This video I am going to detail January 7, 2020 one of the most crucial dates in this entire order. I strongly encourage you to read the entirety of the January 7, 2020 transcript before view the video. There are time stamps on the Youtube.
Time Stamps
1:20 Affirmation Please say it with me.
1:40 My commitment to Black American
2:00 The depression
2:30 The Genocide of Negro people
3:50 Donald Trump
5:30 Please help with my Go Fund Me PLEASE🙏🏾
6:45 We are not supposed to be last in a country we built
7:15 I was raised to be racist
11:16 The events that occurred on Jan 7, 2020
12:00 Why I finally filed for spousal support
13:25 I was living with rats while the abusive alcoholic was traveling the world
14:00 Riff retaliated against me for filing a motion to disqualify Heidel
15:00 Riff makes false statements in a court of law
16:20 The court circumvents my attempt to lawyer fees & have Heidel
18:01 Learning about the false Vexatious
20:00 Discussing how Heidel couches Attorney Ariel Court to file to deem me Vexatious
25:30 B.T.P. LLC v. L.W., Case No. 23LBUD01928.
28:20 Testimony of Judge Riff commits hate crimes
28:40 Riff gives false statements about June 21,2019
35:20 Judge Riff violations my rights regarding discover
44:42 Court uses Interrogatories as pretext to harm
45:20 The conspiracy unravels
52:00 C.O.R.E allegedly in cahoots with Ariel Carter
59:20 Riff deprives my rights causing irreparable harm
1:00.1Riff demonstrates guilty mind intent cause harm
1:02.00 I testify I’m being harmed because I’m BLACK
1:05:50 The court disregards the motion to disqualify
1:06:59 Riff deprives my right to address my concerns
1:07:00 Makes accusations but gaslights stating not to retaliates to prevent my testimony.
1:10:09 Transcripts are compromised
1:10:55 Riff makes false accusations about my motion
1:14:36 Judge Riff prevents me from speaking 1
:15:14 Judge Riff takes my motion to disqualify off the calendar
1:18:30 Judge Riff retaliates against for Motion to Disqualify and calling Heidel racist
1:25:44 Riff with malice aforethought violated California Procedure for Code 2107
1:30:10 Riff’s expressed malice & Implied malice against a black women descendant of chattel slavery.
14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: Civil Rights (1868)
Citation: The House Joint Resolution Proposing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, June 16, 1866; Enrolled Acts and Resolutions of Congress, 1789-1999; General Records of the United States Government; Record Group 11; National Archives.
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.
Following the Civil War, Congress submitted to the states three amendments as part of its Reconstruction program to guarantee equal civil and legal rights to Black citizens. A major provision of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to “All persons born or naturalized in the United States,” thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people.
Another equally important provision was the statement that “nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The right to due process of law and equal protection of the law now applied to both the federal and state governments
The transcripts for January 7, 2020 is on Judge Sarah Heidel is a racist website
I arrived to the court late. They moved the case more than 20 miles from my home. I was not provided temporary spousal support as mandated by Family Code 4320. The trauma of the hate crimes caused debilitating insomnia. The most important question why was I being sent to Stanley Mosk? What was the purpose of going before Judge Lawrence Riff?The court willfully with malice and forethought prohibited me equal protection under the law.
Gibson vs Gibson Transcripts January 7, 2020
Judge Riff begins the hate crimes, and misconduct. Page 3 See line 4. Judge Riff makes multiple false statements. He states that he made an orders on October 25, 2019. Which is a lie. What he is doing is retaliating against me for filing a Motion to Disqualify Judge Sarah Heidel and calling her racist in open court. Find the details for December 18, 2019 here. http://judgesarahheidelisaracist.com/california-commit-hate-crimes/
Judge Lawarence Riff gives false testimony. Stating he made an order on October 25, 2019. Which isn’t true. He only asked me to submit the Declaration of Disclosure. I went to self help to get information about the Declaration of Disclosure. The court surveillance will show me in the self help. Which is in the same room as the court clerk. During this time the self help attorney informed me that opposing filed a Motion to deem me vexatious. Recall Judge Sarah Heidel couched Attorney Carter to file the Motion to deem me vexatious on a September hearing when I wasn’t present. I am not sure if Heidel could legally have a discussion without me being present.
