Dr. Jim Fetzer's debrief on Sandy Hook ‘show trial’: Orwellian ‘judge’ violates right for jury to determine disputed facts, claims five versions of death certificate = ‘no differences,’ silences two expert witnesses proving multiple areas of forgery | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Dr. Jim Fetzer's debrief on Sandy Hook ‘show trial’: Orwellian ‘judge’ violates right for jury to determine disputed facts, claims five versions of death certificate = ‘no differences,’ silences two expert witnesses proving multiple areas of forgery

show trial: noun (especially in a totalitarian state) the public trial of a political offender conducted chiefly for propagandistic purposes, as to suppress further dissent against the government by making an example of the accused.

"Trial by jury; verdict in civil cases. Section 5. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, and shall extend to all cases at law without regard to the amount in controversy; but a jury trial may be waived by the parties in all cases in the manner prescribed by law." ~ Wisconsin State Constitution

"Free speech; libel. Section 3. Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right, and no laws shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions or indictments for libel, the truth may be given in evidence, and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as libelous be true, and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquitted; and the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the fact." ~ Wisconsin State Constitution

“757.02? Justices and judges and municipal judges; oath of office; ... Every person elected or appointed justice of the supreme court, judge of the court of appeals, judge of the circuit court or municipal judge, shall take, subscribe and file the following oath: State of Wisconsin, County of .... 'I, the undersigned, who have been elected (or appointed) to the office of …. do solemnly swear that I will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of Wisconsin; that I will administer justice without respect to persons and will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of said office to the best of my ability. So help me God.'” ~ Wisconsin Statutes

The first legal decision in this civil suit (Professor Jim Fetzer’s blog of status, with our discussion here, here soon, and below) was by Judge Remington to declare Dr. Fetzer guilty of defamation of the plaintiff - an alleged father (Lenny Pozner) of an alleged victim (Noah Pozner) of the alleged Sandy Hook shooting - for Fetzer and Mike Palecek claiming an alleged death certificate provided by Pozner to a website was fabricated. This ruling completely censored two expert witnesses who documented evidence of multiple areas of fabrications in five versions of this alleged "official" document.

Judge Remington acted in Orwellian-opposition of his sworn duties to uphold rights of the accused to present a defense to a jury of one’s peers. Instead, he orchestrated a show trial for dictatorial government: obedience to what is dictated by “officials.” Just three of Remington’s violations:
Fetzer is guaranteed trial by jury rather than judge. This was one of the complaints by American Founders documented in the Declaration of Independence. The purpose of a jury trial is for our peers to determine the facts and merit of law (jury nullification: an essential right) after the accused has provided a defense, and to prevent a government-appointed and/or paid official to have dictatorial control over We the People. The above cited passages of the Wisconsin Constitution are crystal-clear in letter and intent: Remington completely destroyed the constitutional rights of the defendants that he is Oath-sworn to uphold. By doing so, this so-called "judge" destroyed the definitions of court, due process, justice, and all other American freedoms to fairly settle disputes with claims of damages. This was premeditated murder of what we're all promised by the Judicial Branch of government, and must therefore be called something else: a show trial to target and silence dissent (motives for this murder documented below).
Judge Remington was given five different versions of the alleged death certificate, with affidavits from two experts in document forgeries concluding that Pozner’s “death certificate” is a fabrication. Their central, powerful, and damning expert testimonies are below to prove Judge Remington is sworn to provide jury trial because the facts in the case are in contention. Rather than act as fair umpire in a court of law, Judge Remington chose to conduct a show trial joining a criminal conspiracy to hide evidence of what happened at Sandy Hook, then attack patriots raising questions.
Remington’s summary judgment LIED that the facts of the case were not in contention, despite the defendants’ declaration of the opposite backed by expert witnesses and game-changing evidence. Remington claimed dictatorial control to interpret factual evidence with the explanation that the five different versions of the alleged death certificate were not important, with zero consideration to acknowledge or address the expert witnesses’ assertions of forgery! From Jim’s account, Remington claimed: “I’ve looked at the exhibits. I follow and track all of the explanations that have been provided by the Plaintiff as to explaining the differences between the various forms and copies of the death certificates. All of that makes sense to me and provide a plausible and acceptable explanation for those differences. [P. 163, L 9-14]” Obviously, a judge’s role in a court of law is to conduct a fair contest of evidence and interpretations of facts, not to interpret the evidence and usurp the role of a jury. This choice of Remington is not innocent error or incompetence: it is deliberate choice for a show trial through intentional destruction of central components of the role of judge.
The affidavits of two professionals in document analysis (provided below) demonstrate to any prudent adult that five different versions of a public document with multiple areas of apparent alterations means at the very least that the appropriate public official should account for these different versions and how the evidence of apparent alterations came into existence. This game-changing evidence, as you can verify for yourself, is valid and therefore grounds for a jury to consider that judges are oath-bound to honor.

