What is the "Right to Intervene"
Although the case above is a Defamation case and not a Clark County Property-Damage Claim, the Right to Intervene in an ongoing litigation is equally applicable to me when:
It should be noted that the plaintiff would later defer from suing me, and instead went after another. I recorded the conversation while the defendant, and I, and the defendant's paid attorney were in a meeting prior to Pre-Trial. I am heard repeatedly stating that I have video evidence to show the claim is a fraud. I even attempted to show the videos to James Heath, the Paid Attorney, and that the evidence was present with me. The Paid attorney expressed a heated displeasure and chose rather to make a threat against me, which I luckily recorded and maintain the recording to this very day. Then at Pre-Trial the Paid Attorney, James Heath quit the defendant's representation. The paid attorney is the same entity that lured my mother up from Florida to Ohio to "address the allegation made against her" (that she caused property damage). I would much later learn that Ohio had NO JURISDICTION against anyone not in Ohio (for a claim of property damage). While the following Clark County Court case was underway, I came under an increasing organized, very broad attack against my person, property, including across-the-board sudden suspensions of all of my social site accounts (twitter, facebook, google, youtube, phone communications were/are hindered from normal use, and more which is documented on this website elsewhere.
Civil Discourse reference Case Number=15CVF02981
I am Kenny and the author of this website. I am also the same victim of whatever entity that has such broad powers including the stifling of this website from all search engine results.
One might say I've been forced to become apolitical, which is the culmination of years of unwarranted attacks, even before starting this website.
As a heads-up, the reader should be made aware that I am a little "slow". I may not say my sentences correctly or express my intentions well. Please make me aware of any mis-statements if you happen to notice anything amiss here. For a copy of the audio-recorded Attorney James Heath meeting, contact: email@example.com Thank you."
Judge Thomas E. Trempe presided in a case in which Theresa Crow knowingly brought a property damage claim against Margaret Baldino. This case was ushered through the Clark County Court in Springfield Ohio against a completely innocent person.
Although the case above is a Defamation case and not a Clark County Property-Damage Claim, the Right to Intervene in an ongoing litigation is equally applicable to me when:
1.) I filed properly, and had the "right to Intervene as a Plaintiff or a Defendant" (and made such claim in my first two motions to the lower court's ongoing case). I submitted the motions that were accepted by the Clark County Court of record shortly after the Paid Attorney for the Defendant quit his representation to the Defendant, Margaret Baldino. He quit (friendly word), shortly after I met in his office to inform him of the fraud contained in the case and specified that although I had vacated the premises about two years prior and was the last Tenant of the premises, I showed that I still possessed videos to refute the allegations (lies) from the Crow clan.
2.) My person, and my evidence, was obviously "germane to the subject matter within the court".
3.) My Testimony was relevant to make an honest ruling (keep in mind that I submitted numerous DVD videos submitted and accepted into the Clark County Court Record requesting to be made a party so that I can show them in the ongoing case. DVD's that clearly showed the damages as they were occurring and nowhere was the then-Florida-domiciled elderly Defendant that in my opinion was victimized by Administrative swindling and Defaming).
4.) My testimony was directly relevant to the case being heard within the Court.
5.) "An Intervenor must be asserting an interest that is part of the subject matter of a litigation" (How did I not fit in with this ruling to allow me Intervention?)
6.) I was not filing my Motion to Intervene "to protect a property right", which would have possibly hindered my Motion to Intervene.
7.) I also meet the standard because I was being compelled to testify, so obviously I had some "standing" in the case.
8.) I was already made known between the Judge and Attorney prior to, and at Discovery/Pre-Trial.
9.) My 18 motions to the lower Court made not only mention of relevant information, but I even went so far as to divulge much of the information for the court's consideration to the ongoing case so as to effectuate some semblance of hope for redress and Intervention.
10.) I, and my evidence, are an issue to the very litigation that was ongoing.
Seen here is one of my first Motions to the Court, accepted on the Court Record yet refused within the courts, a document showing more than a half-dozen times in which I am requesting to intervene.
