-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
1/319
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
2/319
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
3/319
Attachment 145, Page 1 of 1
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
4/319
EXHIBIT 1
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
5/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 1 of 147
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF COWETA COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
John Harold Murphy, Plaintiffvs. Civil Action No. 12V-413
Nancy Michelle Murphy, Defendant
The Fondling and Sexual Misconduct Accusation against MichelleMurphy was Fabricated and used Fraudulently in the Courts
Part 1 of Motion for an Investigation, Public Disclosure and
Termination of the Corruption of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr.
and those participating in and initiating his corruption, by financing, andotherwise providing incentive to those persons and entities engaging in
fraud, perjury, false statements, false swearing and other conduct inviolation of the LAW*
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
6/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 2 of 147
Pictured Left to right; Jack Murphy, age 16; John Harold Murphy, the father; Renee L. Haugerud,
the stepmother and the lead negotiator; Michelle Murphy, the mother; and Thomas Murphy, age
14 (or, “family”) Photo taken in Utah on Jan. 1, 2015. They met to work this out fairly!
This Motion includes a request for the immediate disqualification / suspension of
Judge Baldwin, until he is provided his protections under the LAW* that
accompany the more appropriate, permanent removal of his judicial authority.
This case is about John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud attempting to take
Jack Murphy, age 16 and Thomas Murphy age 14 from the mother who raised these
children since they were toddlers without the physical presence of John Harold
Murphy. There was and is no legal basis for the taking of the children from their
mother, so the Glover & Davis lawyers, with the assistance of others, fabricated the
most despicable of all reasons, i.e., one of the children had been fondled.
1. Had Judge Baldwin followed the LAW* the children would have never been
subjected to the consequences of the May 27, 2014 illegal arrest and other
despicable conduct, as the “Transporters” and the children would never been
subjected to incarceration that was approved by Judge Baldwin, after the failed
parenting of John Harold Murphy, Renee L. Haugerud, the guardian ad litem,
Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell and their experts.
1.1 This case was driven into its current posture by the corruption of Judge
Baldwin that was motivated by financial and political influence rather than the
LAW*. No family should be subjected to the type of mistreatment to which Judge
Baldwin’s judicial corruption subjected Michelle Murphy, Jack Murphy and
Thomas Murphy.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
7/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 3 of 147
1.1.1 After Michelle Murphy informed John Harold Murphy that she would not
yield to his request for her and the children to move to Tennessee to live near
Renee Haugerud’s home on Lookout Mountain, they began to force Michelle
Murphy to surrender custody of the children, as they had threatened.
1.1.1.1 The efforts of John Harold Murphy and Renee Haugerud to obtain
custody of Jack and Thomas were in two very different arenas. They and their
cadre of lawyers have a unified tactic, i.e., to financially deplete the resources
of Michelle Murphy to cause her submission and to benefit from the corruption
of Judge Baldwin. There were contempts adjudicated by Judge A. Quillian
Baldwin, Jr., accompanied by his not allowing Michelle Murphy to present
evidence.
1.1.1.2 One vital aspect of Judge Baldwin’s corruption included his Order
that allowed the removal of Jack and Thomas from the jurisdiction of the court
to any place in the world. The draconian nature of that Order was combined
with an Order that Michelle Murphy could not have any contact with the
children.
1.1.1.3 John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud began their financial
assault upon Michelle Murphy’s family of Jack and Thomas with the cadre of
lawyers financed with funds derived from Renee L. Haugerud, that were paid
to Taylor Drake of Glover & Davis, and a cadre of lawyers with financial and
political associations with Judge Baldwin. These payments to persons to
assist John Harold Murphy in breaching the 2006 Divorce Decree Settlement
Contract expanded to Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, another law firm,
to numerous “expert witnesses,” to investigators and a public relations expert,
Patrick Crosby, who attempted to deceptively distort information to the media.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
8/319
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
9/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 5 of 147
Included here is a Plea to Judge Baldwin’s Personal Jurisdiction while Seeking his
Disqualification and Other Relief that is Necessary for Michelle Murphy to have
equal access to Jack Murphy and Thomas Murphy immediately.
Before this Motion was served, Judge Baldwin and counselfor John Harold Murphy were Provided the following
Documents in hope of immediately providing Michelle
Murphy her contractual rights that were established in the
2006 Divorce Decree. This would provide Murphy immediate access to her
children and allow John and Michelle to equally decide the best interest of the
children without the money grabbers for Renee’s pocketbook. Judge Baldwin and
Elizabeth “Lisa” Harwell should relinquish their control to John and Michelle. This
motion is supported by the recently provided documents.
1. The Information from the Executive Director of Elevations that
Michelle Murphy should have access to Jack and Thomas.
2. The Accusation of Fondling was Fabricated
3. Motion requesting Access to Jack & Thomas for Response to Motion
for Summary Judgment.
4. The following Affidavit from Joyanna Silberg, Ph D.
I, Joyanna L. Silberg, being duly sworn attest to the
following opinions.
If
called upon as a witness, I am competent to testify to the
information and opinion contained herein.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
10/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 6 of 147
I am a clinical psychologist licensed by the State of Maryland,
and have received temporary licenses to practice in North Carolina,
Ohio, New Jersey, California, and South Dakota. I have 30 years of
experience in trauma, therapy with maltreated children, domestic
violence, sexual abuse, children of divorce, high conflict divorce
scenarios, psychological testing, forensic evaluation, and severe
psychiatric disturbance in children. I have trained Maryland, New York,
Virginia, and California court personnel on how to deal with situations
when allegations of abuse arise in family court, and I have presented
workshops around the world in these issues. I have trained Guardians
ad litem in Maryland through the Maryland Volunteer Lawyer's
Association on child abuse and domestic violence. I have served as an
expert witness in multiple Maryland Counties, and around the country
on issues related to the mental health of children, and have been court-
ordered to treat and evaluate children who are caught in custody
disputes in Anne Arundel County, Baltimore County, Baltimore City,
Harford County, and Charles County. I have served on National Think
Tanks regarding these issues. I am also an international expert on child
therapy and dissociative disorders in children and sexual abuse and have
edited two books, The Dissociative Child, and Misinformation on Child
Sexual Abuse and Adult Survivors. My book The Child Survivor came
out in 2013. I am internationally recognized as an expert on these issues
and have been invited to speak in Norway, Finland, Sweden, Germany,
New Zealand, Great Britain, and The Netherlands. A summary of my
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
11/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 7 of 147
professional qualifications is accurately set forth in my curriculum vitae
attached and incorporated herein.
I have reviewed the following documents: Affidavit of Michelle
Murphy, Affidavit of Jack Murphy, affidavit of Thomas Murphy,
Affidavit of Jan Franks, Affidavit of Clarence Massie, Materials
provided by H. Elizabeth King related to Custody Evaluations, transcript
of May 27' 2014 Hearing, Copy of letter to John and Renee from Jack
Murphy, July 31 Emergency Motion for Relief, and The Motion for
Summary Judgment and Response to Motion for Summary Judgment.
On January 12, 2015 I assessed Michelle Murphy in my office for four hours. During this time, I evaluated her capacity for parenting by
interviewing her about key dimensions of parenting including discipline,
nutrition, academic support, individualized attention to the child's needs,
basic values, and knowledge of the individual strength and weaknesses
of each of her children. It was clear from my assessment that her parenting
style and parenting knowledge is excellent and that she uses a direct
educational approach to teaching children proper behavior, and she is
deeply committed to their progress and strengths. She discussed the
allegation of sexual abuse that had been made against her, and she stated
that both boys have denied it and that in her last meeting with her ex-
husband and his wife both of them acknowledged that they knew this was
not true. While the source of this accusation is unclear, it is clear that this
is not a relevant concern at this point in time.
During this interview, she also discussed with me the current status
of the children's placement at a program entitled Elevations. Based on
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
12/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 8 of 147
the children's report to her, she supports the children's placement in this
program and believes that they will succeed even better if she can
participate in this treatment. She affirmed for me that the director, Judith
Jacques, stated to her that she agreed that mother's involvement in the
treatment would be of great assistance to the children. Although I
attempted to confirm that for myself, I did not receive any calls back or
return messages from Judith Jacques. Nonetheless, as a professional who
works in both an inpatient and residential program I am very aware how
important both parents roles are in participating in the therapy so that
gains made in treatment can be sustained.