I cannot emphasize this enough: a summary judgement from a judge is only lawful when facts are not in doubt. Judge Remington violated a central duty of being a judge by imposing show trial dictatorship rather than determination of the facts by an independent jury. This outrageous attack on obvious and fundamental responsibility requires removal of office for apparent judicial misconduct (here, here) that Judge Remington must, himself, face trial to explain.

Moreover, because the evidence of forgery on the alleged death certificate is so clear, a summary judgment may have been appropriate to dismiss the plaintiff's case because any prudent person must conclude the five versions of the document in question make at least some of them fail to meet the legal definition of an official certified death certificate, and therefore forged, fabricated, fake, or whatever other synonym one may choose to describe an inauthentic document. And if this one document has such overwhelming evidence of alterations and fabrication, what would other documents show us under similar expert scrutiny?

The civil tort of defamation requires a statement that is false. The evidence of faked death certificate(s) is so overwhelming, along with one of the expert witnesses also documenting an apparent forged Social Security Card, that my professional opinion as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government with over 35 years' teaching experience must define this judge's response as conducting a tragic-comic show trial rather than open and fair consideration of factual claims and evidence by an impartial jury to determine what happened.

This is basic civics education for limited government under law to prevent exactly what happened in this show trial: dictatorial government outside the law whenever "leaders" say so, and covered with whatever bullshit they choose to say at any particular time. This civil case is exactly what the American Founders warned us to be wary of and to defend against because it re-establishes unlimited government. Those of us with Oaths to defend and protect the United States Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, should interpret this violation of 7th Amendment rights (reinforced by state law) as also attacking 1st Amendment rights for free speech and press. The broader dangers of unlimited government is a central point of a high school education in history and government, as annual costs of such "leadership" in our world of the present include millions killed, billions harmed, and trillions looted.

You, dear reader, should reflect on the purpose of an education in history and American freedoms, then exercise your thoughts, words, and actions consistent with protecting and defending those freedoms. That is the minimum cost for freedom, with absence to invest allowing for such show trials as this to define your status as We the Sheeple.

Professor Fetzer’s podcast debrief of the trial

Professor Emeritus Jim Fetzer debriefs on the status of the “Sandy Hook trial” in the first hour of this interview, then with my participation to explain the alleged Sandy Hook mothers' average age giving birth at 36 a statistical impossibility, and my background to address solutions to basic world problems that contributed to two UN summits for heads of state (also soon here):


Motive: avoid another King Family Civil Trial proving US government orchestrated local government to commit a massive crime

Why would a judge take such Orwellian-illegal action that is Emperor's New Clothes obvious? One short answer that takes much time to verify is that the United States governmental system promised is not what is delivered on all accounts, with its crimes of being a rogue state empire "covered" by corporate media and public education. This broad context is explained and documented in this published paper, these two article series (one, two), and this published economics paper documenting ~$1,000,000 withheld benefits for every American household that is literally more valuable to understand than any other investment of your time.

This means that .01% American "leadership" in government, money, and communication has been captured by criminal oligarchies working for their own outrageous profits, and controlling their gangs with blackmail and violence. The specific purpose of a false flag event at Sandy Hook, fully documented in this free online version of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook edited by Jim and Mike Palecek with chapters by thirteen experts that include six Ph.D. professors, is to remove the 2nd Amendment from Americans by "gun control." The apparent reason to disarm Americans is the same as Nazi Germany, China, and all colonies to prevent public resistance when the public recognize their status as work animals serving a rogue state empire, an only receiving propaganda to cover their psychopathic crimes.

I previously wrote that the Sandy Hook trial could become more important than the King Family Civil Trial of 1999. Martin’s widow, Coretta, spent more than twice the years she was married to Martin assembling the facts of the assassination along with Martin’s friend and a King Family attorney, Bill Pepper. From my latest on this topic, and with additional resources:

“We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the widest possible audience.” ~ Coretta Scott King, Martin's wife, King Family Press Conference, Dec. 9, 1999.

"We as a family have done our part. We have carried this mantle for as long as we can carry it. We know what happened. It is on public record... Any serious researcher who wants to know what happened can find out.” ~ Dexter Scott King, Martin's son and King Center CEO, remarks on the verdict

For ten years I’ve done what I can to publicly communicate the facts of the King Family civil trial verdict of US government guilt to assassinate Martin. The King Center documents the family’s civil trial that found US government agencies guilty of assassinating Martin in 1968.