By denying me the right to Intervene is not only contrary to the Law, but unethical and possibly of malicious design.
The first submission of this motion to the higher court of review was made promptly after the lower court's pre-trial determination and subsequent denial of my Motion to Intervene. My first submission of appeal to the higher court (2nd appellate) was declined because it didn't look professional enough for them (seriously). So I submitted the following, which was accepted by the 2nd Appellate Court of Lower-Court Review.
And although I submitted my appeal to the 2nd appellate court requesting to overturn the lower court's ruling to ban my Intervention shortly after pretrial within the lower court, instead of a speedy review and reply to force the lower court to allow me to be a party to the case, these people would sit on the request until many months beyond even the lower Court's Trial was over. A noble decision against a 70+ year old woman that had nothing to do with nothing. In other words, the Higher Court acted shady by not addressing the issue requested of them at all, which was to enable my intervention in an ongoing case.
Instead, the higher court pretended that I was acting clairvoyant to know that the lower court judge would many months in the future rule against the wrong party, they pretended to respond as if I was appealing a future negative Trial ruling.
In the months to trial, attached to many of the motions I submitted to the Court, were physical DVD's showing damage as it was occurring (so obviously blaming damage being caused by a person that wasn't even in the same State is ludicrous).
And yet every motion was denied, many without cause or reason expressed. And at least one of the rulings is a complete fabrication leaning toward a Judge practicing Law(lessness) from the Bench.
The paid attorney would later be promoted as head-honcho at none-other than the Bar Association here in Springfield.
But I submitted videos to youtube and other video sites showing the damages being caused by another tenant almost a year before the suit was even filed (against the wrong party).
The strangest thing was, Youtube was pulling the videos (repetitively). Each time I would upload the evidence, Youtube was pulling the videos and Google issued across the board suspensions of my accounts (no kidding, it's documented and I think the last count was 6 times that the google monopoly suspended my entire account affecting all their owned sites).
For some reason, now that the court case is over and my innocent mother was "found guilty" and "has lost" in the best judgment of the justus system, the video is strangely allowed to stay up on Youtube now (now that the "legal" case is over). So I'll learn to host my own site (you are on it now).
After submitting the videos to the Court Record in Clark County Ohio's Court of Justus, the videos were WITHOUT NOTICE summarily being pulled from Youtube apparently by a higher power. But that doesn't explain how the two Courts in Springfield disregarded the physical DVD's that were sent as a backup along with the motions (it's on their court record linked at the top of this page).
But in each of the 18 motions I made to the court, any time a link was mentioned (to the youtube videos), a PHYSICAL DVD ALSO ACCOMPANIED THE SUBMISSIONS TO THE COURT RECORD. I was not given reasons for the repeated censorship of the videos from the Internet, or the repeated 5 or 6 suspensions by the google/youtube monopoly over videos showing a ceiling and water falling from the upstairs tenant's rental. Yet Springfield is okay with a judge that "finds" against the downstairs tenant? I'd like to know the financier's name to the SEO company that handled the complete unlawful obscuring of evidence, recompense is proper.
Who can prove me to be the tenant during the time of damages and during the production of the videos?
Police (Of the few times I called the Police to remove a foul or drunk customer, there is also on record at least two times the police requested my videos feeds; once for an accident at the corner of the building, and the other for a resident three houses away that had his property vandalized...which resulted in i.d.'ing the owner of the getaway car and the number of occupants and the owner of the vehicle that transported the hooligans). Police had to know where I was because me and Vickey also made a donation to the police and I am pretty chatty with paper and have filed at least one complaint that I can remember involving a neighbor's damaged tree (nothing was done about it, you will find the video in my solar portion of this website that proves the tree later did just as I said it would do. Limbs fell to the bus shattering one 200w solar panel, destroyed 2 video cameras (one was knocked completely from the steel brackets that held it to the bus), not to mention the amount of cleanup and other problems that resulted in that particular documented incident).