I assume the reason I did not hear back from Ms. Jacques is that Michelle
Murphy was not able to supply the legal consent for her to speak with
me and so she was not allowed from a legal perspective to verify this
viewpoint that Ms. Murphy should be involved in treatment. Should the
court question whether this approach is recommended by the center I
suggest the court inquire directly from Ms. Jacques as to her
recommendations in this regard.
It is my professional opinion to a high degree of psychological
certainty that their mother's involvement in their treatment will
facilitate these boys ' r ecovery and make discharge planning much
easier . Without the center even observing how she interacts with her
children, they will be unable to provide confident recommendations
regarding the mother’s involvement post discharge. Clearly the
intensive therapy and assessment that the boys have now received at
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
13/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 9 of 147
Elevations obviates any need for the previous assessments that the
court had ordered.
It is clearly in the best interest of the children to move in the
direction of a more normalized family life with access to all of the parents
that love them.
Joyanna Silberg, Ph. D.
Disclosure of Reports of Psychologist Related to John and Renee
before the May 27, 2014 Proceeding.
The psychologist’s report about the parenting skills of John Harold Murphy and
Renee L. Haugerud provided to Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. should be included
in the record in order that two matters may be reviewed. First, the report will support
or repudiate the appropriateness of the transfer of custody temporarily by Judge
Baldwin and second, the reliability of the opinions of the psychologist, who was
selected by Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell.
Unconscionable Restriction upon Michelle Murphy’s Access to her Children
1.2 It is unconscionable that the stepmother, Renee L. Haugerud, has access to the
children that Michelle Murphy does not have when it is the stepmother’s financial
resources that have and are funding substantial portions of the corruption that
resulted in Jack and Thomas, at the behest of John Harold Murphy and the Glover
& Davis lawyers, being snatched away from Michelle Murphy in a Gestapo type of
proceeding on May 27, 2014.
1.2.1 The conduct of Judge Baldwin at the May 27, 2014 hearing that was
retaliatory conduct resulting from counsel’s exposure of the violations of the
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
14/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 10 of 147
protections provided to Michelle Murphy and her counsel by the Code of Judicial
Conduct, the Uniform Superior Court Rules, Constitutional provisions of the
United States and State of Georgia equivalent, First Amendment, Equal
Protection, Due Process protections, statutes, decisional law, Georgia Code of
Professional Conduct (or, collectively or separately, “LAW*”).
The Absence of an Enforceable Case Management Rule Promotes Corruption
1.2.2 The absence of the protections afforded Michelle Murphy and other
similarly situated persons of an unenforced case management plan, Uniform
Superior Court Rule 3.1 and the Recusal mandates of Rule 25 are the systematic
violation of the LAW* that have historically provided the politically associatedlawyers the option to judge-shop. Judicial oversight of the rights of children has
an extremely low priority in the State of Georgia that sinks below the line of
human decency when administered by Judge Baldwin.
1.2.3 The violations of the protections of LAW* inflicted upon Michelle
Murphy were pursued by Taylor Drake, the Glover & Davis lawyer, in order to
select Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr., to whom the Glover & Davis P.A. law firm
members have financially contributed directly, and of more importance, bundled
money and political benefits for years.
1.2.4 The selection of Judge Baldwin in this case was to provide the Glover &
Davis lawyers a return on their financial and political investment in the judicial
authority of Judge Baldwin that these lawyers have cultivated over the years.
1.2.5 Enforcement of a case management plan is as vital to the LAW* as having
a representative cross-section of the community on the jury. In this modification
of custody case, Judge Baldwin serves as both the jury and the judge. The opinion
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
15/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 11 of 147
of a judge in this type of case on appeal is only reversible under the “abuse of
discretion” standard.
Michelle Murphy Could Not Afford a Lawyer who Participates in Judge
Baldwin’s Judicial Corruption.
1.2.6 For these reasons Judge Baldwin could not remove himself, or provide a
hearing on his disqualification that would have exposed his disqualification.
1.2.7 Michelle Murphy could not afford a politically embedded lawyer to
compete with the approximate million dollars that has been spent on behalf of
John Harold Murphy from sources originating from Renee L. Haugerud.
1.2.8 Michelle Murphy was required to accept representation from lawyerswho were such political outsiders that they were illegally convicted by Judge
Baldwin of indirect criminal contempt and Michelle Murphy was adjudicated to
be in contempt for seeking protections provided by LAW*.
1.2.8.1 Michelle Murphy is currently ordered by Judge Baldwin to be held
in the Coweta County Jail until she signs the custody evaluator, Nancy
McGarrah’s contract granting this custody evaluator full immunity from
liability from any civil action filed by Michelle Murphy against her.
1.2.8.2 Nancy McGarrah is the custody evaluator who stated falsely,
according to John Harold Murphy, that John Harold Murphy told her that one
of the children stated that one of the children had been fondled.
1.2.8.3 The contempt Order against Michelle Murphy has been affirmed
with an opinion of Court of Appeals Judge Christopher McFadden serving
with the panel of Judge Boggs and Presiding Judge Doyle. A petition for writ
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
16/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 12 of 147
of certiorari has been filed with the Supreme Court of Georgia. A motion to
disqualify this Court of Appeals panel was denied.
1.2.9 The ability of Judge Baldwin to obtain hefty financial and political
support would diminish substantially if he refused to allow himself to be judge-
shopped. Currently he is near the top of his financial and political funders’
shopping list. The word on the street is that Judge Baldwin delivers even when
he is appointed as a surrogate for another type of political necessity, as appointing
the judge to preside in the Brian Nichols case.
1.2.10 Judge Baldwin is the Chief Judge of the Coweta Judicial Circuit; he
should not attempt at the same time to be the Political Chief and surrogate to
others attempting to carry out their political agenda.
1.2.11. It is the systematic attacks upon such aspects of the political structure
of the judicial misconduct that does not provide protection to litigants without
money that should be provided to them by LAW* that offended Judge Baldwin
to the extent that he engaged in overt, corrupt tactics affecting Michelle Murphy.
1.2.11.1 In the view of Judge Baldwin, as demonstrated by his conduct,
counsel for Michelle Murphy were supposed to succumb to his
administration of a system that did not provide Michelle Murphy the
protection of LAW*
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
17/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 13 of 147
1.2.11.2 On the street, they call it, “No Money; No Justice.” Often, on
appeal, it is called, “judicial discretion;” here, we identify the financial and
political decision making of Judge Baldwin and its numerous facets simply
as, “judicial corruption.”
Michelle Murphy Must Have State Empowered Investigative Assistance
1.3 At this stage, Michelle Murphy requires an investigator empowered and
compensated by the State of Georgia to expose immediately the corruption that
resulted from such despicable judicial conduct that even some of the participants
with Judge Baldwin are ashamed.
1.3.1 Judge Baldwin has substantial assistance in sustaining his corruption.
1.3.1.1 It has been impossible for Michelle Murphy’s counsel to preserve a
record in this case that exposes the corruption, as the basic modus operandi of
Judge Baldwin’s protective shield is very simple; he does not allow Michelle
Murphy to produce evidence and Judge Baldwin requires his approval before
any motion can be filed by Michelle Murphy’s counsel. Judge Baldwin also
obtains assistance from others in secreting his misconduct and the misconductof those who participate in his corruption.
Protectors of Judge Baldwin’s Corruption
1.3.1.2 Examples of protectors of Judge Baldwin’s judicial corruption was
exposed around the events of the “Blame Yourself! Blame Yourself! Blame
Yourself!” May 27, 2014 proceeding.
1.3.1.3 It was necessary for Judge Baldwin to prevent Michelle Murphy
from presenting even her direct examination before he orchestrated the
May 27, 2014 judicially directed, snatch and grab of Jack Murphy and Thomas
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
18/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 14 of 147
Murphy that he perfected with Deputy Sheriffs, whom he prearranged to be
present in the courtroom.
1.3.1.4 Judge Baldwin performed his take-down stunt before the full array
of Glower & Davis lawyers, the Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP lawyers
and the cadre of Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP gawkers who came
from Atlanta to Newnan just to observe the take-down. The expression on the
face of Judge Baldwin as he sought an approving view from these lawyers and
their supporting gawkers was that of a professional, Saturday night, small town
wrestler as the wrestler exchanged looks with the ring-side revelers seeking
approval and looks from the wrestler, starting with the suffering of his
opponent lying unconscious on the mat, bleeding and maybe praying that there
would not be another knee-drop to his back in response to the approval from
the ring-side revelers.