The evidence of guilt is overwhelming:
US 111th Military Intelligence Group were at Dr. King’s location during the assassination.
20th Special Forces Group had an 8-man sniper team at the assassination location on that day.
Usual Memphis Police special body guards were advised they “weren’t needed” on the day of the assassination.
Regular and constant police protection for Dr. King was removed from protecting Dr. King an hour before the assassination.
Military Intelligence set-up photographers on the roof of a fire station with clear view to Dr. King’s balcony.
Dr. King’s room was changed from a secure 1st-floor room to an exposed balcony room.
Memphis police ordered the scene where multiple witnesses reported as the source of shooting cut down of their bushes that would have hid a sniper.
Along with sanitizing a crime scene, police abandoned investigative procedure to interview witnesses who lived by the scene of the shooting.
The rifle Mr. Ray delivered was not matched to the bullet that killed Dr. King, and was not sighted to accurately shoot.
Although most Americans are unaware of the civil trial verdict that Dr. King was murdered by local officials orchestrated by federal officials, we can imagine and predict US .01% rogue state "leaders" today would want to silence critics, even when lies are all they can present to a crooked court.

Sandy Hook mothers’ average age giving birth = 36. Odds this is true = 1 in 109,418,989,131,512,370,000

In 2017 I did a statistical analysis, later backed by Paul Majchrowicz, another researcher with appropriate academic training and professional experience. Here it is:

The alleged Sandy Hook shooting of December 2012 had 20 1st grade children with stated ages of 6 and 7 years old (only four at age seven). From public information (1), the average age of those mothers in 2012 is 42.25; meaning their average age giving birth is 36. Some 1st grade students’ mothers will be 36 or older, but what are the odds of a random group of 20 such mothers averaging 36 years of age?

What are the odds?

According to the CDC (2), the percentage of US mothers giving their first birth at age 35 or older for 2006 is ~8%; about 1 in every 12. Pew Research Center reports (3) that American mothers’ age 35 or older for any birth is 14%. Therefore, let’s estimate the percentage of 1st grade students’ mothers ages being 36 or older at 11%: about 1 in every 9. Age 36 is nine years above cited CDC average of age 27 for mothers with any number of children giving birth in 2006.

This means in an average US classroom of 27 1st grade students, 24 moms would be younger than 36, and only 3 would be 36 or older. To calculate the odds that the average age of Sandy Hook mothers at birth was 36, we multiply 1/9 to itself 20 times. This is the same method for the odds of flipping a coin: multiply 1/2 times the number of flips to have the odds of all heads or all tails (the odds of two straight heads is 1/4, 20 straight heads or tails is 1 in 1,048, 576).

The odds that Sandy Hook mothers averaged an age of 36 is therefore about 1 in 109,418,989,131,512,370,000 (verify yourself by placing 9 in this calculator, then looking at the power of 20. Of course, you can verify with any other accurate method) (4).

Even though I’m a math teacher, I had to look up (5) how to say this number: 109 quintillion, 418 quadrillion, 989 trillion, 131 billion, 512 million, 370 thousand.

How often would odds of 1 in 109,418,989,131,512,370,000 happen?

On its face, it is statistically impossible for the Sandy Hook story to be true given this data point. This is more than enough by itself to fully challenge the accuracy of what you’re told about Sandy Hook. For comparisons:
The odds of a person being left-handed is 15% (6) (~1/6 to 1/7). It’s more probable for a random group of 20 people to all be left-handed than for a random group of 1st grade students’ moms to be age 42.
The odds of an American having green eyes is 12% (7). That all 20 Sandy Hook moms have green eyes is more likely than their alleged ages.
The odds of winning the Powerball jackpot is 1 in ~175,000,000 (8). The odds of winning two consecutive Powerball jackpots is 1 in 30,625,000,000,000,000 (175 million times itself). It’s more likely that you would win two straight Powerball jackpots than the Sandy Hook moms’ ages being true.
The number of days since the claimed life of Jesus is ~730,000 (2,000 times 365). If Jesus were alive for 33 years, that’s 12,045 days. This means Jesus was alive 1.6% of the days passed since his birth (about 1/60). If you had a time machine to pick a random day to visit in those 730,000 days, it’s as likely you’d have 12 consecutive days in Jesus’ lifetime than it’s likely the Sandy Hook mothers’ ages is true.
The Earth is about 4.5 billion years old (9), which is 1.64 trillion days. If we had a computer randomly select one of those days, the odds of you picking that same day is 1 in 1.64 trillion. You are more likely to accomplish this miracle than it’s probable the Sandy Hook moms’ ages are accurate.
In fact, the number of seconds Earth has existed is 141.7 quadrillion. You’re more likely to correctly predict which random second of Earth’s existence a computer selects than the Sandy Hook moms’ ages not being a lie.
Of course, we can also say you’re personally more likely to select a random 1/700th of a second from all Earth’s existence over 4.5 billion years than the Sandy Hook “mom” birth age of 36 not being a hoax.
What are the odds a Sandy Hook dad would laugh it up, then get into character before his CNN press conference?