But who else knew I was the tenant?
Traffic Enforcement On one of the several occasions we met, I was handed a ticket due to my bus having an off-road, parked on private property bus that was not even out of the lawful grace period for an expired tag (I think it was one or two days remaining). The bus was/is not mobile, and is used for storage only.
Fire Department After I put out the upstairs tenant's fire, the Fire Department arrived to make sure I put out the upstairs neighbor's fire (adequately). I'm named within the Fire Department's Report (found on this or the next page).
More Witnesses to my sole residency in the building?
Theresa Crow's upstairs tenant Nicole a.k.a. Nicole Crow.
Evidence was conveniently denied (18 motions in all), including:
Signed letters from the very plaintiffs that filed the claim
Motions made to the Court Record
Time-Stamped and Dated Photos
My first-person testimony, and more were denied to be permitted admissable.
Contrary to the Clark County Municpal Court-version of Margaret's MONTHLY Rental agreement, all subsequent rental receipts following Margaret Baldino's one-year lease were indicated as a quarterly lease with Kenny and not Margaret.
Margaret Baldino's lease with Theresa Crow was not a quarterly lease as shown by their Lease Agreement.
However my lease with Theresa Crow's husband Eric Crow was a quarterly lease.
The Landlord's rental receipts clearly show a quarterly series of payments starting with my lease and not the previous lease-holder's Monthly lease (if I were lying I'd be in jail for forgery, right?).
In an effort to obtain status with the ability to show his evidence to prove the case is fraudulently in the Clark County Court against the wrong party, following the "pre-trial" waste of time (where James Heath, a paid attorney bails on representation at pre-trial), Kenny filed a motion to the higher Appellate Court to make claim that the Lower Municipal Court was not acting lawfully by refusing to allow me to be a party to the very case that involves me (nope, no "interest" can be seen by these people). The Appellate Division of their legal system proved to be a sham also. Instead of reviewing the lower court's decision to refuse to allow me to become a party to the case, they would wait many months beyond trial to make their decision (another scam not taught in the "schools" is learned). Educate the offspring for Christ's sake! Video evidence clearly show that HE (and not Margaret Baldino) was the tenant during the damages being claimed by the Plaintiff (Theresa Crow), and that it is not a female voice heard in the videos but that belonging to none other than, yup me. And furthermore, that neither Kenny nor Margaret are to blame for the damages as they were brought on by others either associated with the Plaintiff and her husband (Theresa and Eric Crow) or their workers that had to enter my rental to access the utility panels, plumbing, and furnace accessible only through Kenny's rental (formerly Margaret's rental space).
The Appellate proved to be a farce, and rather than abide by the law and overturn Judge Trempe's decision in the lower court which barred me from presenting the case which clearly I am the only logical party to, instead the Appellate waited many months even beyond the trial to state they would do nothing (in other words, the motion was to NOT allow evidence into the court for trial).
In the end, the Clark County Municipal Court would award the winnings to not Theresa Crow, who was the only signor on the Margaret Baldino Lease, but rather the court would award to the husband Eric Crow (who had the subsequent lease with Kenny).
It boggles my mind how this is not a racket and subject under Federal penalty. If I or you were to commit an obstruction to Justice, we know we're we would be subjected to become a ward of.
Even the claimant landowner acknowledged in several letters that Kenny was the tenant during the time of the damages. However when a court denies evidence during trial, evidence is of no avail.
This document too, would also be not permitted at Trial in a Court proclaiming of Justice.
There are registered communications between all parties BEFORE the court case ensued which would have facilitated a legitimate court decision (closing one eye doesn't make the judiciary brighter).
Making matters even worse, was the fact that the lease agreement the court DID have in its possession, wasn't even the authentic lease at all (not with Margaret or Kenny). The true copy of the Margaret Baldino lease included at least one amendment that the court's preferred version does not contain, that being the deposit (which isn't mentioned in the court's fraudulent version of Margaret's lease).
