USPS - Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. EDA 1164-16 Re Kathleen Kane Amicus in Support of Motion To Quash, April 28, 2016 Filed On May 2, 2016 Final Verification and APPEARANCE May 3, 2016 PDF

Stanley J.
Caterbone, Pro Se
Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance, Registered in the State of Pennsylvania
Advanced Media Group
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT
IN RE:
Case NO. 1164 EDA 2016
Montgomery Court Case No.

Docket No. 8423-15
:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
v.
KATHLEEN KANE
REQUEST THE COURTESY OF THE COURT TO APPEAR PRO SE AND TO FILE

AN AMICUS CURAIE BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THE FOLLOWING
TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF THE SAID COURT:
AND NOW comes before the said court Stanley J. Caterbone, appearing Pro Se, and Advanced
Media Group, request for Appearance to file an Amicus in the above captioned case to support the
following:
1.
Quashing the charges in case Montgomery Court Case No. 8423-15
2. In support of any other relief this Court deems just and proper.
The following Amicus should provide this Court with the proper jurisdiction for legal standing
to consider this Amicus according to Rule 531 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Procedure.
Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.

(a) Briefs.Anyone interested in the questions involved in any matter pending in an appellate court,
excluding Petitions for Allowance of Appeal, although not a party, may, without applying for leave to
do so, file a brief amicus curiae in regard to those questions.
(1) Unless otherwise ordered by the court, any amicus curiae shall file and serve its brief in the
manner and number required and within the time allowed by these rules with respect to the party
whose position as to affirmance or reversal the amicus brief will support, or with respect to the
appellant, if the amicus brief does not support the position of any party.
Superior Court 1164 EDA 2016
Page 1 of 2
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
(2) In an appeal proceeding under Rules 2154(b), 2185(c) and 2187(b), any amicus curiae shall file
and serve its brief within the time allowed by these rules for service of the advance text of the brief
by the party whose position as to affirmance or reversal the amicus brief will support or, if the amicus
brief does not support the position of any party, within the time allowed by these rules for service of
the advance text by the appellant. Alternatively, the amicus curiae may, but is not required to, serve
an advance text and then file and serve a definitive copy of its brief. If the amicus curiae chooses to
serve an advance copy and then file and serve a definitive copy, its deadlines for each are the same
as for the party whose position as to affirmance or reversal the amicus brief supports or, if the
amicus brief does not support the position of any party, as for the appellant.
(b) Oral argument.Oral argument may be presented by amicus curiae only as the appellate court
may direct. Requests for leave to present oral argument shall be by application and will be granted
only for extraordinary reasons.
Official Note
Where the amicus cannot comply with the requirements of this rule because of ignorance of the
pendency of the question, relief may be sought under Rule 105(b). The last eight words of the rule
are new. In Piccirilli Bros. v. Lewis, 282 Pa. 328, 336, 127 Atl. 832, 835 (1925) the court noted the
applicability of this rule to public officers who are represented by official counsel with an adverse
position.
The 2011 amendment to the rule clarified when those filing amicus curiae briefs should serve and file
their briefs when the appellant has chosen or the parties have been directed to proceed under the
rules related to large records (Rule 2154(b)), advance text (Rule 2187(b)) and definitive copies (Rule
2185(c)). Under those rules, the appellant may defer preparation of the reproduced record until after
the briefs have been served. The parties serve on one another (but do not file) advance texts of their
briefs within the times required by Rule 2187. At the time they file their advance texts, each party
includes certified record designations for inclusion in the reproduced record. The appellant must then
prepare and file the reproduced record within 21 days of service of the appellees advance text (Rule
2186(a)(2)). Within 14 days of the filing of the reproduced record, each party that served a brief in
advance text may file and serve definitive copies of their briefs. The definitive copy must include
references to the pages of the reproduced record, but it may not otherwise include changes from the
advance text other than correction of typographical errors. Those filing amicus curiae briefs may
choose to serve an advance text and then file and serve definitive copies according to the procedure
required of the parties or they may choose to file a definitive brief without citations to the reproduced
record.
Date: May 3, 2016
Superior Court 1164 EDA 2016
_____
Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se
Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
www.amgglobalentertainmentgroup.com
scaterbone@live.com
(717) 669-2163
Page 2 of 2
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
View Notification
1 of 1
https://ujsportal.pacourts.us/Secure/eFiling/ViewNotification.aspx?notific...
PACFile - View Notification

Navigate To
Initiate New Case
Case Filing
Case Search
Dashboard
Filing WSPRED00082210 rejected

Sent Date: 5/3/2016
Tracking Number: WSPRED00082210
Docket Number: 1164 EDA 2016
Lead Case Caption:
Filing Type: Amicus Curiae Brief
Filed Date: 5/3/2016
Filers: Caterbone, Stan J.
Documents:
Amicus Curiae Brief

Proof of Service
Comments
Reason
Other
Comment
you need to enter your appearance and there is no briefing schedule as of yet. Once you enter your appearance you can file an Answer to
the Application to Quash. Andrea
5/3/2016 1:01 PM
210 Pa. Code Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.
1 of 2
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/210/chapter5/s531.html
AMICUS CURIAE
Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.