Briefly going back to January 2, 2019. I informed Judge Sarah Heidel that I was suffering from medical issues. That i needed an attorney.The court continues to accuse me of interrupting. Judge Riff and Judge Heidel had a pattern of not allowing me to speak. You can find the detail to the very first hearing when Judge Heidel gaslit me, ignoring that I continued to request an attorney. Violation of Family Code 2030
Transcript-Jan.-2-2021-copyMoving back to January 7, 2020 I continued to deny the sequence of events that Judge Riff is testifying. He is trying to set me up and maligned me. I am protesting. Page 4 line 7 thru 9. See image below. The court says orders were made on June 21, 2019. There were no orders made on June 21, 2019 other than she granted the Motion to Compel Interrogatories and Vocational evaluation. Which violated California Civil Procedure. Opposing never made an effort to Meet and Confer regarding discovery. Opposing did not follow California Civil Procedure. I didn’t have an attorney.. I continued to request an attorney. Heidel ruled in favor of opposing during the June 21, 2019 hearing. Heidel insinuating I didn’t adhere to orders made in March. There were a Motion For Vocational Evaluation. I filed a Motion To Reconsider for the March 14th Vocational Evaluation. Opposing failed to follow California Family Code 4331 when requesting the Vocational Evaluation. I never received the request for Interrogatories. Attorney Simon Bahwani instructed me to send a letter explaining I didn’t receive the interrogatories, which I followed his instructions. Before filing a Motion to Compel for discovery the attorney must seek a Meeting to Confer. Through out the Divorce Proceeding Opposing Ariel Carter never complied with Meeting and Confer, I wasn’t represented so I wasn’t aware of the Meet and Confer requirement. Judge Heidel failed to follow the law. At every hearing the court failed to follow the law. ( I am going do a spoiler alert) The appeals attorney I paid $10,000 were in cahoots with the Superior Court Judges and Appears court judges) This story has twist and turns. The attorney took my $10,000 during covid. He did nothing. He never updated me regarding the case. He acted as if there was a delay because of Covid. I didn’t even know the Appeals Case was heard. I discovered that it may have been completed when I notice my husband was following me on Twitter.
The court ruled in favor of opposing on June 21, 2019 when opposing failed to send a Meet and Confer letter demanding a response. I didn’t know about the Motion to Compel. The attorney with C.O.R.E failed to inform me. I think C.O.R.E specifically Simon Aziz Budhwani and Charles Major are part of the collusion, fraud and hate crimes against me. Charles Major previously worked with Ariel Carter. I hired C.O.R.E around April of 2019. If they did their due diligence, they would have reviewed the court docket, see there was a Motion to Compel on the court Calendar for June 21, 2019. I’m giving this background to demonstrate Judge Lawrence perjured himself on January 7, 2020. It just hit me that C,O,R,E came back asking that i sign a limited to scope agreement, after talking to opposing Ariel Carter, and seeing the Motion to Compel. C.O.R.E is in cahoots with opposing.
BREAK DOWN
On January 7, 2020 In the courts testimony Judge Lawrence P Riff states that his tentatively orders are as follows. ** Tentative plans today to do is my tentative plan is to make a finding that the case may proceed to judgement without the respondent serving a Declaration of Disclosure .The 2nd thing i intend to do, I’m tentatively thinking about is Precluding Respondent Ms. Gibson from calling any witnesses at trial other than the parties and precluding her from introducing any exhibits because of the continued non compliance with Heidel orders. Judge Lawrence P Riff testimony and action shows malicious forethought “Men’s Rea” Mens Rea is a Latin term meaning “guilty mind.” In criminal law, it refers to the mental state or culpability that a defendant must possess at the time of committing a prohibited act (known as the actus reus, or “guilty act”) for the conduct to constitute a crime.
