Raymond Guzall III v. Grievance Administrator, Attorney Grievance Commission of Michigan

States cannot be allowed to prosecute upon altered court recordings. The Michigan Court of Appeals gave Petitioner (Guzall herein) a copy of a court hearing with a judge’s voice dubbed in. Three witnesses confirmed Michigan courts gave him three altered court recordings of court proceedings involved in his grievance case, removing evidence of judicial bias. Respondent ignored the testimony of those three witnesses confirming those court recordings were manipulated and refused to produce the original recordings which exonerate him. Michigan’s process and procedures offend the Constitution, Guzall’s rights were violated. The questions presented are:

1. Can a state prosecute upon court records or recordings they manipulated?

2. Can a state conceal or withhold original court recordings and/or original grievance recordings where a state produced incomplete or altered copies?

3. Can a state maintain procedures allowing it to confiscate or withhold pleadings filed to a state attorney grievance panel?

4. Does a state violate the U.S. Fourteenth Amendment when refusing to apply a 3.5 year filing delay, concealing evidence of their reasons for delay, concealing docketed records, or by preventing witness confrontation?

5. Does a state violate the Fourteenth Amendment when selecting a grievance panel outside of their common practice to insure due process, when seating an agent of a grieved attorney’s adversary on a state