1.3.1.5 After the May 27, 2014 temper tantrum, counsel for Michelle
Murphy requested that the court reporter allow counsel to purchase the audio
recording of the proceeding. Nan Freeman, the court reporter, refused by
stating that the audio recording was her work product.
1.3.1.6 After Michelle Murphy filed a plea for a change of heart by Judge
Baldwin, it was then necessary for counsel to file a freedom of information
request to obtain the four “Blame Yourself!” omitted pages from the transcript
that Nan Freeman had sworn was complete when she filed the transcript, even
though the critical pages were not included.
1.3.1.7 It is understandable that Nan Freeman wished to protect Judge
Baldwin; it is not understandable that she would provide an oath that she had
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
19/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 15 of 147
provided a complete transcript when she omitted the highly relevant four pages
that punctuated the conduct of Judge Baldwin that was against the LAW*
1.3.1.8 After a threat by counsel for Michelle Murphy to bring an action to
obtain the audio recording of the proceeding, Judge Baldwin e-mailed counsel
for Michelle Murphy and asked that Nan Freeman not be sued, as she did not
have the money to afford the litigation. There was a motion to disqualify Judge
Baldwin based, in part, upon that request to protect Nan Freeman.
1.3.1.9 This request by Judge Baldwin for immunity for Nan Freeman was
both conduct that is against the LAW* and conduct that is personally insulting
to counsel for the mother of Jack and Thomas.
1.3.1.10 Judge Baldwin just did not get that it was corruption that counsel
for Michelle Murphy was resisting and not an opportunity to participate in the
corruption.
1.2.1.11 Counsel did file the necessary action against Nan Freeman and
the Board of Court Reporting that resulted in obtaining all of Nan Freeman’s
audio recordings.
1.3.1.12 The deposition of Nan Freeman was taken on November 22, 2014
and preserved with a video and transcript of the deposition. Nan Freeman,
during the deposition, confessed to illegally charging for her transcripts. The
transcript, with exhibits, is Attachment 154.
1.3.1.13 The District Attorney of the Coweta Judicial Circuit failed to
return phone calls relating to bringing an action against Nan Freeman to
recover the illegally taken funds that Judge Baldwin had approved, without
reading the illegal vouchers for Nan Freeman to receive payment from the
counties in the Coweta Judicial Circuit.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
20/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 16 of 147
1.3.1.14 If counsel for Michelle Murphy had yielded to the request of
Judge Baldwin, the illegal conduct of Nan Freeman would not have been
disclosed.
1.3.1.15 Counsel for Michelle Murphy, at that stage of correcting the Nan
Freeman illegal conduct, then attempted to talk with an employee of the Board
of Court Reporters, who had, in the past, provided helpful information to
counsel. That employee of the State of Georgia did not return counsel’s calls.
After several unsuccessful attempts, Cynthia Clanton, an employee of the State
of Georgia’s Administrative Office of the Courts, returned counsel for
Michelle Murphy’s call that had been left for a person who is employed by the
State of Georgia to administer matters relating to court reporters.
1.3.1.16 Counsel for Michelle Murphy had experience dealing with
Cynthia Clanton of the Administrative Office of the Courts during the time
that counsel was marshalling information in another case involving then Chief
Superior Court Judge Amanda Williams of the Brunswick Judicial Circuit.
During the Williams case, Cynthia Clanton prohibited Millard Farmer from
talking with the State of Georgia employed, Director of the Georgia
Commission on Dispute Resolution about some of the money that the Clerk of
Court in Glynn County collected and did not return to litigants who, under an
Order of Judge Williams, were illegally required to pay an additional filing
fee.
1.3.1.17 On the recent occasion involving Nan Freeman and Judge Baldwin,
Cynthia Clanton refused to allow Millard Farmer to talk with the employee of
the Board of Court Reporting without first submitting questions to her. This
conduct was perceived by Millard Farmer as Cynthia Clanton’s effort to assist
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
21/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 17 of 147
further exposure of the illegal conduct of Nan Freeman and thereby Judge
Baldwin.
1.3.1.18 This information is included in this motion seeking assistance for
investigation of the corruption of Judge Baldwin, as Millard Farmer strongly
suspects that Cynthia Clanton has provided assistance to persons assisting
Judge Baldwin in his corruption, including Nan Freeman and others. It is not
the function of Cynthia Clanton to assist persons compensated by the State of
Georgia in avoiding detection from their illegal conduct.
1.3.1.19 There is a large amount of competent investigative work that is
required by the State of Georgia empowered investigators to determine the
persons who have assisted Judge Baldwin’s law clerk, Melissa Sams, and
others actively participating in Judge Baldwin’s corruption and who
participated by concealing aspects of his ex parte corruption conduct, as Julia
Harris, Judicial Assistant, is believed to have knowledge. Julia Harris was
subpoenaed to testify at the March 17, 2014 proceeding. Michelle Murphy was
not allowed to present her evidence at that March 17, 2014 proceeding. False
statements to the State of Georgia funded investigators will be a criminal act
that will loosen the tongues of these participants, as Nan Freeman’s tongue
was somewhat loosened between the time that she answered, under oath, the
Complaint filed against her and the time of her deposition.
1.3.2 The May 27 “Blame Yourself!” proceeding is only the tip of the Iceberg.
1.3.2.1 The only direct evidence about the hinted fondling and sexual
misconduct were the affidavits of unequivocal denial by Michelle Murphy,
Jack Murphy and Thomas Murphy.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
22/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 18 of 147
1.3.2.2 On May 27, 2014, these persons were in the courtroom, awaiting an
opportunity to testify. Judge Baldwin denied Michelle Murphy, Jack Murphy
and Thomas Murphy the right to testify or to present their evidence directly or
from their witnesses.
1.3.2.3 At the May 27, 2014 proceeding and numerous earlier hearings,
Judge Baldwin intentionally denied Michelle Murphy, Jack Murphy and
Thomas Murphy the protections provided to them by LAW*.
1.3.2 .4 Corruption, and not LAW*, dominated the conduct of Judge A.
Quillian Baldwin, Jr. in this case.
1.3.2.5 A substantial part of the funding that motivated the corruption that
dominated the judicial decision making and motivated benefits derived from
corruption in this case, came directly and indirectly from present and future
anticipated funding from the assets of Renee L. Haugerud, her controlled
Galtere, Ltd, and other entities in which Renee L. Haugerud participated
directly and indirectly.
The Lust for the Money Derived from the Financial Interests of Renee L.
Haugerud Prevented Dispute Resolution
1.3.2.6 There are evasion of state and federal tax consequences that are
suspected, involving assets that have supported this litigation and the lifestyle
of John Harold Murphy, Renee L. Haugerud and others that require
sophisticated investigation, as, correct or not, it has been reported that St.
Thomas provides special income tax credits to individuals with children, as
children assist in establishing residency associated with tax exemptions that
otherwise could not be claimed.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
23/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 19 of 147
1.3.2.7 The lust of the Glover & Davis lawyers for attorney fees prevented
any fair attempts to resolve the dispute that created this case either before or
at any time during the litigation.
1.3.2.8 Renee L. Haugerud, before the litigation began, told Michelle
Murphy that she should just surrender Jack and Thomas to John Harold
Murphy, as she and John were going to get the children from her.
1.3.2.9 The financial strength of Renee L. Haugerud and the willingness of
John Harold Murphy to make false statements and gain assistance from
Superior Court Judge Louis Jack Kirby presented what the litigation has
resulted in accomplishing – the financial devastation of Michelle Murphy. This
was only possible with the corruption and the absence of the protections of the
LAW* provided to Michelle Murphy.
Judge Baldwin Engaged in Judicially Corrupt Conduct.
1.3.2.10 Judge Baldwin engaged in much of his LAW* violations in order
to protect the interest of those participating in the universe of Judge Baldwin’s
corruption.
1.4 Make no mistake in understanding that Judge Baldwin and the Guardian ad
Litem, Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell maliciously attempted to alienate Jack and
Thomas from Michelle Murphy. Judge Baldwin maliciously violated the LAW*.
