Chapter 2. Richard Cullen's McGuireWoods Shadow Government Exposed

 Judge Joseph Ellis and McGuireWoods Brandon Santos Collusion Exposes the McGuireWoods Shadow Government

January 25, 2023. Author- Brace Impact

      On January 13, 2023, Judge Joseph Ellis signed a Memorandum Opinion Orders for Henrico County Circuit Court Case Nos.:  

• CL21005759 Spanos v. Douglass et al.
• CL21005758 Spanos v. Vick, 
• CL21006572 Spanos v. Vick et al.
• CL22002250 Spanos v. Harris et al.

      The Memorandum Opinion Orders were drafted by McGuireWoods Counsel Brandon Santos, who was the counsel of record for the defendants James B. Comey, Howard C. Vick, William Birch Douglass, and William Hutchins. Brandon Santos represented Richard Cullen until February 15, 2022, when Richard Culled resigned from McGuireWoods to become the Chief Legal advisor to Governor Glenn Youngkin. Irving Blank was designated as defense counsel for Richard Cullen, as Cullen wanted to detach himself from James Comey and Howard Vick's obstruction of justice and bribery allegations.  

      McGuireWoods attorney Brandon Santos profile description states "Brandon’s practice focuses on advising and defending corporate and individual clients facing regulatory, administrative and criminal investigations. He has advised clients in a wide variety of matters including allegations of healthcare fraud, bank fraud, financial fraud, accounting fraud, import and customs violations, false claims, and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Part of his practice focuses on conducting internal corporate investigations". Brandon Santos is brought in when serious allegations of fraud and government corruption are charged against defendants.

     Brandon Santos is the lap dog of Richard Cullen, and was assigned to defend the McGuireWoods attorneys that were part of the 600-kilo cocaine criminal syndicate. The Defendants had colluded to support and promote a "White Nationalism doctrine", giving special legal treatment and protection to over 30 white affluent professionals consisting of lawyers, doctors and businessmen who were involved in a 600 kilo cocaine organization that operated in the Richmond area for over 10 years. Many of the white affluent professionals were clients of McGuireWoods law firm and connected to Richard Cullen. 

     Before the January 13, 2023, hearing there was a previous hearing on September 19, 2022 on the subject cases, which Judge Joseph Ellis issued an order, drafted by Brandon Santos. The September 19, 2022, order stated:

              “Plaintiff lacks standing to seek the relief requested in the Complaint, and this Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested in the Complaint.”

              “It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Defendants' motions are SUSTAINED, and Plaintiff s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. Given this ruling, it is not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants to Plaintiff s Complaint.”

              “It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this Order is SUSPENDED until further order of this Court.”

    Please note the important sections of Judge Joseph Ellis' Order are emphasized above. 

Judge Joseph Ellis defective order errors

    On October 5, 2022, 17 days after Judge Ellis' order, Brandon Santos filed a Motion for Entry of Pre-filing Injunction to have Judge Ellis issue an order prohibiting the Plaintiff from filing further ethics complaints in the entire Commonwealth of Virginia. The Pre-filing Injunction was signed by only McGuireWoods counsel not by the other 7 Defendants counsel of record. McGuireWoods did not represent the other 7 defendants. Brandon Santos violated Va. Code § 8.01-271.1. which contained signature defects. Plaintiff gave notice to all the defendants counsel that they were required to remedy the signature defects within 21 days of written notice, Defendant's counsel never remedied the defective signatures.

     The filing of the Motion for Entry of Pre-filing Injunction violated the Virginia Supreme Court Rules of Court. The Pre-filing Injunction should have been filed separately and before the September 19, 2022, hearing date, not after Judge Ellis entered an order. The pertinent parts to Judge Ellis' order states:

• “Plaintiff lacks standing to seek the relief requested in the Complaint, and this Court has no jurisdiction to grant the relief requested in the Complaint.”
• "Plaintiff s Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice. Given this ruling, it is not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants to Plaintiff s Complaint.”

     Judge Ellis' order clearly states: 

• "...this Court has no jurisdiction" 
• "...it is not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants to Plaintiff s Complaint.”