While I have your attention, I don’t know how to calculate the odds that Robbie Parker, a father whose daughter was brutally murdered the day before, would approach a press conference smiling, laughing, then as best I can tell with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer also speaking, saying, “I feel terrible to support this, but should we start? Ok.” Mr. Parker then seems to “get into character,” or whatever you’d call what the video (10) shows. Take as much time as you need to feel the implications of what you see, hear, and read of emotions and body language as this ~30-second video helpfully loops to allow time to process what this might mean:

I do know the odds of the mothers’ ages makes Mr. Parker’s status as one of the dads equally preposterous. Mr. Parker apparently saying he feels “terrible to support this” can be interpreted that his relatively youthful lack of seriousness may be a reason older people with acting experience would be preferable to make public and televised statements; hence the source of the profession of crisis actors (11).

Endnotes for this section:
1. Consider the below cited list of 16 mothers, and these additional 4 from Professor James Fetzer: Rebecca Ann Kowalski born 1968; maiden name Frazier = 44, Michelle Gay (1972); maiden name Hartman = 40, Tricia Pinto 1970; maiden name Volkmann = 42, Cheyenne Wyatt 1975; maiden name Wirtz = 37. Cited list: The Oldest Mothers of a Kindergarten Class. Pastor Don Elmore. FGCP: Fellowship of God’s Covenant People. http://fgcp.org/content/oldest-mothers-kindergarten-class
2. NCHS Data Brief No. 232 January 2016. Mean Age of Mothers is on the Rise: United States, 2000–2014. T.J. Mathews, M.S.; and Brady E. Hamilton, Ph.D. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db232.pdf
3. The New Demography of American Motherhood. Gretchen Livingston, D’Vera Cohn. Pew Research Center. May 6, 2010. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/05/06/the-new-demography-of-ameri...
4. There are several ways to calculate on several different calculators. For one simple way, use this: Script “Power Number Calculator”. http://www.chemelec.com/Calculators/A%20Power%20Number%20Calculator-2.htm
5. Wikipedia as one source: Names of large numbers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_large_numbers
6. Left Handed Facts and Statistics. DailyInfographic. Jay. June 2, 2011. https://www.dailyinfographic.com/left-handed-facts-and-statistics-info...
7. 11 Eye Color Percentages and Statistics. BrandonGaille Small Business & Marketing Advice. Brandon Gaille. May 19, 2017. https://brandongaille.com/eye-color-percentages-and-statistics/
8. A Statistician’s View: What Are Your Chances of Winning the Powerball Lottery? HuffPost. Ronald L Wasserstein, Executive Director, American Statistical Association. Dec 6, 2017. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chances-of-winning-powerball-lottery_b_...
9. How Old Is Earth? space.com. Nola Taylor Redd. Feb 7, 2019. https://www.space.com/24854-how-old-is-earth.html
10. These videos from YouTube are routinely deleted, and easily refound. Here’s one: 10 Minutes Of Robby Parker Getting Into Character Before A CNN Interview. 10 Minutes Of (YouTube channel). Dec 18, 2018. https://youtu.be/-KRBgar3mLI
11. “Crisis actors” is real work. One source is Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisis_actor

Sandy Hook trial expert testimonies: multiple apparent forgeries

Affidavit #1 (formatted as best I can):
Page 1
My name is Larry Wickstrom. I am a computer printer, scanner and network communications
forensic expert. (Curriculum Vitae Attached.)

The documents that I usually evaluate for fabrication, alteration and misrepresentation are
financial contracts, affidavits and exhibits entered with pleadings. As the client, Moon Rock
Books, was referred to me by an attorney that I have worked with on foreclosure cases, I did not
expect to find multiple, obviously altered versions of a child’s death certificate when I opened
the email attachments provided for my initial examination.

As an integral part of the written report, it has been my practice to provide a condensed history
of events that warranted the document examination. When I examine documents after an action
has commenced, it has been my practice to include type of action, along with title and docket
number in the introduction. At the time of drafting this report, I did not know and given the
content of the documents examined, chose not to inquire into the nature, nor even the venue of
this action until after completing my examination.

On May 20, 2019, James Fetzer emailed a copy of the court stamped complaint filed in the
action entitled Leonard Posner vs. James Fetzer, Mike Palecek, Wrongs Without Wremedies,
LLC. Dane County Circuit Court Case No. 2018CV003122.

For the purpose of identifying which document was a true copy, two separate and
different JPEG images of documents purporting to be; copies of the State of Connecticut,
Certificate of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6 and a single PDF attachment containing a
third version of the State of Connecticut, Certificate of Death, for this same Noah Samuel Pozner
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 1 of 22

Page 2
age 6, were received via email for evaluation from Moon Rock Books on May 8, 2019. The
received PDF attachment also included State of Connecticut, Certificate of Death, images of four
other individuals for reference and comparison. On May 10, 2019, the original embossed by the
Seal of State of Connecticut, Department of Public Health, hard copies of the documents as
contained in the PDF attachment were delivered by Fed X to my location for examination and
verification that the Seal of the State of Connecticut was applied to these documents as

On May 20, 2019, James Fetzer emailed a copy of the court stamped complaint filed in the
action entitled Leonard Posner vs. James Fetzer, Mike Palecek, Wrongs Without Wremedies,
LLC., Dane County Circuit Court Case No. 2018CV003122. This file stamped complaint
contained a fourth version of the State of Connecticut, Certificate of Death, for Noah Samuel
Pozner age 6.