Judge Baldwin’s absence of knowledge of the LAW* admittedly contributed to his
reliance upon those participating in and motivating his corruption. Judge Baldwin
attempted to gain status with those whom he used to assist him in furtherance of his
corruption.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
24/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 20 of 147
1.4.1 This is to plainly state that the conduct of Judge Baldwin in administering
the LAW* was corrupt. This motion is to provide the background of information
supplied to Judge Baldwin that he failed to fairly adjudicate that supports that an
investigation should be funded by the government to rid the Coweta Judicial
Circuit of the corruption that resulted in the conduct of Judge Baldwin.
1.4.2 Judge Baldwin substituted the protections provided by LAW*to Michelle
Murphy and her counsel to prevent evidence at critical stages of the litigation
with one of his temper tantrums, threats, or broken commitments to allow
evidence at a later time, or other violations of the LAW*.
1.4.3 The allegations of fondling and sexual abuse of the children against
Michelle Murphy were maliciously fabricated, fraudulently included in the
record and presented to Judge Baldwin and the appellate judges in order to
overshadow and thereby justify the corruption of Judge Baldwin and his
participants by upholding the contempt convictions against Michelle
Murphy and her counsel and for other illegal purpose.
1.4.4 Michelle Murphy and her counsel do not know for certain who originated
the fabrication, as there was no direct testimony that it even occurred. Those who
spread the fabricated accusation, having access to its untruthfulness, are known.
1.4.5 The symbol of our system of justice certainly weeps profusely to
represent sorrow for the suffering that Jack Murphy, now age 16, and Thomas
Murphy, now age 14, have endured as the result of the corruption of Judge
Baldwin and his participants.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
25/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 21 of 147
1.4.6 We should deeply regret the failure of our justice system to eradicate the
corruption of Judge Baldwin and his participants for failing to provide Michelle
Murphy the protections that the LAW* should have accorded Michelle Murphy,
her counsel, Jack Murphy and Thomas Murphy after the filing of the initial
motion to disqualify Judge Baldwin and Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell, the
guardian ad litem, who illegally took money provided to her in trust, that, as a
part of Judge Baldwin’s corruption, was approved without a requested hearing.
1.4.7 This modification of custody case is not the first time that the Coweta
Judicial Circuit deprived Michelle Murphy of justice.
1.4.8 If Michelle Murphy had not been required to share five different judges
in obtaining her 2006 Divorce Decree, as the consequence of the absence of a
Rule 3.1 case management plan, John Harold Murphy, with false swearing,
would not have been able to secret $180,000 from Michelle Murphy until the day
after the divorce settlement contract was signed. John Harold Murphy would also
have never been able to cheat Michelle Murphy on the child support calculations
that were different than the recorded agreement made to Judge No. 2 of 5. More
about the deprivation that occurred during the 2006 Divorce proceedings later.
The Treatment of Michelle Murphy at the May 27, 2014 Hearing
1.4.9 The conduct of Judge Baldwin in choosing to treat Michelle Murphy as
he did at the May 27, 2014 “Blame Yourself!” proceeding is conduct that was so
evil that it is beyond conduct is only punishable as a violation of the LAW*.
On June 1, 2014, Michelle Murphy explained the May 27, 2014 “Blame
Yourself!” conduct of Judge Baldwin and its foreseeable consequences and those
who were participating in his conduct as follows.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
26/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 22 of 147
Personally appeared before the undersigned, an officer duly
authorized by law to administer oaths, Nancy Michelle Murphy, who
after being duly sworn, states as follows.
1. I am the mother of Jack Malachi Murphy (or, “Jack Murphy”),
age 15 and Thomas Emerson Murphy (or, “Thomas Murphy”), age 13.
2. John Harold Murphy brought this action to modify custody
against me after I refused to move to the Chattanooga Tennessee area
with the children. Neither I nor the children wished to move to that
area that the children knew better than I did, as they frequently visited
John Harold Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud there at her home and
they hate the area.
3. The Glover & Davis Complaint for Modification of John Harold
Murphy stated that I was threatening to move to South Carolina.
4. On Sunday after the Tuesday, May 27, 2027 event, John Harold
Murphy and Renee L. Haugerud took my sons, Jack and Thomas,
against their will, with them to St. Thomas, Virgin Islands. Jack and
Thomas were physically pulled from my arms in the courthouse on
Tuesday, May 27, 2014, while I attempted to explain the decision of
Judge Baldwin to both of Jack and Thomas, which Judge Baldwin did
not even announce to me in a rational tone.
5. After Judge Baldwin, with his arm fully extended, pointing his
finger in my face, screamed at me that he was giving temporary
custody of Jack and Thomas to their father and stormed out of the
courtroom, I went to the small room outside the courtroom door where
Jack and Thomas had been waiting to testify at the hearing. Thomas
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
27/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 23 of 147
was crying, and shaking, saying, “No! No way! We’re not going with
him! Jack was saying, “No way!”
6. Thomas was white knuckling the chair. I leaned down to be with
him. He flung his arms around my neck and said, “I am not going! I
hate him!” Jack came over to us; his face had a look I had never seen,
and he was shaking and very upset. We were all crying. John Murphy
was leaned against the wall, watching, while I was trying to comfort
the boys the best I could.
7. Jack and Thomas chose to come to court to talk to the judge of
their own volition. They were devastated that Judge Baldwin would not
allow their voices to be heard. They wanted to tell Judge Baldwin
personally what was happening to their lives because of the false
statements that their father had made under oath about them and their
mother.
8. The bailiff, with my sons being emotionally distraught, said to
Thomas, “Do you want to go to juvi (juvenile detention) young man,
‘cause I’ll take you there if you don’t let go of your mother.” [that
deputy took on the demeanor of Judge Baldwin] Thomas responded
that he did not care, he’d rather go there than with his father. The
bailiff said, “I will take your mom to jail.”
9. I was disgusted and broken hearted for my sons that John Murphy
would stand there, watching, and allow this terrifying experience
inflicted upon his 13 and 15 year old sons. I told the bailiff that he was
not going to take them to juvi. I asked him where was his compassion,
and to leave them alone. I was ordered to leave the building or they
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
28/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 24 of 147
would put me in jail. There were three attorneys for John Murphy and
Renee Haugerud standing in the entrance of the room, looking down
on us; two of them were laughing. This upset my sons so much. Thomas
told them to shut up and quit laughing at us. It was the most horrific
and unimaginable experience of my life and I still cannot believe that
Jack and Thomas had to experience it.
10. While all of this was happening, John Murphy just leaned against
the wall, with his hands behind his back and watched, expressionless.
That alone was incomprehensible to me.
11. I was escorted out to my car by another deputy sheriff, who was
very kind. Her eyes were filled with tears as she led me to my car.
12. My sons, Jack and Thomas are so emotionally distraught about
Judge Baldwin taking them from me. They have lived alone with me as
their primary custodial parent, in our home for fifteen years. They are
electronically texting and calling me as much as possible. They have
told me that their father, John Harold Murphy, has threatened to take
away their phones if they continue to text me.
13. Thomas, age 13, is currently physically sick with a sinus infection
and was forced to fly from Chattanooga to Atlanta and then transfer to
another plane to St. Thomas. Thomas needs to be with me so I can
address his illness with his pediatrician in Newnan, who has treated
him for years and knows him very well. Jack and Thomas are both
extremely distraught by being held against their will by their father
and Renee L. Haugerud.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
29/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 25 of 147
14. The attached electronic messages are some of the true and
accurate messages that I have received. Each of their texts break my
heart, because I feel the distress of Jack and Thomas. The portion of
these electronic messages that are attached to my Emergency Motion
to the Georgia Supreme Court that is to be filed on Monday, June 2,
2014 are also true and accurate copies of text messages that I have
received. Also attached is a true and accurate copy of an email which
I sent to John Murphy, asking that he take Thomas immediately to a
doctor, as he was very sick. This 1st day of June, 2014.
A sampling of the e-mail exchanges attached to the affidavit of
Michelle Murphy that were presented to Judge Baldwin follow. The
affidavit and other information provide in the motion is relevant to this
motion to support that the corruption of Judge Baldwin resulted while
he had full knowledge of the conduct of the participants in his
corruption that support the malicious nature of the corruption.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
30/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 26 of 147
Judge Baldwin is not deserving of a downward departure from the maximum
discipline
1.5 The absence of remorse by Judge Baldwin in not providing a hearing to
determine the consequences of his illegal behavior, by not allowing a hearing to
correct his conduct, is as indicative of the intent of Judge Baldwin’s corruption as
was the May 27, 2014 hearing, the August 13, 2013 hearing and his consistent denial
of the protections of the LAW* to Michelle Murphy and to her counsel.
