HENRY MARTOCCHIO'S TESTIMONY AT THE MARCH 25, 2013 51-14 HEARING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT!

CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Thank you. 

               Henry Martocchio?

               (Pause in the proceedings.)

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  Good day, Justices.

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Good morning.

               JUSTICE EVELEIGH:  Good morning.

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  My name is Henry Martocchio.  I’ve presently submitted eight copies over there.  This is a complaint underneath the American Disabilities Act.  I have petitioned this Supreme Court in my matters in regarding my autistic child in family courts.  I have shown that the courts are in non-compliance.

               My biggest problem here today is when we go to the Advisory Committee underneath the American Disabilities Act that the judicial department has, they are not following the established rules that are in the rules I have inside of my complaint.  They have obstructed me.  It is a Fourteenth Amendment due process right for me to be able to sit in front of the judge to understand what our civil rights are.  I’ve been deemed non-eligible because I refuse to tell a judge what my disability rights are.  My child and me, as we know in Troxel, are the same side of the coin.  His disabilities are my disabilities. 

               We had a gentleman state here earlier today -- there was no association.  There’s other parents out there in this world today that we live in that have to take vehicle rides, get here two hours ahead of time; so there is accommodations.  There’s also accommodations needed in family studies.  If we have expert psychologists that will sit there and say, yup, you’re a bad dad; you’re violent; you’re this; you’re that, where’s my people to understand my child’s needs, then determine what the best interest is? 

               There is nothing in the courts today and, as far as I’m concerned, Mark Cielo and the whole Advisory Committee, after 23 years of being too late on the American Disabilities Act, should be released immediately due to the violations of state ethics and the ethics of their jobs.  I have tried numerous times.

               Chief Justice Rogers, I was in this courtroom one day and I was in the case of -- in Joseph W. and you asked -- and this is what hurts the most -- what is a designated, responsible ADA coordinator?  A coordinator is to coordinate and cease and desist all, all -- and that even means from a judge -- discrimination.  They have the absolute power and it has to be absolute power because as a community we want to forward the rights of people that are perceived as having a problem. 

               Do we need to go back to the ugly laws of the 1900s?  Should we sit there and say that this is not a common law court anymore and if that’s the case, then we’re only segregating the disabled to say we don’t have to have effective communication with these people?  If that’s the case, I am not putting nobody down by no means, but if the true common law court says no women can be in there, nobody of a minority, nobody of a disabled, my question is to you guys, when are we gonna get finally with the 2013 standards?  There are new guidelines.  There is no remedy in this courtroom for me.  There is nobody to turn to. 

               If we know we have three different gun subject control courts in this state, where are my -- where is one court that a disabled person can go to and plead their rights to a judge and have them understand what the disabled rights are -- to be the modification before entering into this courtroom, whether it’s an unjust due burden or not?  That rule could be only applied to 1992.  It’s 2013.  By now, you guys, we should have had something in place. 

               I do not have to explain myself to Mark Cielo and tell him that underneath certain cases, it’s already been ruled on that -- I am not an employee of this state, one of the first and foremost.  I don’t get how he can ask me what my disabilities are and, at that, it’s been identified by Judge Shluger that my child is autistic.  I don’t have to go any further than that.  I don’t have to explain.  These are the rules in the civil rights for me to be in the public.  I have the right to access this court and have effective communication. 

               I do not have the burden of writing a 77-page brief, again, to Abery-Wetstone, Judge Abery-Wetstone, who has denied me again underneath the bright-line rules of my constitutional right to be a parent.  I have a third-party that’s interfering for seven years in my family life.  Do I not have a right to live and have a family autonomy no different than any one of you guys?  When you guys had children, did anyone come to you and ask you:  Well, are you the father? are you the mother? are you the father?  No.  Then, at that, perform a test and make me get subjected to a DCF evaluation, a family court evaluation? 

               The question here, you guys, how many tests do I need and how many times did it have to come back and say that I‘m absolutely fit?  When does the government get out of my child’s life? -- because it was the government that stopped this parent from doing maximum amount of therapies at an early age intervention for my child.  Now it scares me the worst. 

               Do I have the next Adam Sandler [sic.], the Sandy Hook shooter, on my hands? -- because in my opinion, two years after that court was done, the mother was giving up that child to the state; and I don’t know if it’s the truth, the whole known truth, but I just  -- that’s what I’m hearing right now. 

               Why wasn’t that brought up as --

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Sir?

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  -- part of the permanency plan of the court?

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Sir?  Five minutes is up.

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  Good day, Your Honor.

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Thank you. 

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  I thank you very much and here’s your last copy and I -- this is a complaint and I’m asking for a response from every member of this committee in regards to why we do not have rights, civil rights, due process rights underneath the Fourteenth Amendment because they --

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Thank you. 

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  -- Mark Cielo has obstructed me from getting to you guys.

               CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  Thank you. 

               MR. MARTOCCHIO:  Thank you. 
 

                CHIEF JUSTICE ROGERS:  There being no further signups,

 we’ll adjourn this public hearing.  Thank you very much.

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON THIS HEARING, PLEASE GO TO THE FOLLOWING LINK:

http://www.no-wackileaks.com/  

RELATED ARTICLES:

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/05/molly-doe-1s-testimony-at-march-25-2013.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/05/mike-does-testimony-at-march-25-2013-51.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/05/jane-doe-no-1s-testimony-at-march-25.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/05/john-does-testimony-at-march-25-2013-51.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/05/john-doe-provides-his-testimony-on.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/04/comment-on-ms-monica-fores-testimony.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/04/monica-fore-provides-her-testimony-on.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/04/attorney-dan-lynchs-testimony-at-march.html

http://divorceinconnecticut.blogspot.com/2013/05/patrick-henrys-testimony-at-march-25.html