(a) Briefs.Anyone interested in the questions involved in any matter pending in an appellate
court, excluding Petitions for Allowance of Appeal, although not a party, may, without applying
for leave to do so, file a brief amicus curiae in regard to those questions.
(1) Unless otherwise ordered by the court, any amicus curiae shall file and serve its brief in the
manner and number required and within the time allowed by these rules with respect to the party
whose position as to affirmance or reversal the amicus brief will support, or with respect to the
appellant, if the amicus brief does not support the position of any party.
(2) In an appeal proceeding under Rules 2154(b), 2185(c) and 2187(b), any amicus curiae shall
file and serve its brief within the time allowed by these rules for service of the advance text of the
brief by the party whose position as to affirmance or reversal the amicus brief will support or, if
the amicus brief does not support the position of any party, within the time allowed by these rules
for service of the advance text by the appellant. Alternatively, the amicus curiae may, but is not
required to, serve an advance text and then file and serve a definitive copy of its brief. If the
amicus curiae chooses to serve an advance copy and then file and serve a definitive copy, its
deadlines for each are the same as for the party whose position as to affirmance or reversal the
amicus brief supports or, if the amicus brief does not support the position of any party, as for the
appellant.
(b) Oral argument.Oral argument may be presented by amicus curiae only as the appellate
court may direct. Requests for leave to present oral argument shall be by application and will be
granted only for extraordinary reasons.
Official Note
Where the amicus cannot comply with the requirements of this rule because of ignorance of the
pendency of the question, relief may be sought under Rule 105(b). The last eight words of the
rule are new. In Piccirilli Bros. v. Lewis, 282 Pa. 328, 336, 127 Atl. 832, 835 (1925) the court
noted the applicability of this rule to public officers who are represented by official counsel with
an adverse position.
The 2011 amendment to the rule clarified when those filing amicus curiae briefs should serve
and file their briefs when the appellant has chosen or the parties have been directed to proceed
under the rules related to large records (Rule 2154(b)), advance text (Rule 2187(b)) and definitive
copies (Rule 2185(c)). Under those rules, the appellant may defer preparation of the reproduced
record until after the briefs have been served. The parties serve on one another (but do not file)
5/3/2016 1:05 PM
210 Pa. Code Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.
http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/210/chapter5/s531.html
advance texts of their briefs within the times required by Rule 2187. At the time they file their
advance texts, each party includes certified record designations for inclusion in the reproduced
record. The appellant must then prepare and file the reproduced record within 21 days of service
of the appellees advance text (Rule 2186(a)(2)). Within 14 days of the filing of the reproduced
record, each party that served a brief in advance text may file and serve definitive copies of their
briefs. The definitive copy must include references to the pages of the reproduced record, but it
may not otherwise include changes from the advance text other than correction of typographical
errors. Those filing amicus curiae briefs may choose to serve an advance text and then file and
serve definitive copies according to the procedure required of the parties or they may choose to
file a definitive brief without citations to the reproduced record.
Source
The provisions of this Rule 531 amended May 16, 1979, effective September 30, 1979, 9 Pa.B.
1740; amended February 27, 1980, 10 Pa.B. 1038, effective date as set forth at 10 Pa.B. 1038;
amended September 25, 1992, effective immediately, 22 Pa.B. 5014; amended October 3, 2011,
effective in thirty days, 41 Pa.B. 5620. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page
(231617).
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.
This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display
capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
2 of 2
5/3/2016 1:05 PM
:
:
:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
v.
Kathleen Granahan Kane
Appellant
1164 EDA 2016
PROOF OF SERVICE - DRAFT
I hereby certify that this 2nd day of May, 2016, I have served the attached document(s) to the persons on the date(s) and
in the manner(s) stated below, which service satisfies the requirements of Pa.R.A.P. 121:
Service
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Representing:
Amil Michael Minora

Email
amil.minora@gmail.com
5/2/2016
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Amil Michael Minora

eService
amil.minora@gmail.com
Phone:
Representing:
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Representing:
PACFile 1001
570-961-1616
Appellant Kathleen Granahan Kane
700 Vine Street