If my words on this page ring as questionable, click the link at the top of this page to read the Court Record on the Court's own website to see if it correlates exactly as I state herein.
Following Margaret's one-year Monthly lease, was a new lease made between Kenny (aka Kenny Baldino) and the husband of the landlord, Eric Crow. (*who, with the aid of the Clark County Municipal Court, oddly enough would become the benefactor to the Theresa Crow-Margaret Baldino Lease).
Kenny submitted videos to the court showing that the damages occurred during his tenancy, and that Margaret Baldino could not possibly have been magic from Florida to cause the damages a year before they even happened.
However the Clark County Court would deny to allow any of the evidences contained in 18 of Kenny's pre-trial motions. And despite many of the evidences having already been submitted by Kenny and accepted into the Clark County Court Record months in advance of the "legal Trial", Clark County forced Kenny to be delineated to that of a mere witness for Margaret (who is a non-attorney).
The Clark County Court will not allow a witness to present evidence at the trial whatsoever, only Defendants and Plaintiffs have that "privilege" in Springfield's form of Justice.
Margaret, who at the time of the case having been brought against her was living in Florida State and not Ohio, upon receiving the Ohio mail responded from Florida by certified mail to the pre-court communications.
She even hired an attorney when her letters were received but not responded to. She hired the head of the Clark County Bar Association (who moonlighted as an available attorney). However after luring her up to Ohio, at pretrial he declined to represent her anymore without cause or reason.
This is what an attorney costs, they can take money even though they've done more harm.
The new laws allow law enforcement wide-reaching capabilities pertaining to internet websites. The Deputy Sheriff that signed for this document which was addressed to Theresa Crow, is her son-in-law.
Since Judge Trempe was denying the evidence and motions to the Court record, Kenny filed a motion to the higher court, the 2nd appellate court of appeals, asking that they review the reasons as to why I should not be the Defendant and why my evidence was being denied in a case in which the evidence clearly shows within the on-going case.
The 2nd Appellate Court would go on to not issue an answer for the many months before trial, and in fact not making a decision until many months after the trial by denying Kenny and evidence within their Courts.
The Court's preferred version of the lease must be concluded as null and void for at least two good reasons.
1.) Any changes to a lease agreement would have had to be reflected in an amendment to the lease or an amended lease. No such amendments exists to show a monthly renter becoming a quarterly renter, or that a Rental Deposit was necessary.
If Margaret and Theresa Crow's lease was still in effect beyond the one-year specified within their lease agreement, then the lease is broken by the Plaintiff Theresa Crow, who knowingly, prior to filing in the Clark County Municipal Court against Margaret Baldino, would have to have been conducting business outside of the lease agreement (monthly to quarterly would have to be one amendment, another would have to be the Rental Deposit, neither of which is contained in the Margaret Baldino/Theresa Crow Lease).
2.) The copy of the lease agreement that the court has on record is not, nor has ever been, an authentic lease.
The copy that the Court has was scrapped due to a new lease having the inclusion of the amendment made by Theresa Crow that there needs to be a rental Deposit (which the court's version of the lease does not include, hence the reason why that lease never breathed a solitary day).
The authentic lease was also denied in the Clark County Trial.
In fact, Margaret and Kenny went to the Clark County Court numerous times requesting to see the documents posted by the plaintiff against Margaret.
Of the numbered documents allowed for the plaintiff and kenny to review were the wrong lease and the original claim made by Theresa Crow.
Initially the Crows addressed Kenny with the surprise threat of suit for property damage. Due to possessing so much evidence that disproved any claim the Crows thought they might conjure, Kenny basically said he's ready and let's go to court.
The quest for unfounded revenue is shown to evolve to include both parties, Margaret Baldino and Kenny.
Eventually the seemingly planned revenue-generating scheme evolved to ensure that Kenny and his evidence were kept out of the Trial and allow him only to answer a couple of questions and denying his right to present evidence for the very issue that was being claimed by the plaintiff and the plaintiff's court, that Margaret Baldino caused damages.