    Brandon Santos and Judge Joseph Ellis recognized the order's language and recognized two important issues; the court ruled it had no jurisdiction to hear the subject cases, thus it had no jurisdiction to hear the Pre-filing Injunction, additionally the order stated that it was not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions. Brandon Santos and Judge Ellis conspired together to violate Judge Ellis's September 19, 2022, order as they clearly violated the directive of the order which stated "...it is not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants to Plaintiff s Complaint.” .

     Another important factor was that Judge Ellis order stated "...Order is SUSPENDED until further order of this Court.” Why would Judge Ellis suspend his order until further order of the Court? Brandon Santos and Judge Ellis recognized that Spanos would file a notice of appeal and have the cases heard before the Court of Appeals of Virginia (CAV), where he would be allowed to give oral arguments. Where Judge Ellis had violated Spanos's constitutional right to make arguments and give testimony in the Henrico Circuit court.

     Brandon Santos intentionally did not file the Motion for Injunction as a separate case as Spanos who resides in Greece would require that Santos serve him in accordance to the mandatory requirements of the Hague Service Convention. If Santos followed the articles of the Hague Service Convention, it would have weighed against William Birch Douglass III and William Hutchins, who were Defendants in one of the complaints filed. Douglass and Hutchins are accused of fraud concerning Spanos's Trust, having not properly serving him according to the mandatory requirements of the Hague Service Convention.

     Brandon Santos and Judge Ellis conspired together to keep the ethics complaint cases in the Henrico Circuit Court indefinitely by suspending the order. Neither Santos or Judge Ellis wanted the CAV to hear the ethics complaints, as it would further expose their unethical court procedures in the Appellate Court. The McGuireWoods shadow government is desperately trying to keep the Spanos cases from gaining exposure.

    Spanos recognized Judge Ellis and Brandon Santos plan to attempt to prevent him from filing a notice of appeal but Spanos ignored the September 19, 2022, Order stating that the order was suspended and tactfully filed a notice of appeal with the Henrico Circuit Court Clerk on October 12, 2022, 22 days after the order was entered. The Henrico Court Clerk was obligated to follow procedures and process the notice of appeal to the CAV and transmitted the court records on December 1, 2022, which the CAV accepted and confirmed the notice of appeal and records.

    On December 13, 2022, McGuireWoods counsel filed a Motion to Dismiss with the CAV on the basis that the September 19, 2022, Order was not final thus non-appealable. On December 15, 2022, Spanos filed his Objection to McGuireWoods' Motion to Dismiss based on his arguments that the order became final and that Judge Ellis's directives in his order stated that "...it is not necessary for the Court to rule on other motions and defenses filed by Defendants to Plaintiff s Complaint.”, thus all court affairs pertaining to the ethics complaints had been concluded and the order was final.

    

        

Three Richmond Lawyers Entangled in Fraud on The Court

 Prominent Richmond Lawyers face Serious Bribery Charges and Fraud on the Courts

Ethics Complaints filed in the Circuit Court and Sanctions filed in the Court of Appeals of Virginia (CAV) have placed 3 prominent Richmond lawyers facing criminal and civil action and are likely to have their license to practice law in Virginia revoked.

Robert L. Freed, who is facing ethics complaints, Case No. 0706-22-2, Spanos v. Robert L. Freed, et al., in the CAV for conspiring with his clients to commit fraud of $100,000., Fraud on the Court, misconduct, and numerous violations of the Rules of the Virginia Code of Professional Conduct (VCPC), now faces class 4 felony charges for violating Va. Code § 18.2-447. When a person guilty of bribery.

In a October 31, 2022, email to several persons and his legal assistant, Freed admitted to influencing the judges of the CAV to dismiss the complaint against him even before a hearing date for oral arguments has been set and the CAV deciding the case. A November 8, 2022, Motion for Sanctions was filed in the CAV for Freed's confession of bribing/influencing a judicial preceding. The sanctions are requesting that the CAV report the bribery/influence charge to the Richmond City Commonwealth Attorney for investigation. Click to view Motion for Sanctions November 8, 2022 

Julie S. Palmer and Michael E. Harman of Harman, Claytor,  Corrigan, & Wellman, represent Robert Freed and Emily Kokie in the ethics complaint. 

