TREASON: Connecticut Superior Court Judge Yamini Menon (Kangaroo)

FROM THE DESK OF Andrew-Hamilton:Pritchard, Beneficiary in Equity-Executor
DOCKET NO. FST-CV23-5029576-S : SUPERIOR COURT
LUTHY, THOMAS E. : J.D. STAMFORD/NORWALK
V. : AT STAMFORD
PRITCHARD, ANDREW H. : JUNE 13, 2024

MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO CONNECTICUT PRACTICE BOOK SECTION 1-23 FOR JUDGE YAMINI MENON “WARS AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION, TREASON” OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, “THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND”.
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958) Note: Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the supreme law of the land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "no state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it". See also In Re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (188); U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S. Ct. 471, 66 L. Ed. 2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L. Ed 257 (1821).

Motion for Disqualification of Judicial Authority pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book Section 1-23
The Sui Juris Defendant, Andrew Hamilton Pritchard, makes Motion for Disqualification of Judicial Authority pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book Section 1-23 for Complicit Judge Yamini Menon for engaging in Acts of Treason and Perjury/Fraud upon the Court.

Complicit Judge Yamini Menon DENIED HER OATH AND DUTY as per ORDER #145.01.

Traitor Judge Yamini Menon DENIES her oath to the Constitution of the United States “wars against that Constitution” and engages in acts in violation of the supreme law of the land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "no state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it".

Yamini Menon is an “ENEMY” of the US Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land.

ALL ORDERS OF COMPLICIT JUDGE YAMINI MENON ARE VOID, AND OF NO LEGAL FORCE OR EFFECT IN ALL CASES.

See PUBLIC NOTICE and Attached 45 Affidavits Below:

FROM THE DESK OF Andrew Hamilton Pritchard, American and Beneficiary in Equity-Executor
JUNE 12, 2024
PUBLIC NOTICE
CGS 54-170 ARREST WITHOUT WARRANT
CONNECTICUT: LOSS OF AUTHORITY FOR ALL JUDGES, STATE REFEREES, JUDGE TRIAL REFEREES, AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS REQUIRING OATH OF OFFICE.
“RACKETEERING”, “ENEMY”, “DOMESTIC TERRORISM”, “BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS”, “GENOCIDE” AND “TREASON” AS DEFINED BY LAW.
THE CONNECTICUT GOVERNMENT IS “AT WAR WITH THE U.S. CONSTITUTION”
The Constitution is harmed by subverting its authority as the foundational law of the land. A domestic enemy is any American who either promotes foreign invasion or attacks the Bill of Rights. The former assaults national stability. The latter assaults individual freedoms.
1982 Connecticut’s Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branch committed “War against the Constitution” (Treason) as an “Enemy” by eliminating the use of a GRAND JURY made up of the people, an inalienable right.
"THE TROJAN HORSE" was a new creation called an INVESTIGATORY GRAND JURY defined by statute as a judge, constitutional state referee, or three-judge panel appointed “to conduct an investigation into the commission of a crime or crimes” (see CGS § 54-47b).
All Judges, State Referees, and Judge Trial Referees willfully violate the law. There is NO DUE PROCESS in Connecticut Courts. The Complicit Judges willfully use and work with Complicit State Referees and Complicit Judge Trial Referees to put forward a FICTION CASES WITHOUT AUTHORITY.
The Complicit Judges’ Misprision of Felony willfully disregarding that State Referees and Judge Trial Referees violate the requirements of CGS 51-44a [Judicial Selection Commission. Members. Duties. Nomination of judges by Governor] enable “Racketeering” and the “Weaponization” of the Judicial Branch. (see CGS § 52-434 & CGS 51-44a).
This fictional authority exerted by Complicit Judges and other Complicit Participants gives the “ENEMY” absolute power.
For Example: Nemo Judex in Causa Sua ("no one is judge in their own case") an axiom of Common Law and common sense is willfully disregarded by the Complicit Judges and Complicit Participants. Just read the following unconstitutional Connecticut General Statutes empowering the “ENEMY”.
Sec. 51-183d. (Formerly Sec. 51-42). Disqualified judge; proceedings not void. If a judge acts in any legal proceeding in which he is disqualified, the proceeding shall not by reason thereof be void, but such action shall constitute an irregularity of which advantage may be taken by appeal or, where no appeal lies, by proceedings in error.
AND HERE IS WHAT OUR U.S. SUPREME COURT SAYS ABOUT THAT:
30A Am Jur Judgments '' 44, 45. A void judgment is not entitled to the respect accorded a valid adjudication, but may be entirely disregarded, or declared inoperative by any tribunal in which effect is sought to be given to it. It is attended by none of the consequences of a valid adjudication. It has no legal or binding force or efficacy for any purpose or at any place. ... It is not entitled to enforcement ... All proceedings founded on the void judgment are themselves regarded as invalid.
Ableman v. Booth, 21 Howard 506 (1859) "No judicial process, whatever form it may assume, can have any lawful authority outside of the limits of the jurisdiction of the court or judge by whom it is issued; and an attempt to enforce it beyond these boundaries is nothing less than lawless violence."

Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
“Inalienable Rights”
The U.S. Constitution recognized that certain universal rights cannot be taken away by legislation, as they are beyond the control of a government, being naturally given to every individual at birth, and that these rights are retained throughout life.

Supreme Court Case Law:
U.S. v. Minker, 350 U.S. 179, 187,
The Supreme Court has warned: "Because of what appear to be Lawful commands on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights, due to ignorance."

Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S. Ct. 1401 (1958)
Note: Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the supreme law of the land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "no state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it". See also In Re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (188); U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S. Ct. 471, 66 L. Ed. 2d 392, 406 (1980); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L. Ed 257 (1821).

Unlimited Power to Connecticut Judges in 1982
CONNECTICUT GRAND JURY LAW Grand Jury Indictment Requirement Repealed: When Connecticut repealed the requirement of a grand jury indictment before a person can be tried for any crime punishable by death or life imprisonment, it substituted a probable cause hearing requirement.
It retained the investigatory grand jury, defined by statute as a judge, constitutional state referee, or three-judge panel appointed “to conduct an investigation into the commission of a crime or crimes” (see CGS § 54-47b).
This Act of “War against the Constitution” gave unlimited rogue power to the Judicial Branch of Connecticut. No longer was there a check on Judicial Power by “We the People”.
The people Justice Antonin Scalia's majority opinion in United States v. Williams, 1992 has been relied on to refer to grand juries as a fourth branch of government.
In that opinion, Scalia wrote: [T]he grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It 'is a constitutional fixture in its own right' [case cites]. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people.[10]

CONNECTICUT’S GOVERNMENT IS AT “WAR WITH THE CONSTITUTION” AND HAS “NO AUTHORITY”.
As a Trojan horse, Connecticut is one of the leaders on the fraudulent construct of Foreclosure Racketeering/property theft, attacking 1st Amendment "Alex Jones" and attacking 2nd Amendment "Sandy Hook/Remington Arms".
This is not a political statement.
It is the obvious and grotesque violations of the rights of the U.S. Constitution, “The Supreme Law of the Land”, with all the authority defined by The Judiciary Act of 1789 during the first session of the First United States Congress [Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution prescribed that the "judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and such inferior Courts"] developed and demonstrated by weaponized fictional adjudication.
The Covid 19 “Domestic Terrorism” lock down executed by the Connecticut Government did irreparable harm to the 3,625,000 approx. people that live here. Churches, Courts, and other necessary facilities were immediately closed, and all were ordered to put on your mask.
The “ENEMY” Connecticut Courts went as far as executing “Remote Hearings” without any Jurisdiction to do so. It made it much easier for the “ENEMY” to “SEIZE” and/or hit their target or objective.
The “ENEMY” Connecticut Government with its “SEIZED” power can control the State of Connecticut to execute “DOMESTIC TERRORISM” through uncontested fear.
The “ENEMY” Connecticut Government ordered State Employees, Health Workers and others to take a “BIOLGICAL WEAPON” fraudulently represented as a COVID 19 VACCINATION.
Please note: the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Acknowledges Plaintiffs' Claim that COVID-19 mRNA Jab is NOT a Vaccine, But a Therapeutic, Opinion filed June 7, 2024.
Please note: Dr. Francis A. Boyle the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act: Author Of 1989 Law has stated COVID IS A BIOWEAPON and meets the legal definition of “GENOCIDE” as reflected in his May 27, 2024, AFFIDAVIT Below:

Stew Peter’s Show referenced in Dr. Francis A. Boyle’s AFFIDAVIT of May 27, 2024.
Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act: Author Of 1989 Law: COVID IS A BIOWEAPON!
https://rumble.com/v2atvv2-biological-weapons-anti-terrorism-act-author-of-1989-law-covid-is-a-bioweap.html

Please Note: Florida Supreme Court Case below:

The “ENEMY” Connecticut Government continues to harm all that they gave an OATH to protect.
The damage is irreparable.
All Americans living, visiting and passing through Connecticut are being hurt.
A simple conservative dollar calculation of the damage done just by the “BIOLOGICAL WEAPON” is as follows:
$200,000 per life X 3,625,000 people = $725,000,000,000, not including burial costs.