No original Certificate of Death was provided for examination, the examined Certificates were
digital images or printed reproductions of digital images. All examined certificates listing
December 14, 2012, as actual or presumed date of death are identified in the upper left hand
certificates listing December 14, 2012, as actual or presumed date of death appear to have been
hand inscribed by the named certifying medical examiner as the cursive scrawl differs slightly on
all certificates. All examined certificates listing December 14, 2012, as actual or presumed date
of death appear to have a cursive image of Debbie A Aurelia applied by rubber stamp as the date
noting when the certificate was received appears to have been written by three (3) different
hands and the signet shape of Debbie A Aurelia remains constant and the placement of this
signet changes on all examined certificates.

All examined Certificates of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6, have notable differences as
do even the two printed images (CoD 3 & 8) both of which are purportedly attested to by
Registrar of Vital Records, Elizabeth Frugale, and certified by the Seal of the State of
Connecticut, true copies of a record filed. The copies of this record bearing the state file number
2012-07-078033 are notably different in appearance. The most notable appearance difference of
certified "A TRUE" copy Version 4 (CoD 8) is not the redaction as noted in the complaint to
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 2 of 22

Page 3
which it was attached, but the printed form content that is not found in the same location on the
certified "ATRUE" copy Version 3 (CoD 3).

The most notable common feature of these (CoD 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7) examined, seal embossed, true
copy of a record, certificates is that the contents of box in the lower right corner, along with the
title and even some of the lines which appear to have been hand redrawn, are notably absent
from all of these state seal certified "True Copies" of filed records.

The first examined Connecticut, Certificate of Death, (CoD 1) for Noah Samuel Pozner
age 6, is a 132KB, JPEG image. Moon Rock Books did not have the original hard copy
document that was used to create this imaged file and this document was examined in the digital
format as received.

The most distinguishing features of this document image are the grey background color, the three
(3) black marker lines that obliterate the internment location as recorded in box’s 29 - 30 and the
illigibly titled box directly right of Box 58. The dark black border that frames this image was
obviously added to the document image as the sharp dark black of this line is inconsistent with
the low resolution of the image it frames and it abruptly terminates what should be the
continuation of paper hole punch images on the left printed edge.

The greatest oddity of this imaged document is what appears to be part of the Connecticut State
Seal, found directly below the written received for record on date December 26, 2012 (CoD 1a)
on a document that is obviously lacking the state file number.

The second examined Connecticut, Certificate of Death, (CoD 2) for Noah Samuel
Pozner age 6, is a 1.7MB, JPEG image. Moon Rock Books did not have the original hard copy
document that was used to create this imaged file and this document was examined in the digital
format as received.
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 3 of 22

Page 4
The most distinguishing feature of this document (CoD 2a) is an image purporting that same
"Debbie" Debbie Aurolia Halstead certified this, a partial document, containing changes as noted
made on 6-14-13, to be a true copy of the original received for record on December 26, 2012, as
this document contains “Debbie A Aurolia” the pre hyphenated name (CoD 2b). The name of the
Registrar that received this record on December 26, 2012, and the name that appears at this
location on the state certified copy containing the same certification (CoD 3) are Debbie A

This “Debbie Aurolia Halstead” section of the image also appears to contain the shadowy image
of a registry stamp (CoD 2c) impressed upon this Debbie Aurolia Halstead certification. There
are strikeout and corrections of boxes 12 & 22 as noted and dated 6-14-13 at the top of the
document image.

Appearing in the upper right corner of this imaged document purporting to be a state file number
(CoD 2d) are a partial character followed by the legible number 243. This number scheme is not
compliant with the State of Connecticut file numbering as found on the certified by affixed
embossed seal copy (CoD 3) and neither the number scheme, nor the font of this number print
matches the character font as found on reference copy examples (CoD 4, 5, 6, & 7). The lower
portion of the December 26, 2012 hand written date is obviously missing, as is the lower printed
portion of this document image.

The third examined Connecticut, Certificate of Death, (CoD 3) for Noah Samuel Pozner
age 6, is certified by the affixed state seal as a true copy actual record copy. The most disturbing
attribute of this document is the embossed Seal of the State of Connecticut, Department of Public
Health, "affixed to certify that the above is "ATRUE" copy of a record filed" that has been
recklessly altered and repaired in an attempt to conceal the act of alteration. That printed form
content was removed is evidenced by its appearance in this location on Version 4 (CoD 8).

Another notable attribute is found on the left edge of the certificate section of this document
(CoD 3a) where “Debbie A Aurolia” registrar, attests that this is a true copy of the original
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 4 of 22

Page 5
received for record. This marking differs in size from all other examined certificates (CoD 4, 5,
&6) listing December 14, 2012, as actual or presumed date of death.