Scranton, PA 18510
570--96-1-1616
Assistant Counsel Seth C. Farber
Email
sfarber@winston.com
5/2/2016
212-294-6700
Page 1 of 3
Print Date: 5/2/2016 11:33 am

(Continued)
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Representing:
Gerald L. Shargel
Email
sfarber@winston.com
5/2/2016
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Representing:
Kevin R. Steele
Email
ksteele@montcopa.org
5/2/2016
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Representing:
Robert Martin Falin

Email
rfalin@montcopa.org
5/2/2016
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Robert Martin Falin

eService
rfalin@montcopa.org
Phone:
Representing:
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Representing:
PACFile 1001
212-294-2637
610-278-3098
Appellee Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
610-278-3102
Montgomery County Courthouse

P.O. Box 311
Norristown, PA 19404-0311
610-278-3104
Ross Mitchell Kramer
Email
sfarber@winston.com
5/2/2016
-Appellant Kathleen Granahan Kane
Page 2 of 3
Print Date: 5/2/2016 11:33 am

(Continued)
Courtesy Copy
Stan J. Caterbone
Email
stancaterbone@gmail.com
5/2/2016
Served:
Service Method:
Email:
Service Date:
Address:
Phone:
Pro Se:
717-669-2163
Amicus Stan J. Caterbone
/s/
(Signature of Person Serving)
Person Serving:
Attorney Registration No:
Law Firm:
Address:
PACFile 1001
Page 3 of 3
Print Date: 5/2/2016 11:33 am
The Unified JUDICIAL

SYSTEM of PENNSYLVANIA
WEB PORTAL
PACFile
Summary Report
Report Date: 05/02/2016
Submission Status: Not Submitted
Filing Package
Tracking Number: WSPRED00082210
Description: Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. ED
Filing Type: Ancillary

Total Fees Due:
Pre-Submission Status
X Select Cases
X Establish the Counsel
X Final Verification
X Select Filing Type

X Upload Filing Documents
Establish the Participants

X Record Service
Case Information
Intermediate Court Cases
Docket Number: 1164 EDA 2016 (Lead)
Case Status: Active
Case Caption: Com. v. Kane, K.

Event Track: Appeal
Program Status:
Filers
Filer Name:
Role:
IFP Status:
Counsel:
Current Filings in Progress

Filing Name: Amicus Curiae Brief
Required: Yes
Document Name: Amicus Curiae Brief.pdf
Upload Date/Time: 5/2/2016 11:19AM
PACFile 2100
Filing Fee: $0.00
Printed: 5/2/2016 11:32:11AM

Freedom From Covert Harassment and Surveillance, Registered in the State of Pennsylvania
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603

EASTERN DISTRICT
IN RE:
Case NO. 1164 EDA 2016
Montgomery Court Case No.

Docket No. 8423-15:
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA :
v.
KATHLEEN KANE
AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF KATHLEEN KANE'S (ATTORNEY GENERAL)