ENEMY:
50 U.S. Code § 2204 - Definitions
As used in this chapter—
(1) the term “appropriate congressional committees” means the Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, or, where required by law for certain reporting purposes, the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Select [1] Committee on Intelligence of the House of Representatives;
(2) the term “enemy” means any country, government, group, or person that has been engaged in hostilities, whether or not lawfully authorized, with the United States;
(3)the term “person” means—
(A) any natural person;
(B) any corporation, partnership, or other legal entity; and
(C) any organization, association, or group; and
(4) the term “spoils of war” means enemy movable property lawfully captured, seized, confiscated, or found which has become United States property in accordance with the laws of war.

DOMESTIC TERRORISM:
18 U.S. Code § 2331 - Definitions
As used in this chapter—
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
(2) the term “national of the United States” has the meaning given such term in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and Nationality Act;
(3) the term “person” means any individual or entity capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in property;
(4) the term “act of war” means any act occurring in the course of—
(A) declared war;
(B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more nations; or
(C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin;
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States; and
(6) the term “military force” does not include any person that—
(A) has been designated as a—
(i) foreign terrorist organization by the Secretary of State under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189); or
(ii) specially designated global terrorist (as such term is defined in section 594.310 of title 31, Code of Federal Regulations) by the Secretary of State or the Secretary of the Treasury; or
(B) has been determined by the court to not be a “military force”.

BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS:
Title 18 U.S. Code § 175 - Prohibitions with respect to biological weapons
(a)In General.—
Whoever knowingly develops, produces, stockpiles, transfers, acquires, retains, or possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for use as a weapon, or knowingly assists a foreign state or any organization to do so, or attempts, threatens, or conspires to do the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both. There is extraterritorial Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section committed by or against a national of the United States.
(b)Additional Offense.—
Whoever knowingly possesses any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system of a type or in a quantity that, under the circumstances, is not reasonably justified by a prophylactic, protective, bona fide research, or other peaceful purpose, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. In this subsection, the terms “biological agent” and “toxin” do not encompass any biological agent or toxin that is in its naturally occurring environment, if the biological agent or toxin has not been cultivated, collected, or otherwise extracted from its natural source.
(c)Definition.—
For purposes of this section, the term “for use as a weapon” includes the development, production, transfer, acquisition, retention, or possession of any biological agent, toxin, or delivery system for other than prophylactic, protective, bona fide research, or other peaceful purposes.
(Added Pub. L. 101–298, § 3(a), May 22, 1990, 104 Stat. 201; amended Pub. L. 104–132, title V, § 511(b)(1), Apr. 24, 1996, 110 Stat. 1284; Pub. L. 107–56, title VIII, § 817(1), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 385; Pub. L. 107–188, title II, § 231(c)(1), June 12, 2002, 116 Stat. 661.)

GENOCIDE:
18 U.S. Code § 1091 - Genocide
(a)Basic Offense.—Whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of war and with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such—
(1)kills members of that group;
(2)causes serious bodily injury to members of that group;
(3)causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar techniques;
(4)subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part;
(5)imposes measures intended to prevent births within the group; or
(6)transfers by force children of the group to another group;
shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(b)Punishment for Basic Offense.—The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is—
(1)in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1), where death results, by death or imprisonment for life and a fine of not more than $1,000,000, or both; and
(2)a fine of not more than $1,000,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both, in any other case.
(c)Incitement Offense.—
Whoever directly and publicly incites another to violate subsection (a) shall be fined not more than $500,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(d)Attempt and Conspiracy.—
Any person who attempts or conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be punished in the same manner as a person who completes the offense.
(e)Jurisdiction.—There is jurisdiction over the offenses described in subsections (a), (c), and (d) if—
(1)the offense is committed in whole or in part within the United States; or
(2)regardless of where the offense is committed, the alleged offender is—
(A)a national of the United States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101));
(B)an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101));
(C)a stateless person whose habitual residence is in the United States; or
(D)present in the United States.
(f)Nonapplicability of Certain Limitations.—
Notwithstanding section 3282, in the case of an offense under this section, an indictment may be found, or information instituted, at any time without limitation.
(Added Pub. L. 100–606, § 2(a), Nov. 4, 1988, 102 Stat. 3045; amended Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60003(a)(13), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970; Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, § 4002(a)(4), (b)(7), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1806, 1808; Pub. L. 110–151, § 2, Dec. 21, 2007, 121 Stat. 1821; Pub. L. 111–122, § 3(a), Dec. 22, 2009, 123 Stat. 3481.)

Connecticut Sheriffs Extinguished in 2000
In the year 2000 Sheriffs were eliminated from the Connecticut Constitution and their power to arrest Judges and the Governor was abdicated, relinquished, returned to us, the people.
‘We the people’ have the power of a Connecticut Sheriff. (see CGS 54-170 Arrest without Warrant)