This certificate notes the corrections of boxes 12 & 22 as per father 6-14-13 at the top of the
document and certifies itself as a true copy of the original received for record and contains a
received for record date of December 26, 2012.

The hand written number code of this (2013 address corrected) certificate is consistent only in
numerical content with the mechanically applied State File number code as found on the
examined certificates (CoD 4, 5, 6, & 7) as (CoD 4) Certified by the medical examiner on Dec
16, 2012, and received for record on 1-3-13, is mechanically stamped as state file
201207078019, and (CoD 5) Certified by the medical examiner on Dec 16, 1012 and received
for record on 12-21-12, is mechanically stamped as state file 201207078020 and (CoD 6)
Certified by the medical examiner on Dec 15, 1012 and received for record on December 16,
2012, is mechanically stamped as state file number 201207078036 and (CoD 7) Certified by the
Attending Practitioner on 11/9/2017 and received for record on Nov 09 2017, is mechanically
stamped as state file 201707027410.

One would expect that a corrected and true copy of the original would have a mechanically
stamped state file number. This certificate contains the hand written number code “2012-07-
078033" inside the state file number box.

The fourth examined Connecticut, Certificate of Death, (CoD 8) for Noah Samuel Pozner
age 6, found as Attachment A of the complaint filed in the action entitled Leonard Posner vs.
James Fetzer, Mike Palecek, Wrongs Without Remedies, LLC. Dane County Circuit Court Case
No. 2018CV003122.

With the exception of differences previously noted and incorporated herein. This certified as a
true copy of a record filed with the State of Connecticut, Department of Public Health is nearly
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 5 of 22

Page 6
identical to Version 3 (CoD 3).

No original State of Connecticut, Certificate of Death was proffered for examination. No
unaltered digital image file, or unaltered printed reproductions of digital images, or hard copy
document purporting to be the original State of Connecticut, Certificate of Death was proffered
for examination.

The examined certified by state seal certificates are only certified to be true copies of the record
filed. None of these printed state certified records are certified to be true and correct copies of the
filed record which is a State of Connecticut, Certificate of Death.

The examined certified by state seal Certificate of Death copies (CoD 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7) were
proffered with all contents of the box located in the lower right corner, including the title
completely removed. Certificates identified as (CoD 3a`, 4, 6 &7) indicate hand drawn
restoration of box lines inadvertently removed.


The 132KB, JPEG imaged (CoD 1) Certificate of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6,
is intentionally defaced by black ink markings and altered in appearance by the added black
border. This digitally captured image records an alteration in the lower left corner that appears to
resemble a portion of a seal, possibly the Connecticut State Seal. The multi generational copy
degradation of printed image, combined with the low resolution of the captured digital image,
prevent identifying this marking or the cause of this curious marking.

The 1.7MB, JPEG imaged (CoD 2) Certificate of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6,
is grossly altered by the deletion of the lower portion which is approximately 1/7th of the actual
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 6 of 22

Page 7
form area and the addition of markings, specifically the purported state file number along with a
registrars seal and certification images, purporting, that this assembled fabrication is a true copy
of the original record.

The certified by state seal (CoD 3) Certificate of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6, is
intentionally altered and notes the reason for alteration of information contained in boxes 12 &
22 at the top line of print which is correction of address by strikethrough of original content. This
version is intentionally altered by removal of form print as evidenced by (CoD 8) and repaired in
attempt to conceal the alteration. The hand written state file number also appears to have been an


From my examination of the documents which were presented to me electronically and by US
Mail, I make these determinations.

1. That the 132KB, JPEG imaged Certificate of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6, (CoD
1) as examined is an altered and unreliable document image. No determination of
originality, or intentional act of forgery, can be supported due to the multi generational
copy degradation of printed image and the low resolution of the captured image.
2. That the obviously altered in shape and content, 1.7MB, JPEG imaged Certificate of
Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6, (CoD 2) is a forgery.
3. That the State of Connecticut, Registrar of Vital Statistics, has issued two different and
certified as true versions (CoD 3 & 8) of state file number 2012-07- 078033, a Certificate
of Death, for Noah Samuel Pozner age 6.
4. That for reasons disclosed and undisclosed, the content of state file number 2012-07-
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 7 of 22

Page 8
078033 has been digitally and physically altered.
5. That until such time as the State of Connecticut addresses and rectifies the conditions that
allow this kind of record manipulation, any "true copy of a record filed", certified by the
Seal of State of Connecticut, Department of Public Health, should be considered suspect
and treated as unreliable.

Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 8 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 9 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 10 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 11 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 12 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 13 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 14 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 15 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 16 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 17 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 18 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 19 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 20 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 21 of 22
Case 2018CV003122 Document 178 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 22 of 22

Affidavit #2
Page 1 of 7

(personal contact information omitted)

13 Defendants

CASE NO.: 2018-CV-003122


I, A.P. Robertson, hereby declare and state that all of the facts set forth in this declaration are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and if called as a witness I could and would competently testify as to the following:
1. My name is A.P. Robertson. I am a resident of Santa Clara, California.
2. I am a Mortgage Loan Auditor and Forensic Document Examiner and I am currently the Chief Auditing Officer at KMBA ASSET LIQUIDATIONS. FILED
Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 1 of 7
Page 2 of 7

3. I have over 28 years of full-time experience in all aspects in the fields of Forensic Document Examination, Real Estate and Mortgage Banking with extensive knowledge and training in Fraud Detection and Loss Mitigation.
4. I am a member of the American Society for Testing and Materials International, my member number is #1694306. I am a participating member of the ASTM Committee on Forensic Sciences and I am on the Sub-Committee responsible for setting the standards and practices of Digital and Multimedia Evidence for the organization and I have full voting status for my committee and sub-committee.
5. I have received extensive expert training in all aspects of Forensic Document Analysis by some of the most highly regarded experts in the country who handle the big cases that make national news.
6. I have extensive training by instructors from all of the major United States Government agencies concerning the area of Forensic Sciences, specifically, fraudulent documents and expert testimony in federal and superior court.
7. In compliance with Federal Rule 26(a)1(B), my disclosures are listed in my Curriculum Vitae along with my qualifications and experience, which is attached to this declaration.
8. In the normal course of my daily business I am often asked to verify the accuracy and validity of reports, documents and Exhibits that are submitted to the court in cases requiring expert testimony in my area of experience and expertise, as well as prepare original Forensic Document Examinations.
9. I was contacted by Dr. James Fetzer on June 3, 2019 and asked to do a peer review of a Forensic Document Examination done by Mr. Larry Wickstrom that would be submitted to the court in the instant matter. I understand that time is of the essence and that I would not be able to take the time that I would normally like for a case like this. So, this report
Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 2 of 7
Page 3 of 7

will be brief. If the court requires more detail, or has any questions, I will make myself available.
10. After reviewing the Forensic Document Examination Report by my colleague Mr. Wickstrom, I concur with his findings.
11. Additional items that I feel deserve further attention and/or investigation are the State File Numbers. Several samples have no file number, one has a stamped file number that is almost completely blank, save the last 3 digits, which can be recognized as “243.” However, one sample has a handwritten State File Number as, “2012-07-078033.” This appears to be a later version of the document, based on the fact that there is a note on the top that states boxes 12 & 22 were corrected by the Father Leonard Pozner 6-14-13. However, the stamped file number has been completely erased and written by hand. This anomaly is most difficult to explain.
12. Box 18 contains the words “Father’s Name (First, Middle, Last), and is filled in with “Lenny Pozner.” This is highly unusual, as normal formal documents have the full name, including middle name and nicknames are generally not accepted by the Registrar for obvious reasons.
13. Another anomaly that bears mentioning is the multiple different font types, sizes and darkness, to the point where several entries look as if they were bold. Although these anomalies may be able to be explained by the Registrar, the relevant factor remains. Would a reasonable person of average intelligence look at these anomalies and come to the conclusion that something suspicious is going on?
14. Additionally, Plaintiff has admitted that he made alterations to the Death Certificate. On 06-13-13 he apparently unlawfully changed the Death Certificate. Ironically, in Plaintiff’s Affidavit, he failed to submit the new, unlawfully modified Death Certificate. It is unknown why he did not submit the most recent documents to this Court. Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 3 of 7
Page 4 of 7

15. Connecticut Regulations, Title 19a - Public Health and Well-being, outlines the rules and regulations that are required to correct, modify or amend a vital record.
16. Title 19a-41-6(f) states: “Except as otherwise specified by statute, no information shall be removed or otherwise changed on a vital record if such information is known to be accurate.” Plaintiff claims to have made the alteration to the Death Certificate on his own motion. Plaintiff’s ex-wife’s was listed as the informant on the Death Certificate and listed the address of her son as 37 Alpine Circle, Sandy Hook, CT 06482, which is apparently where she and the children lived. However, Plaintiff took it upon himself to alter the death certificate, in an apparent attempt to divert any public donations away from his ex-wife and children, directly into his own pocket. Hence, he put his own address of 3 Kale Davis Road, presumably in an unsuccessful effort to save his house from a foreclosure proceeding, which was initiated long before December 14, 2012.
17. Sec. 19a-41-7 states: “Supporting documentation for amendment or correction: A registrar of vital statistics shall amend or correct a vital record upon the written request of a party authorized under section 19a-41-8 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies to make such request when the party provides documentation to support the requested change. Only unaltered documents will be accepted. In addition to documentary evidence, the requesting party shall also provide an affidavit affirming that the existing vital record is incorrect or incomplete, and that the newly provided information is accurate.” Examiners were not provided with any supporting documents, nor the required affidavit.
18. Connecticut General Statutes 7-36 (9) states: “Correction” means to change or enter new information on a certificate of birth, marriage, death or fetal death, within one year of the date of the vital event recorded in such certificate, in order to accurately reflect the facts existing at the time of the recording of such vital event, where such changes or entries are to correct errors on such certificate due to inaccurate or incomplete information provided
Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 4 of 7
Page 5 of 7