Read my testimony on page 7 and 8 of the transcripts from January 7,2020
Judge Riff with malicious forethought deprived me of my right to an attorney under California Family Code 2030. I pointed out that I am black, the opposing is white, that I am being harmed because I am black. He talks about a witness list. I have no idea what he is referring to. He said orders where made on June 21, 2019. On June 21, 2019 the court held a hearing when I did not have an attorney. I requested an evidentiary hearing. In my request for an evidentiary hearing I submitted a witness list. Heidel decline my request for an evidentiary hearing. I have no idea what he is talking about because I am not represented. I was never consulted, He mentions the Motion to Disqualify. He says February 11, 2019 I filed a Motion to Disqualify. His date is inaccurate. On page 10 Judge Riff acknowledged that I filed a Motion to Disqualify for misconduct. He insinuates that I wrote the court date was set for January 13, 2020. How can I write the date or issue a date. A young black women who works in the Stanley Mosk Superior court wrote in the date. I remember her because she had filed another request. Her name was either Ruwanda or Lawanda. ** *****find the document If you look through every transcript the court never gives me the opportunity to discuss what I am asking for. I requested an attorney on Januray 2, 2019 Judge Heidel gaslight me. See page below ***** Screenshot page from transcript
Page 9 of January 7, 2020 transcripts Judge Riff is setting me up, while simultaneously gaslighting me. He asked about a witness list. I have no idea what he is talking about. I didn’t even understand why we were at Stanley Mosk. The court docket said moved to Stanley Mosk due to long trial. I tell him that my husband makes over $180,00 that I am on food stamps. I say my purpose is the shine a light on Judge Sarah Heidel racism. On page 8 I say I need an attorney. According to California Family Code 2030
According to California Family Code (a)(1) In a proceeding for dissolution of marriage, nullity of marriage, or legal separation of the parties, and in any proceeding subsequent to entry of a related judgment, the court shall ensure that each party has access to legal representation, including access early in the proceedings, to preserve each party’s rights by ordering, if necessary based on the income and needs assessments, one party, except a governmental entity, to pay to the other party, or to the other party’s attorney, whatever amount is reasonably necessary for attorney’s fees and for the cost of maintaining or defending the proceeding during the pendency of the proceeding.
I am trying to speak, to explain that I need an attorney. That Heidel did not make any orders in which I didn’t comply. That I need an attorney, and I am concern that he too is bias because my husband is white. I tell him I was in a 23 year abusive marriage. He tells me to stop. He fails to address any of my testimony, that opposing makes $180 annually and I am food stamps. That opposing is an abusive alcoholic. That I feel like he is being bias because I am black and opposing is white. He tells me to stop. I say of course the black woman doesn’t get to speak.
He begins to talk about the Motion to Disqualify. He illegally denies my right to hear the Motion to Disqualify. He is violating California Civil Code by even having a hearing when there is a Motion to Disqualify on the calendar. Riff takes the Motion to Disqualify off the Calendar completely but moves the Motion for attorney fees to Department 2. I explained that when I attempted to file in her court the clerk denied me the right to file..
I gave testimony that the first time I mentioned something about being black he shut me down. He start saying that I filed in the wrong court. I asked him why am I in his court. I don’t have an attorney. I have no idea what is going on. Again he implies that he made an order on October 23, 2019 which is a fabrication. He is retaliating against me because of what happened Dec 18, 2019. During the hearing, that should’ve held, I called Heidel out for being bias against me for being black. Riff sanctioned me with all these limitations in order to harm me financially. Riff with malice and forethought caused me irreparable financial and mental harm. I charge attempted genocide. That this is a cold orchestrated attempted to harm me because I am a black women.
January 7, 2020 Judge Riff states that the case will proceed despite the lack of Declaration of Disclosure. I state that I have the Declaration of Disclosure with me. Judge Riff ignores my testimony. Judge Riff continues to claim there was an order made on October 23, 2019 court date. He sanctioned me for what he calls unexcused noncompliance with court order regarding pretrial documents.I have never been consulted about pretrial documents. Judge Heidel never mentioned anything about pretrial documents. You can tell from my testimony that I have no idea what he is talking about. I am not represented. Since January 2, 2019 I have requested representation. In Jan 2, 2019 transcripts Judge Sarah Heidel conspire to deprive me of my rights to an attorney. I tell Judge Heidel on January 2, 2019 I need to consultant an attorney to be briefed on what I am entitled to. Judge Riff Sanctions me with evidentiary sanctions. This is fraud. This isn’t the first time he has done this. ( I found a legal article online regarding Judge Riff concerning his ordering evidentiary sanctions. If that article is posted here, I need time to find it. I am homeless, have been living in hotels and Airbnb after the court stole my $1.3 million dollar home. I have notes and documents in different places.)
Judge Riff tries to give me a one day trial for January 30, 2020 knowing he moved my request for attorney fees to January 13th. He isn’t giving adequate time for preparation or even to respond to this order. He ask opposing if January 30, 2020 worked for her. She said she was in court. Please note judge Riff’s pattern of being accommodating to opposing. Throughout the divorce the judges act as if I am not in the room. Judge Heidel behaves in the same way.
Judge Riff goes off the record with opposing. If you read carefully through each transcripts you can detect that none of the judges acknowledge that I am in the court room. I don’t know the rules for the judge going of the record.