1.5.1 Michelle Murphy should never have been subjected to the “Blame
Yourself!” pronouncement by Judge Baldwin, even if the pronouncement had
been delivered in a judicial manner instead of in a street fight delivery tone with
the accompanying physical gyrations of Judge Baldwin. Michelle Murphy, nor
any mother, can be blamed for attempting to protect the lives of Jack and Thomas
from Judge Baldwin and his corrupt participants.1.5.1.1 Nan Freeman should be appropriately reminded of her participation
in the corrupt conduct of Judge Baldwin. It was not until the conduct of this
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
31/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s Corruption With Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 27 of 147
official court reporter was addressed that she produced the omitted four pages
of a transcript that she had certified to be complete, in which she omitted the
“Blame Yourself! Blame Yourself! Blame Yourself !” pronouncement of Judge
Baldwin at the May 27, 2014 hearing.
1.5.1.2 It was the open records request of Larry King that obtained those
four pages of the transcript.
1.5.1.3 It was only counsel for Michelle Murphy’s resistance to the request
of Judge Baldwin not to bring the action against Nan Freeman that also
produced the evidence now preserved with the complete audio recordings of
the transcripts of Nan Freeman. These audio recordings are available upon
request from Millard Farmer and will be a part of the record in the Superior
Court of Troup County in Michelle Murphy vs. Nan Freeman, et al .
1.5.1.4 The video recording of the deposition of Nan Freeman will also be
available in the Superior Court of Troup County, and, upon request, to the Law
Office of Millard Farmer. The video recordings are an important teaching aid.
The transcript of the deposition is included as Attachment 154.
1.5.1.5 The personal lives of A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. and those who
participated in alluring Judge Baldwin into such a gestapo type of proceeding
came to a fork in the road of life on that infamous May 27, 2014 day.
The Fork in the Road
1.5.1.6 The fork in the road that Judge Baldwin ultimately took led to two
teams of “Transporters” coming into the bedrooms of Jack and Thomas in the
dark of the morning at 6:00 a.m. on September 28, 2014 and taking them into
custody.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
32/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 28 of 147
1.5.1.7 Michelle Murphy, Jack Murphy and Thomas Murphy had no more
opportunity to speak about these children being captured by the “Transporters”
in the dark of the night and taken to Utah and placed in separate confinement
units than Judge Baldwin provided them on May 27, 2014.
1.5.1.8 The “Transporters” Arrived, Unannounced, in the Bedrooms of Jack
Murphy and Thomas Murphy at 6:00 a.m. on September 28, 2014.
1.5.1.8.1 At 6:00 a.m., Jack and Thomas were asleep, in what they believed
and were always told to be their secure bedrooms, at the mansion of Renee L.
Haugerud on Lookout Mountain, TN.
1.5.1.8.2 Very unexpectedly to Jack Murphy, then age 15, two men, unknown
to Jack Murphy, appeared at his bedside to awaken him. The two men announced,
“Brush your teeth, go to the bathroom and put on your clothes.”
1.5.1.8.3 Jack inquired. “Who are you? What are you doing here?”
1.5.1.8.4 Jack received no truthful responses about his pending fate. Jack was
shown no documents.
1.5.1.8.5 Jack’s guardian ad litem, Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell, explained
nothing to Jack, as he was alarmed and dazed by the intrusion of these two men,
who are called “Transporters.”
1.5.1.8.5.1 Certainly, rational people, at this point, wish to know how
this then fifteen (15) year old popular high school student who advanced with
his class in school and tested to be quite normal by a psychologist whom
Michelle Murphy employed to provide information to the Court on
May 27, 2014 that Judge Baldwin would not allow, could have deteriorated
to a mental condition requiring him to be awakened in the dark hours of the
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
33/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 29 of 147
morning, with no explanation, and removed from what he was told to be a
secure place, by two unknown “Transporters.”
1.5.1.8.4.2 Contemporaneously, with the arousing of Jack Murphy, a man and a
woman approached Thomas Murphy in his bedroom and took him into custody in
much the same unexpected manner in which Jack was approached and taken into
custody.
1.5.1.8.4.2.1 Jack and Thomas were placed into two separate cars with the
separate teams of “Transporters” and taken to the Atlanta Airport.
1.5.1.8.4.2.2 Jack was escorted through the Atlanta Airport separately from
Thomas.
1.5.1.8.4.2.3 One of Jack’s transporters held tightly onto Jack’s clothing as
they passed through the Atlanta Airport. Jack and Thomas were in custody of two
teams that were each composed of two “Transporters” they had never seen
before. They only know that Renee L. Haugerud was in her bedroom when they
were captured and their father was crying when they left.
1.5.1.8.4.2.4 Jack and Thomas, who had never been separated over a few days
at a time since their birth, never saw each other again until approximately five
weeks later.
1.5.1.8.4.2.5 Thomas was placed at Elevations RTC in Syracuse, Utah; Jack
was initially placed in Viewpoint Center, an assessment center in Syracuse, Utah,
before being placed in Elevations RTC.
1.5.1.8.4.2.6 Elevations RTC identifies itself as follows.
What is Elevations RTC? See, http://www.elevationsrtc.com/
When parents are in crisis with a troubled teen, Elevations Residential Treatment Center (RTC) can offer
guidance, support and relief. We help boys and girls from ages of 13-17 overcome challenges stemming
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
34/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 30 of 147
from mental health problems, emotional disorders, learning disorders, substance abuse, and other underlying
issues. From depression to addiction to bullying, Elevations RTC is a leading treatment center in America,
helping troubled teens regain their self-worth through proven therapeutic methods. Call today at
855.290.9681.
1.5.1.8.4.2.7 Jack and Thomas will later learn that this trauma that they endured
was a part of Judge Baldwin’s retaliation against his mother’s attorney, Millard
Farmer and his mother, for raising issues about this Judge’s violations of the
Code of Judicial Conduct, the Uniform Superior Court Rules and the laws of
Georgia, as counsel for Michelle Murphy sought Due Process from a jurist who
was not handpicked, in violation of the law, without running the risk of being
judged by such fabricated assertions as the falsely asserted fondling accusation
that Michelle Murphy and the children were prepared to defend and expose on
May 27, 2014.
1.5.1.9 This country does not accept the fork in the road that Judge Baldwin
took or takes.
1.5.1.10 High priced lawyers and fancy legal arguments cannot smother or
remove from memory the lessons of history that people learned with far more
sacrifice than the contempt of court convictions.
The High Price for Paid for a State Mandated Case Management Plan
1.5.1.11 Michelle Murphy, Larry King and Millard Farmer paid an extremely
high price to change the failure of the Coweta Judicial Circuit to adhere to the
Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 case management requirement; however,
that made a change that is a large step toward ending the judge-shopping
system that initially corrupted Judge Baldwin.
1.5.1.12 The next large step that involves issues in this case is to have the
judges in the Coweta Judicial Circuit and throughout the State learn from the
http://www.elevationsrtc.com/choose-residential-treatment-center-therapeutic-options/http://www.elevationsrtc.com/choose-residential-treatment-center-therapeutic-options/
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
35/319
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
36/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 32 of 147
1.5.1.16 On Friday afternoon, July 25, 2014, Taylor Drake sent to counsel
for Michelle Murphy, John Harold Murphy’s threat to breach the Settlement
Agreement that was memorialized before Judge A. Quillian Baldwin to
provide Michelle Murphy child support for Jack and Thomas.
1.5.1.17 John Murphy mandated that Michelle Murphy will not receive
August child support, because Judge Baldwin took the children from her at a
hearing which was so devoid of due process that even the prisoners at
Guantánamo Bay during the last six years have been provided fairer hearings
with less irate judges.
1.5.1.18 Counsel for Michelle Murphy responded to Taylor Drake
with the thought process of Michelle Murphy and those of any rational
person as follows.
The Settlement Agreement incorporated and made the Order of the Court in the 2006
Divorce Decree provides as follows.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
37/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 33 of 147
The threat, without any legal authority to breach the agreement, or the letter’s
attempts to shift the obligation to defend John Harold Murphy’s conduct upon
counsel for Michelle Murphy is the typical, we got our hand-selected judge and
millions of dollars to litigate you in ground, Taylor Drake/Glover & Davis John
Harold Murphy/Renee L. Haugerud strategy.
