Jean Coulter v. Thomas Forrest, et al.

Petitioner Coulter again finds it necessary to bring to This Honorable Court's attention, yet another incredibly blatant example of overt criminal actions by members of the nation's "Justice System" - again made possible by the Unconstitutionally Vague wording of a Rule of State Court which is - almost exclusively applied only in cases where a member of the Justice System is a defendant. In the Instant Matter, Coulter sued two Probation Officers who intentionally tainted the testimony of an Expert Witness (who testified in Termination of Parental Rights Hearings for Petitioner), by knowingly providing completely false "information" to the Expert, to assist the prosecution, rather than the interests of both Petitioner and the Child. Coulter's suit for Witness Tampering, Fraud, etc. was dismissed under the unconstitutionally vague State Rule 233.1 of Civil Procedure. Coulter wonders if This Honorable Court doesn't question whether the increasingly egregious and even shocking, actions by members of "Justice System" are related to This Honorable Court's willingness to look the other way to crimes committed by their Brethren from the bench or chambers of the jurist! This case proves both the complete corruption of the Pennsylvania Courts, even made part of the State's Rules of Court, as well as the State Courts' confidence that their criminal acts will be "forgiven" by the "Just Us System"! (a) Questions Presented for Review Is PaR.C.P.Rule 233.1 Unconstitutionally Vague? Are the State Judges' acts relate to similar acts by the Third Circuit, must This Court now address the corruption of the entire Third Circuit as well? 1.