Julie Palmer was elected in 2022 as President of the Virginia Association of Defense Attorneys https://www.vada.org/directors

Julie Palmer was recently named as one of Virginia Lawyers Weekly’s 2022’s Influential Women in Law.                                        https://valawyersweekly.com/2022/04/04/vlw-names-2022s-influential-women-of-law/

Freed, Palmer and Harman are facing sanctions before the CAV for fraud on the court, making false statements to the court, and tortious interference. Palmer and Harman face separate charges of  bribery/influencing a judicial proceeding in pending cases in the Henrico County Circuit Court. 

The August 1, 2022, Motion for Sanctions against Freed, Palmer, and Harman allege that Palmer and Harman took a February 22, 2022, circuit court record transcript and had ex parte communications with Judge Wilford Taylor Jr., who was presiding over Henrico County Circuit Court Cases CL21006572, CL21005759, to influence Judge Taylor to reverse orders he had previously issued in the Plaintiff’s cases. Click to view CAV SANCTIONS Aug. 1, 2022

The Plaintiff filed a Motion to Recuse Judge Taylor with the Henrico Circuit Court on February 28, 2022, based on evidence provided to the Plaintiff about the ex parte communications between Palmer, Harman, and Judge Wilford Taylor. 

Michael Harman and Judge Wilford Taylor are connected through the McCammon Group, a dispute resolution company which employs Michael Harman and Judge Wilford Taylor as dispute mediators.        Click to view https://www.mccammongroup.com

Shortly thereafter, Judge Taylor recused himself from the Appellant’s cases in the Henrico County Circuit court. Judge Wilford Taylor had been designated by the Supreme Court of Virginia to preside over the Henrico Court cases, as all the Judges of the Henrico County Circuit Court had recused themselves. The SCV had to designate a new judge after Judge Taylors recusal.

Palmer and Harman's influence/bribery of a court member or official, is Fraud on the court and considered to be one of the most serious violations that can occur within a court of law. If fraud on the court occurs, the entire case is voided or cancelled. This means that any ruling or judgment that the court has issued will be rendered void. Additionally, the case will need to be retried, and with different court officials. This is often done in an entirely different venue in order to avoid further instances of fraud on the court. 

Virginia Supreme Court Chief Justice hiding from being served in Ethics Complaint

When high court justices hide from being served with court filings. 

Chief Justice Donald W. Lemons, Supreme Court of Virginia dodges service of a civil Ethics Complaint and a Petition for a Declaratory Judgment filed in the Circuit Court of the County of Louisa, Virginia.

Chief Justice Lemons refused three times to allow his office staff to accept substitute business service.

In a separate Ethics Complaint filed in Orange County, Virginia, Chief Justice Donald Lemons again refused service at his office and was served at his home at 1340 N. Ivanhoe street, Alexandria, VA, 22301.

Karen Gould, Executive Director of the Virginia State Bar accepted service and is represented by the Virginia Attorney General.

How does Chief Justice Lemons think that running from service is going to help him?

Rhetta M. Daniel filed an Ethics Complaint against Chief Justice Lemons and eleven other defendants, who are listed as:

Karen Gould, Executive Director of the VSB 

Chief Justice Lemons of the Supreme Court of Virginia 

E. Grier Ferguson, Esq., Executor and Trustee of Judge William Wellington Jones (deceased)

Alison R. Zizzo, Esq., Ferguson's attorney 

Vanessa Stillman, Esq., Ferguson's attorney 

Nathan Olansen, Esq., Ferguson's attorney

Glen M. Robertson, Esq., Ferguson's attorney

Judge John F. Daffron, Jr. (ret. Chesterfield), sitting specially in the City of Suffolk Circuit Court - Appointed by the VA Supreme Court 

Judge H. Thomas Padrick, Jr. (ret. Virginia Beach), sitting specially in the City of Suffolk Circuit Court. Appointed by the VA Supreme Court 

W. Randolph Carter, Jr. L, Clerk of the City of Suffolk Circuit Court 

Elizabeth K. Shoenfeld, Esq., Asst. Bar Counsel

Prescott L. Prince, Esq., Asst. Bar Counsel

The Ethics Complaint filed on June 09, 2021 can be viewed at the below link:

ETHICS COMPLAINT FILED IN LOUISA COUNTY

The Ethics Complaint filed lists the following offences:

Case # CL 21-209

Ethics allegations: Failing to report other attorneys and judges unethical and criminal actions for prosecution.