I try to address this issue of non-compliance. I have no idea what he is talking about. I testify that I don’t have an attorney. I testify that Judge Heidel is showing racial bias. To prevent me from continuing to demonstrate how I am being discriminated against. He has me removed from the court. Also in the transcripts there is a warning. That doesn’t happen. When he asked that I be removed the bailiff, thats was when he says the song and dance about being calm. What I have notice is that they are copying and pasting testimony. Meaning if testimony is given. The edit the words, putting words in a difference sequence to falsify the context of the testimony. I recognize this when I read a statement in a transcript was given on a different date.
Notice how he thanks opposing. Why is he thanking her? I am going to say this now. This is racial discrimination. I am sure of it. I am afraid that this might have something to do with sex crimes against children in the court system and or the kid for cash scheme. If you follow the entire case. Judge Heidel immediately started discriminated against me. On the 1st court date Judge Heidel insinuate that I was impaired when I was suffering from a concussion. The petitioner is an alcoholic. I will include a photo he text me of him reading from the Alcohol anonymous ook. Twelve I am terrified that everything that transpired was orchestrated.
This man is an abusive alcoholic. I endured in abuse since 1993
This is my motion to disqualify
Judicial-ReferralThis I just discovered. when I start reading this transcripts.
To enforce Family Code 2107 this has to be initiated by the opposing. Again, Judge Riff writes an article stating that discovery needs to be handled outside of court.
California Code, Family Code – FAM § 2107
Current as of January 01, 2025 | Updated by Findlaw Staff
(a) If one party fails to serve on the other party a preliminary declaration of disclosure under Section 2104, unless that party is not required to serve a preliminary declaration of disclosure pursuant to Section 2110, or a final declaration of disclosure under Section 2105, or fails to provide the information required in the respective declarations with sufficient particularity, and if the other party has served the respective declaration of disclosure on the noncomplying party, the complying party may, within a reasonable time, request preparation of the appropriate declaration of disclosure or further particularity.
(b) If the noncomplying party fails to comply with a request under subdivision (a), the complying party may do one or more of the following:
(1) File a motion to compel a further response.
(2) File a motion for an order preventing the noncomplying party from presenting evidence on issues that should have been covered in the declaration of disclosure.
(3) File a motion showing good cause for the court to grant the complying party’s voluntary waiver of receipt of the noncomplying party’s preliminary declaration of disclosure pursuant to Section 2104 or final declaration of disclosure pursuant to Section 2105. The voluntary waiver does not affect the rights enumerated in subdivision (d).
(c) If a party fails to comply with any provision of this chapter, the court shall, in addition to any other remedy provided by law, impose money sanctions against the noncomplying party. Sanctions shall be in an amount sufficient to deter repetition of the conduct or comparable conduct, and shall include reasonable attorney’s fees, costs incurred, or both, unless the court finds that the noncomplying party acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.
(d) Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, if a court enters a judgment when the parties have failed to comply with all disclosure requirements of this chapter, the court shall set aside the judgment. The failure to comply with the disclosure requirements does not constitute harmless error. If the court granted the complying party’s voluntary waiver of receipt of the noncomplying party’s preliminary declaration of disclosure pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b), the court shall set aside the judgment only at the request of the complying party, unless the motion to set aside the judgment is based on one of the following:
Judge Lawrence Riff initiated the issue about the Declaration of Disclosure. The first time I heard of this was during the Oct 23, 2019 hearing. Remember I learned about the Oct 23, 2019 hearing when I looked to see did Judge Sarah Heidel move the date for my September 23, 2019 hearing. What I gather, I still am not sure that these items should be handled between the petitioner and the respondent. The court intervention showed bias.
Judge Riff writes how discovery should be handled by the litigants, not the courts in this article written by Judge Lawrence Riff in the Advocate February, 2024. The opposing never requested a motion to show cause or anything regarding non compliance.
Then the matter of this false order that Judge Riff claims to have made during the October 25 2019 hearing. I want to be clear, I didn’t understand the nature of the hearing. He even said he wasn’t doing anything, therefore I shouldn’t be upset. I believe the transcripts have been altered. Judge Riff and Judge Heidel worked in concert to deny me my rights under Family Code 2030. I want to be clear that I didn’t understand why Judge Heidel referred me to Stanley Mosk. I thought Heidel sent me to Stanley Mosk because I was trying to have her recused. Judge Riff fraudulently claims that he made an order on October 25, 2019. I remember on October 25, 2019 Judge Riff was leading Attorney Ariel Carter regarding how to move forward without the Declaration of Disclosure. I hadn’t slept I really struggled with keeping up with what was being said but he did not make an order. I just discovered this reviewing the transcripts for this video. In order for the court to evoke evidentiary sanctions according to California Code of Civil Procedure CCP 2023.40. I am going to include the code on the Judge Sarah Heidel is a racist website.
