THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA

(a CALIFORNIA corporation)

currently d.b.a.

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF NEVADA

(a fictitious business)

THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA	)	Notice of Denial
	)	of Access
	)	to Court Records
versus	)
	)	Case number M96-1292
THOMAS M. THORNHILL, III	)
(a legal fiction)	)	Place: 201 Church Street
	)	Nevada City, California
	)	Date:
	)	ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL NOTICE REQUIRED
	)

Declarant, ___________________________________________ a natural born, white Man of sound mind and body, a National of the united States of America, and currently a Citizen of California; is here by Special Visitation only and without the benefit of the Assistance of Counsel; for the purpose of advising this "court" that one of its employees has denied me the Right to inspect the public record.

Declarant, with all due Respect and in full Good Faith, Declares, Swears, and Affirms:

1. A. I respectfully Demand the immediate presence and services of a competent court Reporter to Accurately record the current, and all future, proceedings in this "court of record" as required by the statutes of THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (See: In re Armstrong (1981), 126 Cal.App.3d 565; California Court Reporters Assn. v. Judicial Council of California (1995), 39 Cal.App.4th 15, 18; California Court Reporters Assn. v. Judicial Council of California (1997), 59 Cal.App.4th 959, 964; Ryan v. Commission on Judicial Performance (1988), 45 Cal.3d 518, 541-542; Kloepfer v. Commission (1989), 49 Cal.3d 826, 842-843, 865-866; Kennick v. Commission on Judicial Performance (1990), 50 Cal.3d 297, 313-314; Doan v. Commission on Judicial Performance (1995), 11 Cal.4th 294, 311-312).

2. On October 27, 1999, I came to the COUNTY OF NEVADA courthouse to inspect the records of the case M96-1292 maintained at the former NEVADA COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT CLERK'S OFFICE. I was shown a roll of microfilm which contained copies of the records of that case and viewed portions of it with assistance from one of your employees (WFA, name unknown to me, age @30's, blonde hair, @5'-10", heavy build). I told her I needed a copy(ies) of a warrant served and returned @April 24, 1998. She told me it was "confidential"; that I could not have it; and that I would have to request that the "court" order her to release it to me at "the 8:30 session". So here I am.

3. Copley Press, Inc. v. Superior Court (1998), 63 Cal.App.4th 367, 373-374 says:

Public policy requires public records and documents to be available for public inspection to prevent secrecy in public affairs. (Craemer v. Superior Court (1968) 265 Cal.App.2d 216, 222... .) "Where there is no contrary statute or countervailing public policy, the right to inspect public records must be freely allowed." (Ibid.)
"[I]t is a first principle that the people have the right to know what is done in their courts." (In re Shortridge (1893) 99 Cal. 526, 530... .) The public has a legitimate interest in access to court documents because "[i]f public court business is conducted in private, it becomes impossible to expose corruption, incompetence, inefficiency, prejudice, and favoritism." (Estate of Hearst (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 777, 784... .)
..."A trial is a public event. What transpires in the court room is public property. ... There is no special perquisite of the judiciary which enables it, as distinguished from the other institutions of democratic government, to suppress, edit, or censor events which transpire [in] proceedings before it." (Craig v. Harney (1947) 331 U.S. 367, 374... .)
Court records are available to the public in general, ..., unless a specific exemption makes specific records nonpublic. (Estate of Hearst, supra, ... 782.)...
The burden rests on the party seeking to deny public access to court records to establish compelling reasons why and to what extent the records should be made private. (Estate of Hearst, supra, ... 785.)

5. In the alternative, this "court" should order your employee to immediately deliver to me a complete copy(ies) (fronts and backs) of the said returned warrant.

6. If your employee can not or will not deliver said copy(ies), we must Presume (1) that said warrant has never yet actually been returned to this "court" by the arresting officer; and/or (2) that your employee is, and wishes to be held, in Contempt of this "court".

I Declare and Affirm, under the penalties provided for the crime of Perjury in the Law of the United States of America and in the Law of the State of California, that the foregoing is True, Accurate, and Complete, to the best of my knowledge, belief, and understanding at this time.

Verified by my hand, this Day, the ______________ day of___________________ in the year of Our Lord, one thousand, nine hundred and ninty-nine, in ____________________________city,
_________________________county,
____________________________state, United States of America.

Signature: _______________________________________
Thomas Murrell Thornhill III