MOTION TO QUASH BASED ON SELECTIVE AND VINDICTIVE PROSECUTION
TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF THE SAID COURT:
AND NOW comes before the said court Stanley J. Caterbone, appearing Pro Se, and Advanced
Media Group, as Movant, to file an Amicus in the above captioned case.
The Movant has an interest in this case as also being a victim of SELECTIVE AND
VINDICTIVE PROSECUTION by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Lancaster County
District Attorney's Office dating back to the myriad of prosecutions by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania in 1987, 2005, and 2006 while a resident of the County of Lancaster, Pennsylvania.
Most of which have been dismissed without any convictions, most without any trials, which according
to law are false arrests and false imprisonments. The MOVANT was a Federal Whistleblower in the
United States v. International Signal and Control, Plc., case of 1991.
This amicus provides a voice for the Movant as well as providing another perspective and
opinion that should benefit the courts; the parties; and the public-at-large. The matters presented in
this amicus have a direct relevancy in the disposition of this case as it does in the Attorney General's
(Kathleen Kane) fight to restore integrity and equity to the Judicial System of Pennsylvania, which
affects all of the residents of the COMMONWEALTH. The
Attorney General has been quoted as
saying she is in a battle with the 'old boys' network' of Pennsylvania and the MOVANT has written
extensively about this same select group over the years beginning in 1998. In an interview with
Brian Taff of WPVI on February 16, 2016 the Attorney General is quoted as saying Everybody
Superior Court 1164 Amicus re Kathleen Kane
Page 1 of 48
Thursday, April 28, 2016
makes mistakes. I knew there was a good old boy network, everyone does. I had no idea
how deep and how powerful that network actually ran. The fact that I took it on and I
wasn't silent about it and that I am determined to tear that down, I think that's what my
legacy will show.
In a 1998 narrative the MOVANT wrote the following This story was perpetuated
through a gross miscarriage of justice: a tenure of malicious wrongdoing by both the law
enforcement community of Lancaster County and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as
well as community leaders. A process that continues to obstruct Stan Caterbone's rights
for justice. It's mannerisms reach into the inner soul of political and judicial corruption. All
in the name of greed, and all in the honor of continuing the status quo of the "Good Ole
Boy's" club of Lancaster County. A process obsessed with keeping it's disclosure from
escaping beyond the confines of "Pandora's Box". It's a tenure of power that evolved from
the days of this country's earliest settlers, but an evolution that has somewhere strayed
away from the intent of our constitution; with total disregard for the law, in total
disrespect for the Constitution, and void of many of our civil liberties. This atrocity,
like the Lambert case, would have made our founding forefathers revel in disgust and
bellow in despair. In fact, their spirits and energies probably are!
In 2009 Opednews.com printed the narrative in full and the MOVANT wishes this said
court to consider it's content in it's final deliberations in support of dismissing all prosecutions
against the Attorney General of Pennsylvania. In addition attached are supporting documents
to advanced the credibility and integrity of the MOVANT.
These documents are attached as
EXHIBITS.
Diary: Lancaster County, The CIA, and U.S. Sponsored Mind Control,
http://www.opednews.com/populum/diarypagem.php?f=Lancaster-County-TheCIA-by-Stan-Caterbone-091125-169.html
In addition the MOVANT wrote to the ATTORNEY GENERAL on November 12, 2015 and
stated the following Back in 1998 I had a meeting with an NSA (National Security
Agency, Ft. Meade, Md) operative in a parking lot of a former car dealer in York, PA. I
had just attended a job fair and he approached me as I was about to get into my car.
He introduced himself as being from the NSA and I questioned him about why they
would not leave me alone. His response was "It is not US (NSA) it's the Good Ole
Boys". I also have a huge problem with modified, stolen, and planted documents. We
parted ways in an amicable fashion.
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 2 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
The ATTORNEY GENERAL returned a letter the following day that stated Dear Mr.
Caterbone, Thank You for your correspondence to the Office of Attorney General, we
will keep your information in our files. These are attached as EXHIBITS.
Date: April 28, 2016
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
/S/
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
(717) 669-2163
Page 3 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
___________________________________________________
HAD LANCASTER COUNTY (Pennsylvania) LOST IT'S SOVEREIGNTY BEFORE IT LOST
IT'S SOUL?1
Authored in May of 1998
"Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or
strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope. And crossing each
other from a million different centers of energy and daring, those ripples build a
current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression.".
by Robert F Kennedy
In 1987 This Plaintiff (Stan J. Caterbone) Had Unjustly Lost His Freedoms, His Rights, And His
Pursuit Of Life, Liberty And Justice.