The upcoming of that “we have the judge and the money” strategy was first
identified to counsel for Michelle Murphy when Taylor would not discuss a
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
38/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 34 of 147
disposition to the dispute of the parties without rushing to the courthouse to select
Judge Baldwin,
It was at that first meeting, over strong protest of counsel for Michelle Murphy,
that Judge Baldwin signed, without reading an order appointing a guardian ad litem
with the power to change temporary custody of the children without approval of the
Court.
Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell, at the insistence of Taylor Drake attempted to
perform this illegal temporary change of custody act. It was necessary for Michelle
Murphy to defy the illegal “order” of Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell and enroll the
children in the public schools of Coweta County in order to resist the illegal conduct
of Elizabeth “Lisa” F. Harwell supported by Taylor Drake on behalf of John Harold
Murphy. The event creating this illegal conduct by the guardian ad litem occurred
because of one of John Harold Murphy/Renee L. Haugerud power plays that
terminated the transportation that they had been providing for the children to attend
a private school in Atlanta after Michelle Murphy refused to move to Chattanooga,
Tennessee that resulted in the Modification of Custody Complaint being filed by
Taylor Drake.
The signing of the appointment of the guardian ad litem order without reading it and
the false statement of Judge Baldwin in defending the motion to disqualify him was
so bad that Stephen E. Hudson on page 14 in his January 22, 2014 Appellees’ brief
for John Harold Murphy in the Court of Appeals made a false assertion about the
conduct of Judge Baldwin not reading the Order before signing it. That false
assertion by Stephen E. Hudson was to support a false statement made by Judge
Baldwin in his Order denying the motion for his disqualification. (V2, p.307) That
denial by Judge Baldwin was yet another Birt, Issacs disqualification of Judge
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
39/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 35 of 147
Baldwin ground. Conspicuously, the Glover & Davis lawyer who was present when
the Order was signed and who struck through the statement did not sign the brief of
Stephen E. Hudson, (p. 14) yet, he permitted the brief to be filed and go uncorrected.
Tell me Mr. Farmer just what does the following monetary commitment in the
Settlement Agreement memorialized before Judge Baldwin mean?
The questions in rapid sequences became: What do you think, Mr. Farmer? Rent is
due on the children’s and my home. You know; the alimony stops in September, Mr.
Farmer?
Don’t you know, Mr. Farmer; nobody listens to you and that study by that Emory
Law Professor, Joanna Shepherd, about the evil of money influencing judges?
Don’t you know Mr. Farmer that the studies about the authorities disciplining judges
about their demeanor does not apply to Georgia?
Don’t you know Mr. Farmer that you cannot expect equality from a judge who would
not allow evidence on a motion to disqualify a guardian ad litem after being
informed that the guardian ad litem was engaging in OCGA § 16-6-19 Adultery,
taking money held in trust in violation of Uniform Superior Court Rule 24.9 (8) (g)
and trying her personal cases before Coweta Judicial Circuit Judge Louis Jack
Kirby who suggested to John Harold Murphy that he employ Taylor Drake.
Don’t you get it Mr. Farmer, it is not Jack Murphy, age 15 and Thomas Murphy,
age 13 whose best interest that is being adjudicated, It is the benefits that the bank
account can derive to the contributors of those who sell their political influence to
wealthy client, not persons with the status of a hair stylist who was moved from
California to the Coweta Judicial Circuit in order that John Harold Murphy could
do such things a getting away with secreting $180,000 in stock options until the day
after the settlement agreement was memorialized before Judge A. Quillian Baldwin,
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
40/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 36 of 147
Jr. in open court.
Don’t you understand Mr. Farmer how much that I gave up to get the right to free
my children for John Harold Murphy who was engaging in habitual acts of adultery
throughout New York City, Georgia and California? Mr. Farmer. I have devoted my
time to the getting the children through the stressful false statement of John Harold
Murphy that Renee L. Haugerud finances. I have not taken the time to build my hair
styling business.
Mr. Farmer, you do remember that you told me that I had to save the $5,000
contempt fine money to stay out of jail, if the appeal does not work. You remember
that we had to pay that filing fee in Fulton County to sue Nan Freeman to get the
audio to send to those people. We had to pay $300 for that expert witness for that
May 27, 2014 hearing when Judge Baldwin had the temper tantrum and we not allow
you to put up any witnesses, or for you to question me. He only allow Taylor Drake
to ask me questions that did not present me an opportunity to present my defense,
followed by Judge Baldwin treating me like I was some animal.
Mr. Farmer, you remember that you told me that we had to pay for those records
that Judge Baldwin ordered us to pay, or have that contempt appeal dismissed.
Mr. Farmer, please tell me why I will not be treated like I was treated when Judge
Baldwin made me pay for those records that could not even be considered on that
appeal because the records were for things that occurred after the appeal was filed.
Mr. Farmer, Do you know when we will get a judge who will allow us to present
evidence and not spend the time telling us how fair that he is, when he will never
allow us to present evidence of his bias to another judge?
Please answer me Mr. Farmer! Please answer me Mr. Farmer!
Is this just another chapter in that book that you are calling, No money, No equal
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
41/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 37 of 147
justice, Mr. Farmer?
Mr. Farmer. I have devoted my time to the getting the children through the stressful
false statement of John Harold Murphy that Renee L. Haugerud finances. I have not
taken the time to build my hair styling business.
Don’t you understand, Mr. Farmer John Harold Murphy is morally corrupt and he
now has the money that Renee L. Haugerud supplies to corrupt others?
Don’t you understand, Mr. Farmer the reason that Judge Baldwin would not even
allow you to ask John Harold Murphy where he lived at that hearing?
Don’t you understand Mr. Farmer that Judge Baldwin has not requested that even
H. Elizabeth King to interview the children in private even once since he had the
temper tantrum and had the Deputy Sheriff take the children, without any
explanation to the children to the SUV Limousine.
Tell me Mr. Farmer, have you ever seen any judge at any time engage in the conduct
that Judge Baldwin permitted and engaged in at the May 27, 2014 hearing?
Tell me Mr. Farmer have you ever observed any judge at any time order a lawyer
arrested as Larry King was arrested on the day that he attempted to file and explain
the reason for his plea to the personal jurisdiction of Judge Baldwin?
.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
42/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 38 of 147
1.6 There were attempts to obtain a hearing to present evidence of the
detriment to the lives of Jack and Thomas while they were in St. Thomas,
USVI, but first, we should document the initial appointment by Judge
Baldwin of Melissa Griffis as the initial guardian ad litem, who resigned, and
who, as an act of retaliation against Michelle Murphy for seeking to disqualify
her, provided Judge Baldwin an Order to appoint Elizabeth “Lisa” Harwell as the
guardian ad litem.
After omitting the introductory comments referring to Tinker to Evers to Chance,
the disqualification motion follows.
1.8 The conduct of Kirby to Drake to Baldwin in this case was not
ethical or legal and this is where the Baseball's Sad Lexicon transforms
into Justice’s Sad Lexicon.
1.9 Judge Jack Kirby recommended that his friend and former client,
John Murphy, employ the law firm of Glover & Davis’s Taylor Drake in
this litigation.
1.9.1 Judge Jack Kirby knew both John Murphy and Glover & Davis’s
Taylor Drake extremely well.
1.9.2 Judge Jack Kirby knew that Glover & Davis’s Taylor Drake would know
how to judge shop for a judge with whom they had a good, ongoing earwigging
relationship.
1.9.3 Judge Jack Kirby knew that Glover & Davis had survived a Court of
Appeals test to its judge selection shenanigans, as this law firm had not been
caught in its Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co., 2012 Ga.
LEXIS 488 (Ga. May 29, 2012) judge selection shenanigans at that time.
1.9.4 Judge Jack Kirby knew that he was providing sound legal advice to his
friend, John Murphy when he gave him the legal advice to hire Glover & Davis’s
Taylor Drake instead of the other lawyer who had represented John Murphy in
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
43/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 39 of 147
Nancy Michelle Murphy v. Delia Tedder Crouch, Civil Action No. 08V2137 in
the Superior Court of Coweta County, Georgia.
1.9.5 The law of Georgia prohibits a Superior Court Judge from practicing
law. John Murphy came to Judge Jack Kirby for legal advice that belonged to
the people of the State of Georgia, not to Judge Jack Kirby to exchange for such
social pleasures provided to him by John Murphy with his expensive toys, as his
50 foot Hedge-Fun boat.
