge Hogan was provided with proof that the Statute of Limitations was tolled by the administrative claim.

When James Hackett and the Linn Benton Housing Authority tried to have Judge Hogan throw out my Retaliation claim through the process of summary judgment, the judge refused in his Order #95 because he said he was aware of my Administrative claim that tolled my Retaliation claim in the District Court.

One year later during the pretrial conference on August 14, 2009 Judge Hogan stated that he had not seen my administrative claim for retaliation. I had it in hand and tried to give it to him and he turned his head sharply away from me and refused to accept it and quickly changed the subject.

He also looked the attorney for the Linn Benton Housing Authority in the eyes and said that if the defendants could get my Retaliation claim thrown out I would only have one claim left. His intention, his prejudice, and his bias were crystal clear.

Two weeks before the pretrial conference I subpoenaed all of the witnesses for the trial that was scheduled for July 29, 2009 for Retaliation. This was quite a process as many of the witnesses lived far away. I had to pay three different sheriff's departments in other counties to serve the subpoenas and also pay two private investigators and travel extensively to make sure that everyone was informed of their need to appear on the 29th and several days following. This took me hours of work and thousands of dollars.

Another way that I prepared for the trial was to go to Judge Hogan's courtroom to witness several other proceedings just to get a sense of what it meant to be in federal court. One of the trials was with the plaintiff, Kristi Diamond and her attorney, Dana Sullivan. During the lunch hour for that trial Judge Hogan sentenced four different individuals in unrelated cases and I watched and listened.

One of these men was Latino. He had been stopped in a routine traffic stop by the police and they asked him for his papers to be in America. He lied out of fear of deportation. He did not have any kind of a serious criminal history and had lived in this area for many years. All of his family lived in this area. His lawyer spoke of him as a good family man.

Judge Hogan had the discretion to sentence him to deportation and from zero years to five years in federal prison for lying. He sentenced him for about half of the maximum sentence and as they led the man from the courtroom with his head drooping in anguish Judge Hogan turned to his staff laughing loudly and said clearly:

"I am going to make sure that he goes to prison in Texas."

Charlene Pew, who works in the federal court, helped me determine that this man's name was Maricio Amaral-Ramos.

I am sickened to think of all of the Latinos that he has sentenced from a view point of prejudice.

My submissions to the court proved to Judge Hogan that my child and many other children suffered deeply because of the corruption of the Linn Benton Housing Authority. I provided him with proof that my claims had merit and tolled the statute of limitations. I proved to him that Mr. Hackett was intentionally HUD funding sex offenders and other violent felons. I proved that I complained to HUD and many other offices which was my protected activity.

Judge Hogan's financial disclosures show that he receives dividends from the housing construction company that gives millions of dollars to the think tanks that propose HUD's rules. He owns many rentals.

Judge Michael R. Hogan did not treat my claims respectfully in the court. Over time it became apparent that he destroyed my case methodically and intentionally.



_________________________________________