The following report (most identities purposely omitted from this version) is an amazingly true
and factual account of an extraordinarily bizarre tragedy that has turned one man's life into an
eleven (11)2 year free fall into "Dante's Hell".
On the surface, this is a story of a victim (Stan J. Caterbone) struggling to seek the truth, but
in reality, the evidence will conclude that this is a victim, literally, held hostage by virtue of his
truth. Later, the preponderance of evidence that Stan Caterbone has amassed and his
obsession for meticulously documenting his ordeal might seem eccentric, yet his demonstrated
ability to react to events before they unfold appears mystical. And this was his manner in which
he tactfully defended and protected his life. It is these actions that have painted the landscape
with a dire vengeance for his ruin. His actions will ultimately serve to protect, preserve, and
foster the truth of his story, incriminating the culpability of his many perpetrators, while at the
same time being twisted and tainted in a relentless manner to attack his credibility.
This is a story of a human being endearing for his rights, living in fear of his life, and the
remedial actions required for the truth to set him free. A victim (Stan J. Caterbone) forever
believing in his accomplishments and his visions, yet forced to adhere to a life of their
diversions. Fatefully, ten years after being taken as a "political hostage", with the aid of
numerous arrests and false imprisonment's conveniently falling short convictions, a Federal
Judge, Judge Stuart Dalzall, of the Eastern District Court of Pennsylvania, opened a "Pandora's
Box" into the true colors of the inner workings and politics of ultra conservative Lancaster
County, Pennsylvania, a supposedly "God's" country. His findings reeled a dramatic and
emotional response from the Lancaster County community that was akin to the assassination of
1
2
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 4 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
JFK. A community where "obstructions of justice" strikes a startling and stark contrast to the
image it so desperately embraces. A community proud of it's "tough on crime" judges, a
community of "plain folks" and Amish, and a community settled in a beautiful landscape
abundant in an agricultural bounty. This is not a community of compromising integrity. Or so it
has been perceived.
Judge Dalzall's extremely controversial findings were responsible for Pennsylvania's own
crafting of the "Laurie Bill", the retaliation by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania intended to
curb the Federal Courts interference within the respective state's own jurisdictions and
proceedings. Or was it a political maneuver to close the lid on "Pandora's Box"? The
Pennsylvania Attorney General and the Lancaster County District Attorney have both thrown all
their might and all their muscle at turning the tides of Judge Dalzall's findings. This story and
Stan Caterbone's rights have been violated and abused by some of the very same principals
that were responsible for Judge Dalzall's unsettling revelations. Lancaster County prosecutors
were found to have engaged in one of the grossest acts of prosecutorial misconduct "found in
the English speaking language", which allegedly occurred in this now famous Lisa Michelle
Lambert case, a murder trial which began in the summer of 1992. Subsequently, it is now in
the midst of a treacherous appeal process convened by Judge Dalzall. And if so, by fate, in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; the home of the "Freedom Fighters".
It is this public disclosure, that casts a new light and sudden hope for freedom into Stan
Caterbone's unbelievable and horrid story, that begun just four years prior to the murder of
Laurie Show. It is the decisive similarities of how both victims were subjected to a very
calculated and politically motivated attempts to "frame" and "fabricate circumstances" to obtain
the results that justified the means for illicit self-serving interests. This very same conduct,
committed by public servants, elected and enlisted to enforce the law, to which Judge Dalzell
found so appalling. Conduct, which violated the very same rights their respective offices are
commissioned to protect. Conduct, which strikes the meaning of "We The People" from our
nation's very own Constitution.
Fortunately, Stan Caterbone's story is laced with a thread of faith, a faith in God. And because
of his faith, Stan Caterbone will forever regard Lisa Michelle Lambert 3 and Laurie Show as his
little "Angels of Justice", a Godsend. An answer to his many prayers, that for the first time in
ten years provided a small glimmer of hope, and a few moments of solitude that have
materially justified his own tragic experience. The realization that the truth is that much more
believable because of the trials and tribulations of Lisa Michelle Lambert. Unfortunately, this
revelation came at the unfortunate and untimely death of Laurie. However, it just may be God's
intentions of a Higher Purpose.
3
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 5 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
This story was perpetuated through a gross miscarriage of justice: a tenure of malicious
wrongdoing
by
both
the
law
enforcement
community
of Lancaster
County
and
the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as well as community leaders. A process that continues to