1.10 Melissa Griffis, the Guardian ad Litem whom Judge Baldwin
appointed, appears before Judge Jack Kirby on a regular basis
representing her private practice clients who seek discretionary decisions
from Judge Jack Kirby. Melissa Griffis knows that Judge Jack Kirbyrecommended that John Murphy employ Glover & Davis’s Taylor Drake
for this litigation. Kirby to Drake to Baldwin works fine for Melissa
Griffis. This connection is what some people call one of the benefits of
being, nearer, my judge, to thee.
1.11 Melissa Griffis and Glover & Davis’s Taylor Drake were
co-fundraiser organizers for a current candidate for Superior Court
Judge, Emory Palmer.
1.11.1 Judge Baldwin attended the Emory Palmer fundraiser in LaGrange onlya few nights before he appointed Melissa Griffis as Guardian ad Litem.
1.11.2 Members of the law firms of Taylor Drake and Melissa Griffis also have
recently contributed substantially to Judge Baldwin’s reelection committee,
although Judge Baldwin has no opposition.
1.11.3 In the Order of Judge Baldwin denying the disqualification motions of
Michelle Murphy, Judge Baldwin goes to an extreme to make a point about the
contributions to him by Melissa Griffis’ law firm. On pages 3 and 4 of the Order
of Judge Baldwin he states as follows.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
44/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 40 of 147
. . . The amount received from Ms. Griffis’ firm was received almost a month
after her appointment.
1.11.4 This raises the question of, just what was Judge Baldwin’s point?
1.11.4.1 The appointment of Ms. Griffis occurred on April 26, 2012; the time
for the qualification to the reelection of Judge Baldwin closed, with him having
no opposition on May 25, 2012.
1.11.4.2 What was Judge Baldwin’s point about Ms. Griffis’ firm making a
contribution almost a month after her appointment? Was Judge Baldwin’s point
that Ms. Griffis’ firm was getting its due to him late?
1.11.4.3 Was Judge Baldwin’s point that Ms. Griffis’ firm was waiting until it
was certain that he would have not opposition before placing its bet?
1.11.4.4 Whatever the point that Judge Baldwin was attempting to make, we all
now know, as the holiday season song goes, Santa Clause is “checking his list to
find out who is naughty or nice.” Please, understand that in-kind fundraising
parties for friends are not adequate; you must get these financial gifts in on time
in order that they will not look so strange and require so much explaining in
Court Orders.
1.11.4.5 In Melissa Griffis’ defense, she might retort to Judge Baldwin, we
wanted to wait to see if you would be disqualified from serving in my bread and
butter guardian ad litem appointment.
1.12 In open court, on the morning when Taylor Drake arranged to have Judge
Baldwin appoint a guardian ad litem, Judge Baldwin, during the case
assignment, first called the calendar and then sent one of the cases that he
selected down the hall to another judge. This type of case assignment does not
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
45/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 41 of 147
comply with Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1. This is the ad hoc, unpublished
“case assignment” of the Coweta Judicial Circuit system.
1.13 Judge Baldwin makes a deceptively fraudulent, legally incorrect
statement about USCR 3.1 compliance in his Order refusing to disqualify himself.
This statement is as follows.
1.14 In an oral open records request to the Clerk of Court of the Superior
Court of Coweta County, as authorized by OCGA § 50-18-70 et seq., as amended
by the 2012 House Bill 397, counsel for Michelle Murphy was advised that there
was no case assignment plan by the Judges of the Coweta Judicial Circuit in the
records o f the Clerk of Court the Superior Court of Coweta County, i.e., there
was no document relating to USCR 3.1 compliance for counsel for Michelle
Murphy to view in order that the rule was followed.1.14.1 Based upon the oral information received from the Clerk of Court,
counsel for Michelle Murphy made the following assertion in the motion to
disqualify Judge Baldwin. If Judge Baldwin wished to dispute this factual
representation in the disqualification motions, an assignment of the matter to
another judge for a hearing was his remedy.
8.4 The Superior Court of Coweta County has no documented “Method
of Assignment” plan. emphasis supplied
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
46/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 42 of 147
8.1 The train of judicial responsibility ran off the tracks when the judges
in the Coweta/Troup segment of the Coweta Judicial Circuit made the
decision to disregard the Uniform Superior Court Rule 3.1 in order that
the judges may select the cases that they wish to address and shuffle to
another judge the cases that they do not want to address.8.2 This Unif. Super. Ct. R. 3.1 violation system is sanctioned by the
domestic relations bar in the Coweta/Troup segment of the Coweta
Judicial Circuit for two primary reasons.
8.2.1 This Unif. Super. Ct. R. 3.1 violation system is sanctioned by the domestic
relations lawyers as they understand that a large majority of the domestic
relations decisions are made based upon the discretion of the judges, and
challenges to judges have a detrimental effect upon the rights of their clients.8.2.2 This Unif. Super. Ct. R. 3.1 violation system is also sanctioned, as these
judges have developed employment opportunities for the core of firms with a
substantial domestic relations practice by appointing some members of these
firms as guardians ad litem and requiring litigants to pay the appointed
guardians ad litem fees based upon their highest level of fees.
* * *
8.4.1 Judge Quillian Baldwin shares the responsibility for failing to adopt a
“Method of Assignment’ plan in the Superior Court of Coweta County.
8.4.2 This illegal conduct by Judge Quillian Baldwin is a legal basis upon
which to disqualify him from picking and choosing the cases that he wishes to
address.
8.4.3 The failure of the Superior Court of Coweta County to adopt a “Method
of Assignment” plan provides no continuity of judicial oversight for domestic
relations cases.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
47/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 43 of 147
8.4.4 Due to the failure of the Superior Court of Coweta County to adopt a
“Method of Assignment” plan provides these judges great incentive to appoint a
guardian ad litem to fulfill the role that the judge is elected and sworn to fulfill.
Such conduct adds thousands of dollars into the pockets of lawyers who litigants
are required to pay on the threat of contempt of court.
8.5 In this case, Judge Quillian Baldwin has engaged in each of the evils
that the “Method of Assignment” rule is designed to prevent.
1.14.2 If Judge Baldwin has a documented plan for case assignments approved
by a majority of the judges that is filed in the records of the Clerk of Court of
Coweta, he has the obligation to produce it.
1.14.3 If such a plan is not filed with the Clerk of Court in the records of the
Court, it is not a USCR 3.1 compliant plan and Judge Baldwin should be
sanctioned by the Judicial Qualifications Commission for knowingly making such
a statement to protect his conduct in the motion to disqualify him. Certainly,
Judge Baldwin must have heard about Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah v.
Batson-Cook Co., 2012 Ga. LEXIS 488 (Ga. May 29, 2012).
2. Memorandum of Law 2.1 The removal of Melissa Griffis as Guardian ad Litem does not resolve the
conduct of Kirby to Drake to Baldwin.
2.2 The appointment of Melissa Griffis as Guardian ad Litem is only the symptom
of the judicial corruption that surrounds the Case Assignment issues in the Coweta
Judicial Circuit and the unethical conduct of Judge Baldwin, in this case.
2.2.1 Admittedly, the unethical misconduct of Judge Baldwin has adequate
company in the Coweta Judicial Circuit.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
48/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 44 of 147
2.2.2 It was just unfortunate for Judge Baldwin that Judge Jack Kirby selected
the Glover & Davis judge shoppers to call upon Judge Baldwin to pay the Piper
in this matter.
2.2.3 John Murphy’s financial statement indicates that John Murphy makes
and average of $625 month in political contributions. This is a interesting
invitation for those who bundle such funds. This invitation follows.
2.3 John Murphy has no viable cause of action in his Complaint for
Modification of Custody or in the Alternative, Parenting Time.
2.3.1 John Murphy’s only claim is that his spouse is a multi-millionaire and
that he can better financially provide for Thomas and Jack than Michelle Murphy
who must provide for these two children with the money that she receives as child
support, alimony, as a hair stylist and with the gratuitous funds that John Murphy
and his spouse provide.
2.3.2 The problem of the children being provided more financial support does
not require a change of custody, only a change of child support.
2.3.3 There was absolutely no emergency identified or proven in order for
Taylor Drake to obtain the appointment of a guardian ad litem.
2.4 The elimination of Melissa Griffis as Guardian ad Litem does not
address the core problem created by the Kirby to Drake to Baldwin issue.