Rental in disrepair owned by Eric and Theresa Crow who profited almost $10,000.00 with the aid of the Clark County Municipal Court.
Hi, My name is Kenny.
The true story starts out like this:
In 2012, Prior to moving to Ohio, A storm in Florida occurred that caused the ceiling and roof to fall-in, leaving me without a place to call home.
But I was still left with nowhere to go for more than 3 months.
After a few months of wandering, my aged-mother offered to help by signing a one-year lease with Theresa Crow for a rental located all the way in Ohio at 1335 North Limestone St. in Springfield.
Theresa Crow, My Mother, and I met on location and a one-year monthly lease was signed between my mother and Theresa Crow.
Days later while unpacking the bus, my identification was located but it was agreed that the first year lease would resume as written, between my mother and Theresa Crow, and that the subsequent lease would resume in my name.
This is the genuine lease. The lease proffered by the Plaintiff and accepted by the court of justus does not contain at least one item on the first page, that being the Deposit (the Court's version may not have had mentioned about the 2 months advance payment + 1st month's rent either).
Mom's Genuine Lease Page (*which is not the same as the court's somewhat hidden version. It's real easy to ascertain which document followed the other.) Also note, that the only time my mother's lease paid such a large amount, was due to the landlord's rental requisites (which just by happenstance equaled my quarterly rental amount one year later).
Following my mother's one-year MONTHLY lease, I and the husband of the Lessor of my mother's lease, Eric Crow, came to an agreement that I would resume the new lease under new pay arrangements.
Whereas my mother's one-year lease was a monthly lease, the subsequent Lease to me would be a quarterly lease with Eric Crow.
Subsequent Lease shows Quarterly Pay Arrangement
An additional year later in my lease, due to electrical deficiencies and other problems with the rental, I gave notice to Eric Crow to vacate and a "walk-through" inspection occurred impromptu.
Eric Crow and I walked through the entirety of the building and he only specified one solitary problem that he required me to repair. The small hole that was created, approved by Eric Crow to allow alternate electricty into the building since he seemed unable to keep the electric stable, Eric Crow stated that the hole needed to be repaired. I supplemented the erratic electricity using solar panels for the bulk of the remaining weeks at the Crow Property using an extension cord and began tidying up in preparation for the move out.
After the "walk-through" inspection was conducted by Eric Crow and I, (*emphasis on I; can another person terminate any other person's lease agreement? If so, we'd all be in trouble, obviously the Lease was in my name), I was told to fix the hole and nothing else was demanded of me (oh but I did do more, quite a bit more).
A few videos were made during the repair of the hole, which also show the state of the Crow rental upon my vacating.
Later I would submit the videos to the Court Record to refute the lie from Eric and Theresa Crow who Claimed to have paid someone else to repair the hole.
There appears to be a force or entity that actively hinders the topic contained herein, and may cause issue with the video loading completely (must be great to have a cop in the family with the new laws that Law Enforcement now have the right to remove and take-down any websites that it deems as "inappropriate". Personally I would think that this might be inappropriate: Same Sheriff
Regrets to any inconvenience this may pose, as an alternative video viewing solution, try watching the video here: https://archive.org/details/crow-judiciary-scam
Long story short, the justus system allows my MOTHER to be sued instead of me (my mother did not live with me and the suit was 2 years after her one-year lease was signed). The Clark County Municipal Court would go on to deny all my submissions to the court record including receipts, signed documents, photos, and videos. Instead, my mother was "found" guilty of damages which is a complete disgrace for any legitimacy of the Court system since no 70+ year old woman could accomplish this magic trick of causing damages from a remote location hundreds of miles away.
So how does a landord profit almost $10, 000.00 between the upstairs and downstairs tenants?
Kenny Hendrick to the 2nd Appellate Division
2014-2022 Kenny Hendrick and the Public Diary (of sorts). All Rights Reserved. Visit a I-Love-America Moment