obstruct Stan Caterbone's rights for justice. It's mannerisms reach into the inner soul of
political and judicial corruption. All in the name of greed, and all in the honor of continuing the
status quo of the "Good Ole Boy's" club of Lancaster County. A process obsessed with keeping
it's disclosure from escaping beyond the confines of "Pandora's Box". It's a tenure of power that
evolved from the days of this country's earliest settlers, but an evolution that has somewhere
strayed away from the intent of our constitution;
with total disregard for the law, in total disrespect for the Constitution, and void of many of our
civil liberties. This atrocity, like the Lambert case, would have made our founding forefathers
revel in disgust and bellow in despair. In fact, their spirits and energies probably are!
AT ISSUE
The central issue in this story is a cover up, a cover up of mass proportions, and of perplexing
design, with national consequences. The fact of the matter is that this cover up has had
ramifications throughout this world; specifically the Middle East The cover up would be
emphatically unbelievable without the wealth of evidence, especially the recorded conversations
with Pennsylvania officials. A cover up that permeates from what will later emerge as the 4th
largest financial fraud (Billion Dollars) in the history of the United States coupled with the
covert sales of arms to Iraq. And five years after this cover up began, these same munitions
were used against our own troops in the Persian Gulf War. And of course, there are admitted
ties to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA).. And this
cover up and story, which began in June of 1987, in Lancaster County, preceded criminal
indictments by the United States Attorney General, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the Department of Justice and Commerce, and more. A
vast array of criminal activities conspired from the ultra conservative Lancaster County, where
God is supposedly supreme, and it's hard line approach to crime is said to be preeminent. In
June of 1987, Lancaster County was immersed in a dynamic twist of fate, with a host of players
which may never be fully identified.
The irony of this story is how Lancaster County manages the disclosure of the very same
criminal activities that this story proves that it condoned, prior to the intervention of federal
authorities. It most dramatically will prove the nature of it's integrity, or lack thereof.
International Signal & Control, (ISC) is the controversial player in this web of conspiracy. In
1987, ISC was the third largest employer in Lancaster County, a non-discrete defense
contractor. In all due respect to our beloved country, this report is in no way challenging the
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 6 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
policies or the activities of the Department of Defense, or the vast agencies of the "Intelligence
Community", especially the CIA or the NSA (National Security Advisory). with regards to ISC's
foreign dealings. Trying to protect the world of malicious and evil empires is a process which
never ends, and whose players are constantly changing. And our respective intelligence
agencies are continually challenged with the task of trying to make a difference, in accordance
with protecting our national security. Unfortunately, given the nature of their discrete activities,
and given the CIA's history of avoiding congressional approval in certain situations, our current
laws are void of effectively dealing with the peripheral catastrophes of such activities that
inherently
transpire.
The
CIA
remains
immune,
while
everyone
outside
suffers
the
consequences.
The fact that the CIA, or anyone of the other intelligence community, may have been involved,
does not grant a blanket of immunity over activities which were not material to protecting our
national security. If a company provides a service to anyone in the intelligence community, our
constitution, our laws, and it's respective commercial regulatory authorities, must still have the
full sense of their jurisdiction. The intelligence community may not have the right of
intervention into the commercial enterprise, or organization, circumventing the rights of its
employees, shareholders, creditors, and customers. No United States law or statute suggests
that there is any involuntary mandate that requires any of the preceding to compromise his or
her interests in the respective enterprise for the sake of national security, or the respective
intelligence agency. There must be considerations paid to all involved for those rights and
interests that compromise such a relationship. Otherwise, the CIA could effectively gain control
of any domestic corporation it so desires, without ever owning one share of its outstanding
stock, simply by enlisting its product or services for the sake of national security. The CIA
requires a formal vehicle to enlist the aid of our domestic commercial enterprises. ISC is a
proven and unfortunate example of that.
Stan Caterbone was a shareholder of record of International Signal & Control (ISC) for the
previous four years prior to when this tragic ordeal began. Stan Caterbone was to purchase the
stock from now Republican Pennsylvania Senator Gib Armstrong, who was in the brokerage
business at the time and selling ISC stock. The stock was sold over the London Securities
Exchange, supposedly for reasons to suppress information. Stan Caterbone was interested in
the stock because of his appetite for technology, and was more curious about the business of
ISC, than anything. In fact, Stan Caterbone had never made any inference to any of the illicit
dealings with Iraq. However, the perpetrators of this story, attempt to hide behind a vale of
"national security," in an effort to find legal immunity from all wrongdoing. In accordance, the
record will prove that this is merely a smoke screen used to intimidate and obstruct Stan
Caterbone's access for due process of the law.
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 7 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
The trials and tribulations of Stan Caterbone are unprecedented in terms of emotional and
psychological duress, fortunately his indestructible faith in God, and his enduring belief in
himself and the truth, endures his life. There was one attempt on the his life, days within the
public disclosure of the CIA's involvement with the local Lancaster County defense contractor
(ISC), which Ted Kopel reported on ABC News Nightline, on May 23, 1991, 4 years after the
initial cover up began. This story will depict a series of systematic and strategic offensive
attacks upon Stan Caterbone and his businesses that will result failed business enterprises, and
a Hollywood motion picture, deserted. An impeccable professional reputation and a flawless