California Code, Code of Civil Procedure – CCP § 2023.030
To the extent authorized by the chapter governing any particular discovery method or any other provision of this title, the court, after notice to any affected party, person, or attorney, and after opportunity for hearing, may impose the following sanctions against anyone engaging in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process:
(a) The court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. The court may also impose this sanction on one unsuccessfully asserting that another has engaged in the misuse of the discovery process, or on any attorney who advised that assertion, or on both. If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.
(b) The court may impose an issue sanction ordering that designated facts shall be taken as established in the action in accordance with the claim of the party adversely affected by the misuse of the discovery process. The court may also impose an issue sanction by an order prohibiting any party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process from supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses.
(c) The court may impose an evidence sanction by an order prohibiting any party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process from introducing designated matters in evidence.
(d) The court may impose a terminating sanction by one of the following orders:
(1) An order striking out the pleadings or parts of the pleadings of any party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process.
(2) An order staying further proceedings by that party until an order for discovery is obeyed.
(3) An order dismissing the action, or any part of the action, of that party.
(4) An order rendering a judgment by default against that party.
(e) The court may impose a contempt sanction by an order treating the misuse of the discovery process as a contempt of court.
(f)(1) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), or any other section of this title, absent exceptional circumstances, the court shall not impose sanctions on a party or any attorney of a party for failure to provide electronically stored information that has been lost, damaged, altered, or overwritten as the result of the routine, good faith operation of an electronic information system.
(2) This subdivision shall not be construed to alter any obligation to preserve discoverable information.
California Code, Code of Civil Procedure – CCP § 2023.040
A request for a sanction shall, in the notice of motion, identify every person, party, and attorney against whom the sanction is sought, and specify the type of sanction sought. The notice of motion shall be supported by a memorandum of points and authorities, and accompanied by a declaration setting forth facts supporting the amount of any monetary sanction sought.
I went to Stanley Mosk to file a Motion for Change of Venue which was advised by the Commission on Judicial Performance. The clerk began to file the motion. Then she read the the notes. Judge Sarah Heidel made notes to not allow me to file a motion. See how the clerk an x on my motion. I then requested copies of the minute order. I discovered that the court falsified the minute orde for the Oct 25, 2019 hearing. . See the bottom of the minute order says “Notice Waived. A motion wasn’t actually made. The court falsified the documents. My goal is the hold the court accountable for conspiracy, and collusions. I believe I can even make a RICO case. ( The back of the minute order)
This is the judicial referral to the Self Help that Kodie Elzie handed to me on Oct 25, 2019. This is a black woman. I thought that Judge Lawrence Riff was fair because he had a black clerk, to the contrary. She is complicit in the hate crimes against me.
Judicial-Referral****Please take note that the transcripts from January 7, 2020 are compromised. Several lines has inaccurate testimony. The pages and lines numbers of the omitted testimony is on the website. I will include the link to the website in the description box.
Transcript Testimony Omitted
- Page 4 Line 24 (The Court)
- Page 5 Line 3.
- Page 5 Line 25
- Page 8 Line 10
- Page 8 Line 26
- Page 9 line 1
- Page 9 line 3
- Page 9 line 6
- Page 9 line 10
- Page 9 line 23
- Page 10 line 3
- Page 10 line 5
- Page 10 line 14
- Page 10 line 15
- Page 10 line 20
- Page10 line 22
- Page 10 line 25
- Page 11 line 2
- Page 11 Line 4
- Page 12 line 20
- Page 12 line 21
- Page 12 line 22
- Page 12 line 28
- Page 13 line 5
- Page 13 line 25
- Page 13 line 26
- Page 13 line 28
- Page 14 line 1
- Page 14 line 9
- Page 15 line 6
- Page 15 line 8
- Page 15 line 19
- Page 15 line 24
- Page 16 line 19
- Page 16 line 20
- Page 16 line 26
- Page 16 line 27
- Page 17 line 6
- Page 17 line 11
- Page 17 line 15
- Page 17 line 28
- Page 18 line 18
- Page 3 Line 16 (The Court)
- Page 20 line 1
- Page 20 line 19
- Page 20 line 3