It is necessary to eliminate Melissa Griffis as the Guardian ad Litem asa step toward addressing the unethical conduct created by the Glover &
Davis judge selection process and thereby Guardian ad Litem selection
process.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
49/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 45 of 147
2.5 To the eyes of counsel for Michelle Murphy, Judge Kirby to
Glover & Davis’s Taylor Drake to Judge Baldwin was “fleeter than
birds” and beginning the process of “ruthlessly pricking” in route to
Thomas, Jack and Michelle Murphy’s Chance at justice.
2.6 Whether Tinker to Evers to Chance, or Kirby to Drake to
Baldwin; neither the base runner nor Michelle Murphy, ever had a
Chance and the feigned potential scorekeeper, Melissa Griffis, does not
possess the fortitude to do anything but what is necessary to please Judge
Kirby and Judge Baldwin, who are each attempting to please John
Murphy.
2.7 If Melissa Griffis possessed an ounce of fortitude she would have
taken action for her numerous private clients to correct the USCR 3.1
violations in the Coweta Judicial Circuit and the events would have neveroccurred that led to Mayor & Aldermen of Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co.,
2012 Ga. LEXIS 488 (Ga. May 29, 2012).
2.8 It must be stated clearly, Melissa Griffis has no obligation to
exhibit an ounce of fortitude so long as she chooses not to attempt to serve
in an appointed fiduciary capacity, such as a guardian ad litem, when the
case involves a close friend of a judge, from whom on a regular basis she
seeks discretionary rulings in her private cases. When she is appointed
in these incidences, it is a deficiency in the fortitude of a lawyer torepresent a client involved in such a situation who fails to act, regardless
of the personal friendships of that lawyer.
2.9 Judge Kirby was so anxious to accommodate and please John
Murphy and his, many times over millionaire, spouse that he illegally, in
violation of OCGA §19-3-58, performed a marriage ceremony for the two
without a valid marriage license. See, Deposition of Judge Jack Kirby p.
42 – 48.
2.10 The performance of the illegal marriage ceremony for John
Murphy together with providing John Murphy legal advice about the
selection of counsel relates to the Justice’s Sad Lexicon’s aspect of Kirby
to Drake to Baldwin. There is not a clean hand in the crowd. Each is
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
50/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 46 of 147
beholding in various degrees and ways to the other, and to the purse
strings of John Murphy’s spouse.
2.11 The reality is that Melissa Griffis was appointed Guardian ad
Litem for the illegal Coweta Judicial Circuit case assignment system.
2.11 Each of the Pleadings in this Litigation are Incorporated and Made a Part of this Motion for the Disqualification of Melissa Griffis.
2.12 It is imperative that this motion be litigated with the full array of
information that led to Justice’s Sad Lexicon’s Kirby to Drake to Baldwin
refrain. The following documents, together with the attachments to the
documents that have been filed with the Clerk of Court in this case are
incorporated and made part of the information in support of this motion.
John Murphy’s Summons
John Murphy’s Complaint for Modification, et al. Answer of Michelle Murphy with Counterclaim and Third Party
Complaint
John Murphy’s Motion for Appointment of Guardian ad Litem
Michelle Murphy’s Response to John’s Motion for Guardian ad Litem
John Murphy’s Motion for Immediate Relief
Michelle Murphy’s Response to Motion for Immediate Relief
Preliminary Domestic Relations Financial Affidavit of John Murphy
John Murphy’s Rule Nisi for April 26, 2012
Notice of Appearance of Millard Farmer and Larry King
Order Appointing Melissa Griffis as Guardian Ad Litem
Motion for Mercy Disqualification of Judge Baldwin
Request of Child Under Age 14 as to Custodial Parent – Jack Murphy
Request of Child Under Age 14 as to Custodial Parent – Thomas Murphy
First Amended Motion to Disqualify Judge Baldwin
Domestic Relations Financial Affidavit of Michelle Murphy
Addendum to First Amended Motion to Disqualify Judge Baldwin
Order Denying Motion to Disqualify Judge Baldwin
3. Melissa Griffis Should be Disqualified as Guardian ad Litem for the minor
children, Jack Murphy and Thomas Murphy.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
51/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 47 of 147
3.1 The improper conduct of Judge A. Quillian Baldwin, Jr. in designating Melissa
Griffis as the Guardian ad Litem for the minor children, Jack Murphy and Thomas
Murphy in this case justifiably subjected Melissa Griffis to careful scrutiny by
counsel for Michelle Murphy. Kirby to Drake to Baldwin attempt to add “to
Griffis” to Justice’s Sad Lexicon and counsel for Michelle Murphy detected that
Melissa Griffis was a slow base runner in life’s fortitude test when she evaded
providing information to the court reporter and otherwise evaded full disclosure.
This is not to say that Melissa Griffis is a bad person; she is just not a person with
the fortitude to evade becoming Kirby to Drake to Griffis to Baldwin. 3.2.1 Judge Baldwin’s conduct was extremely unfair to Melissa Griffis, as well
as to the parties in this litigation, as Judge Baldwin created an enormous amount
of otherwise avoidable litigation expenses. If Judge Baldwin had just adhered to
the law established by USCR 3.1, the plague identified in Mayor & Aldermen of
Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co., 2012 Ga. LEXIS 488 (Ga. May 29, 2012) would
not be frequently occurring in the Coweta Judicial Circuit. USCR 3.1 is not a
draconian rule that deprives judges of power; it is a filter for lawyers’ judge
shopping and judges’ litigant shopping.
3.2.2 While it was Judge Baldwin who first placed Melissa Griffis in an unfair
ethical dilemma, it was Melissa Griffis who sealed her fate of being eligible to be
designated as a lawyer acting unethically, who should not be allowed to serve as
the Guardian ad Litem in this case and should be a suspect in future cases.
3.2.2.1 Melissa Griffis, at a minimum, had the ethical obligation to disclose
to counsel for Michelle Murphy that only a few nights before being appointed
Guardian ad Litem, she and Taylor Drake hosted a fundraiser for a candidate
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
52/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 48 of 147
for a Superior Court Judge that Judge Baldwin and retiring Judge Allen B.
Keeble attended.
3.2.2.2 Counsel for Michelle Murphy knew that Melissa Griffis practiced
before Judge Baldwin on a regular basis and had never challenged the manner
in which Judge Baldwin and other judges in the Coweta Judicial Circuit judge
shop for litigants and/or that the lawyers judge shop for judges. Lawyers
outside the circuit have a difficult time in detecting this type of conduct, which
can be utilized to subject their clients to prejudice. See Mayor & Aldermen of
Savannah v. Batson-Cook Co., 2012 Ga. LEXIS 488 (Ga. May 29, 2012)
3.2.2.3 Melissa Griffis had the ethical obligation to allow counsel for
Michelle Murphy to record the questioning of her after the conduct of
Judge Baldwin in appointing her as Guardian ad Litem and providing that she
would immediately receive $5,000 and $250 per hour for her services.
3.2.2.4 It is relevant that the standing order relating to fees for mediators,
including attorneys who serve in this capacity, in the Coweta Judicial Circuit
provides $150 per hour for the first two hours and $75 per hour for each
additional hour. Nan Newman, an attorney in the same law firm as Melissa
Griffis, with far more years’ experience than Michelle Griffis, is a qualified
mediator. See, Attachment 5, page 5 that, in part, states as follows.
-
8/9/2019 b50130 RPF Corruption Motion w Exhibit 1 and all atts.pdf
53/319
Motion for Investigation of Judge Baldwin’s CorruptionWith Plea to Jurisdiction
Page 49 of 147
3.2.2.5 It is also relevant to note that in the Final Divorce Decree that the
Court only awarded Michelle Murphy, a person who at that time had nooutside income, less than a third of the attorney fees that she had to pay her
attorney.
3.2.2.6 A full disclosure of the history of the fees awarded to Melissa Griffis
by the Court in comparison to the fees that she charges her clients is also
relevant, as the Court does not consistently award Melissa Griffis $250 per
hour in her private cases. This is not a plea for a cheaper fee from Melissa
Griffis but this is for its weighing in determining if Judge Baldwin was
attempting to award Melissa Griffis a gift of funds over and above her value
to compensate for the fruits of her sponsoring campaign events attended by
Judges Baldwin and Keeble.
3.2.2.7 The questioning of Melissa Griffis was justified, as Ju