credit rating purposely sabotaged. Financial opportunities, that in 1987, were almost impossible
to extrapolate, Vast financial opportunities and aspirations forever a part of history. This
horrendous Crime was perpetrated for the interest of a cover up, further protecting the corrupt
enterprises of Lancaster County's International Signal & Control (ISC). A quest for justice that
polarized every relationship Stan Caterbone maintained, in Lancaster County and beyond,
including friends and family. This story demonstrates a methodology of his perpetrators for
keeping Stan Caterbone "quarantined" from justice and public disclosure, through a malicious
means of "credibility" proponents, and horrendously deceptive tactics. Financial motives
prominently displayed in the hands of all of the perpetrators, which absolves the burden for a
traditional conspiracy.
The emotional response to the truth of this story is compelling, to say the least. Subsequently,
the startling keen sense of perception that Stan Caterbone had demonstrated is even more
intriguing. It is this extraordinary quality that is responsible for saving his life, while yet at the
same time providing his perpetrators with an alibi and a vehicle for discrediting his startling
allegations and his story. This story embellishes a dichotomy of perception that had Hollywood
producers from his film project call his work genius, while his perpetrators from the Lancaster
County Community conveniently and maliciously labeling him as "insane" and "emotionally
disturbed."
THE LANDSCAPE
The perplexing question of Stan Caterbone's intelligence, or lack thereof, is best analyzed as a
question of perception. However it terms of the legal consequences of the activities contained
herein, they are of little if any relevancy. The fact of the matter is that the "mental deficiencies"
have very little relevancy to this story, other than serving as a means to discredit Stan
Caterbone, a vehicle to facilitate the cover up, and a blanket of immunity for all of the
perpetrators.
The heart of Stan Caterbone's legal dogma is best described as follows: If a person, is
perceived to have a "mental deficiency"; yet whose actions and decisions are always proven to
be instinctually and amazingly prudent, always abiding within the law, and in the best interest
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 8 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
of his affairs, what rights and protection do the laws afford him from persons abusing that
perception, in order to yield political and financial rewards, as a direct consequence of his
demise? Furthermore, how does the law protect his rights, if any and all malicious acts against
Stan Caterbone, are constantly and immediately disregarded because he is perceived to not to
be "credible"? As this story unfolds, these questions will become even more troubling and
appalling. Although Stan Caterbone could never describe the pain of his trauma, he would often
say that the closest situation that may compare is that of a woman being continuously raped,
night after night, helplessly praying for relief, struggling to free herself from her captor, all with
no avail. He would call it as being "brain f------".
Stan Caterbone, coming from the lower middle class of Lancaster City, was only 29 years old
when this tragedy began. Coming from a broken home, he was the third of six boys. While at a
very young age, he would help his mother run a dry cleaning business, in an amazing similarity
like Lisa Michelle Lambert, he had also nursed his mother during bouts of depression. While in
high school, he was nursing his mother's depression, while at same time tending to his older
brothers bouts of schizophrenia. Stan Caterbone had learned to listen to the obscenities of
mental illness since he was a child. He learned to fill the shoes of his absent father in helping
his mother raise his three younger brothers.. Stan Caterbone was often called the "little old
man" because of his extraordinary maturity as a child. Stan Caterbone was determined to
break the "barrier" of the "Good Ole Boy's" club or the power elite, and had always felt a sense
of compassion for those less fortunate, and those neglected by those of material means, the
oppressed and impoverished. He had an undivided aspiration to someday make a difference to
those that could not help themselves, especially his older brother. Through his ingenious,
resourceful, and honest business approach, he was relentlessly growing his business and their
respective missions, in constant reminder of his oppression. His in depth understanding of
computer technology and his vision were his most powerful allies. Always pushing the envelope
for advanced technologies and seeking solutions for the most efficient means of his operations..
He knew that every break was going to be few and far between, he dedication himself to his
work, and married his business affairs, always embracing his projects with a passion.
In 1986, after serving on the Board of Directors for the Central Pennsylvania Chapter of
International Association of Financial Planners (IAFP), Stan Caterbone had made a large
contribution to increasing its membership and it's awareness among local professionals, as it's
vice president. In an effort to promote the organization, Stan Caterbone solicited a nationally
recognized and prominent financial planner from Washington, D.C., to be a headline speaker at
a dinner meeting. Ms. Alexandra Armstrong, one of the most nationally recognized financial
planners, often headlined in Money Magazine, attracted 100 industry professionals to the
Treadway Resort Inn. The attendance was unprecedented for the local IAFP chapter. The IAFP
is the authoring organization for certification as a financial planner. It was through the direct
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 9 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
conversations with Ms. Armstrong regarding his ideas and her experience, that inspired Stan
Caterbone to pursue his ambitions of growing his own financial firm, which he began in the
following months.
Disgruntled with the conflicts of interest and the lack of incentive for various professionals to
work together in managing one's wealth, a process which lacked efficiency, this entrepreneur
founded the firm Financial Management Group, Ltd., or FMG as it was often called. The firm
was to incorporate a "one-stop-shopping" strategy and incorporate financial services, legal,
accounting, tax preparation, real estate, insurance, mortgage banking, and estate services all
in one firm, all residing in one location, all taking advantage of the synergistic approach toward
managing wealth. And to provide the professionals long term security and equity participation,
all participants were encouraged to purchase stock in the company. This was a new and