Knowing violating Virginia laws since he became a Justice on the Supreme Court of Virginia.

CL 21-221

Declaratory Judgment:

Seeking a decision from the Louisa Circuit Court that since 1976, the Supreme Court of Virginia and the Virginia State Bar have disregarded Virginia Statutes and knowingly broken the law.

Ethics & Declaratory Judgments Cases:

Both deal with:

The collusion of the VSB and the Supreme Court of Virginia has caused thousands of Complaints to be dismissed without investigation and thousands of lawyers to be disciplined without the VSB having the statutory authority to impose any discipline.

It's a criminal act (accessory after the fact) to fail to report evidence of a crime to the appropriate federal or state authorities. The VSB & the VA Sup Ct rarely report evidence of a crime even though they are mandated to do so by the VSB Code of Professional Conduct and the Virginia Supreme Court Rules of Procedure for the VSB.

Va Sup Ct Procedural Rule 13-30 

G. Disclosure of Criminal Activity. If Bar Counsel or a Chair of the Board or a Chair of a District Committee discovers evidence of criminal activity by an Attorney, Bar Counsel, the Chair of the Board or a Chair of a District Committee shall forward such evidence to the appropriate Commonwealth’s Attorney, United States Attorney or other law enforcement agency. The Attorney concerned shall be notified whenever this information is transmitted pursuant to this subparagraph 13-30 unless Bar Counsel decides that giving such notice will prejudice a disciplinary investigation.

Suffolk attorney E. Grier Ferguson under criminal investigation

E. Grier Ferguson, Esquire, allegedly being investigated for various criminal offences 

E. Grier Ferguson is the brother of re-elected Suffolk Commonwealth Attorney C. "Phil" Ferguson and the father of Alexander "Lex" Ferguson.

Sources with the Suffolk City Police Department stated that criminal complaints have been filed against E. Grier Ferguson's allegedly stealing more than $8000. 

The alleged stolen money is said to entangle the law firm of Ferguson, Rawls & Raines P.C. because the stolen money was moved from a Farmers Bank Jones Estate bank account to the law firm's escrow account and commingled with other client's funds.

Randolph Alexander Raines Jr., Frank M Rawls & E. Grier Ferguson

According to the unnamed source: 

E. Grier Ferguson allegedly received the stolen money from filing a fraudulent 2014 personal tax return for Suffolk City Judge William Wellington Jones after Judge Jones died. The theft of over $8000 was from the Estate of Judge William Wellington Jones & the beneficiary Mary Margaret Jones.

• In the fall of 2016, E. Grier Ferguson filed a fraudulent 2014 personal tax return for Judge William Wellington Jones who had died on January 25, 2015.
• On or about October 11, 2016, Ferguson allegedly deposited the personal tax refund check for more than $8000 and to the Farmers Bank Jones Estate bank account.
• After October 11, 2016, Ferguson transferred Jones Estate funds from the Farmers Bank Jones Estate bank account to a Ferguson, Rawls & Raines PC escrow account.
• By March 31, 2017, the balance in the Farmers Bank Jones Estate account was less than $3000.
• By June 30, 2017, all of the $8000 had been allegedly stolen.

Concerns of a "cover up" have been stated by Suffolk City employees who requested anonymity, because E. Grier Ferguson's brother C. Phillips Ferguson is the Suffolk Commonwealths Attorney and they think that Suffolk's "good old boy" network is trying to cover up any investigations of E. Grier Ferguson, Esquire.

Click to read previous article on E. Grier Ferguson, abusing the elderly and Financial Exploitation

www.facebook.com/virginiacorruptlawyers