by the informant at the time the certificate was prepared, or to correct transcribing, typographical or clerical errors;” There is no evidence that the information provided by the informant at the time the certificate was prepared was inaccurate, hence any alterations would be unlawful accordingly.
19. I would also advise that Defendants inquire with the Registrar and ask for proof of documentation for the modification and possibly be deposed, and/or write a declaration or affidavit explaining all the anomalies to clear up any confusion.
20. In addition to the death certificates, I have examined the Social Security Card of Noah Samuel Pozner. Since 1936, the Social Security Card has been changed by the Social Security administration 34 times. Many of the changes that are done are not made readily available to the general public. The Social Security Card that was submitted by Plaintiff was redacted; however public records indicate the number is 043-11-8199. This number was issued between the years 2006-2008. Given the way that the Social Security Administration issues the numbers, the first three digits represent the state code. The middle two digits represent the date code and the last 4 digits are random, however, they are listed sequentially. All numbers in the group are issued until the last one “9999.”
21. Given the date of birth of the decedent, 11-20-2006, and the last four of his SSN of 8199, the estimated issue date for this number is mid to late 2007.
22. This poses a serious problem because the Social Security Administration does not issue Social Security numbers to people before they were born. This Social Security Number should be on the card in the new format applicable at the time of issuance. Among other things, the new format contains the date the actual card was issued.
23. Additionally, upon close examination of the card, there are more anomalies that make this card highly suspect. For example, the “L” in Samuel is a full two pixels lower than the rest of the letters in the middle name. The “N” in the last name is also two full pixels
Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 5 of 7
Page 6 of 7

below the rest of the letters in the last name, except the “R”, which is a full two pixels above the rest of the letters. See below.
24. Although there may be a logical explanation for these serious issues, it is highly unlikely. I would recommend that the Court order the original card to be produced so I can do a full Forensic Examination on the original. If Plaintiff is either unwilling, or unable to produce the card, the Court should most certainly take that fact into account when adjudicating the instant matter.
25. In my experience, when I expose a potentially altered or fabricated document based on a copy, almost without fail, the submitting party will be unwilling or unable to submit the original document to the Court.

Due to the deadline that I have been given, I regretfully will not be able to complete a full investigation and examination of my own, however, with the clear evidence that has been documented in Mr. Wickstrom’s report already, I believe the minimum standard for a Forensic Document Examination has been successfully met.
In any event, without accusing anybody of criminal activity, I will say this: given the vast array of different versions of the same document and all the numerous documented anomalies that are clearly visible, I would ask the question, “Would a reasonable person of average intelligence, draw the same conclusions as the Defendants?” I think that the answer is almost Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 6 of 7
Page 7 of 7

certainly yes. I would dare to say that any person of average intelligence would come to the conclusion that there appears to be some sort of intentional document manipulation.
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of California & Wisconsin, the previous is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Respectfully Submitted,
June 4, 2019 ______________ A P Robertson ____________
A.P. Robertson,
Forensic Document Examiner Case 2018CV003122 Document 182 Filed 06-07-2019 Page 7 of 7


I consider Dr. Jim Fetzer a hero and among the “Re-Founders of America” for leading research beginning with proving President Kennedy was assassinated by our own government, and continuing to the present with game-changing documentations with experts.

Again, if you’re interested, here is an online version of Nobody Died at Sandy Hook, edited by Jim and Mike Palecek, with chapters by thirteen experts, including six Ph.D. professors.

I make all factual assertions as a National Board Certified Teacher of US Government, Economics, and History (also credentialed in Mathematics), with all economic factual claims receiving zero refutation since I began writing in 2008 among Advanced Placement Macroeconomics teachers on our discussion board, public audiences of these articles, and international conferences (and here). I invite readers to empower their civic voices with the strongest comprehensive facts most important to building a brighter future. I challenge professionals, academics, and citizens to add their voices for the benefit of all Earth’s inhabitants.
Carl Herman worked with both US political parties over 18 years and two UN Summits with the citizen’s lobby, RESULTS, for US domestic and foreign policy to end poverty. He can be reached at Carl_Herman@post.harvard.edu
Note: My work from 2012 to October, 2017 is on Washington’s Blog. Work back to 2009 is blocked by Examiner.com (and from other whistleblowers), so some links to those essays are blocked. If you’d like to search for those articles other sites may have republished, use words from the article title within the blocked link. Or, go to http://archive.org/web/, paste the expired link into the box, click “Browse history,” then click onto the screenshots of that page for each time it was screen-shot and uploaded to webarchive (blocked author pages: here, here).




jones was right.