innovative approach that attracted a lot of attention from investors and clients, but also came a
lot of nervous twitches from competitors, especially in conservative Lancaster County.
Stan Caterbone began recruiting professionals from all of the other firms, with great success.
He had enlisted two partners whom he had worked with at IDS/American Express, to carry out
his mission, which he began after extensive market studies and his early version of the
company, Pro Financial Group, Ltd., His two partners had followed Stan Caterbone to an
independent broker dealer in Atlanta, named Financial Services Corporation, where Ms.
Alexandra Armstrong was associated, and encouraged Stan Caterbone to visit, during their
discussion after dinner. Within one year, by June of 1987, the firm had invested over $40
million for respective clients.
The company had developed satellite offices throughout Pennsylvania and in several other
states, through his unique design. This firm was causing the other financial services companies
and the local banks in Lancaster County a run for their money. The firm had built a new 20,000
square foot office building just a few miles north of the city. The firm was attracting clients,
associates, and nervous attention from, well just about everybody. Considering the capabilities,
legal, real estate, insurance, financial services, accounting, FMG was making as many enemies
as it was making friends. And Stan Caterbone always believed in the premise that it's always
better to have people talking about you, regardless of the matter, than to have no one notice
you. And they were talking. Stan Caterbone was only in his late twenties when he started this
organization,. He held several positions; he was Executive Vice President and Secretary of
Financial Management Group Ltd, and President of FMG, Advisory, Inc., which was one of the
many subsidiaries parent company owned. Stan Caterbone acted as the architect and legal
administrator of the organization, in addition to building his own financial planning clients. He
filed all of the articles of incorporation in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and submitted all
of the tedious and rigorous filings necessary for the Pennsylvania Securities Commission, which
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 10 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
were very demanding considering Stan Caterbone, was selling stock of his company to his
associates and investors. Stan Caterbone and his associates had also attracted some very
prominent Lancastrians's to invest in his venture, coming from various professional circles, all
infatuated with this extraordinary and intriguing concept of this young victim (Stan J.
Caterbone). All had seen it's potential for success and financial reward.
Many of his friends were involved, and in Lancaster, everyone knows everybody, so it seams..
And everyone talks, gossip is as common as jogging. This exaggerated trait of Lancaster
County, will later to come back to haunt Stan Caterbone, in a way that is most sickening. In a
way that will parallel the attitudes and sentiments in the Lisa Michelle Lambert story.
In 1987, his business affairs were reaching a point of incredible success. In fact, most of his
family and friends, have always questioned the merits of their legitimacy. He always conducted
his affairs with the presumption that time could not afford the opportunity to complete his
agenda, while at the same time disclosing his business affairs to persons that were not directly
involved.. Accomplishing his mission was first and foremost. But in Lancaster County, that was
difficult. Lancastrians's have a notion to fear what they don't know, and will always believe
what they think they know, regardless of its merits. In Lancaster County new ideas are
shunned unless coming from their own, and their own ideas are often kept close at bay,
inhibiting progress and stymieing learning. By June of 1987, a majority of his business affairs
were conducted out of the grasp of Lancaster County, his unknown activities made others
curious, especially in Lancaster County, where the blessing of the power elite was essential for
success. But, deep down inside, he knew he could never be accepted, because he did not
descend from a family of "social grace". This fueled his aspirations for success even further,
committed to prove that intelligence was innate and learned, not a direct correlation to material
wealth or social grace.
An elder attorney, Mr. Kenellm Shirk, a very respected and prominent older Lancaster attorney,
who was part of the status quo, provided one of his most cherished testimonials to his concept,
his reputation, and his mission. Mr. Shirk had petitioned the Pennsylvania Bar Association, after
meeting with Stan Caterbone, to obtain their blessing and their knowledge of any laws which
would forbid his firm to provide a satellite office in the headquarters of Financial Management
Group, Ltd., (FMG) Mr. Shirks firm was to provide a partner, and estate services to the clients
of FMG. The Pennsylvania Bar provided a lengthy recommendation that did not prohibit a
relationship, although cautioned it to proceed with careful review. The fact that the very young
and unknown Stan Caterbone could attract an elder, conservative Lancaster County attorney to
associate with his firm was an encouraging sign of respect. Ironically, Mr. Shirk is the father of
Roy Shirk Jr., Lisa Michelle Lambert's first attorney who represented her during trial of 1992,
the proceeding which was the center of Judge Dalzall's controversial and appalling findings.
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 11 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
Stan Caterbone prided himself on his entrepreneurship, and after building the foundation for
FMG, he set out to take advantage of its resources and it's synergism.
By June of 1987, Stan Caterbone had developed a fairly substantial mortgage banking
relationship with a Houston, Texas banker. That operation was capable of providing lending to
potential developers and businesses in the range of $ 3 million to $100 million. And the lending
packages were as competitive if not more competitive than the local lending institutions of
Lancaster County, capable with even higher lending limits. In a matter of months of securing
this relationship, Stan Caterbone and his partner were evaluating deals from Pennsylvania, New
Jersey, New York, Florida, and as far away as California.
There was a uniqueness to his capabilities that was very appealing to potential borrowers.
Because of the vast array of services of FMG, potential developers had the opportunity to
obtain both debt and equity financing through his companies. In plain terms, most shopping
centers raised capital by raising funds through investors coupled with a mortgage. This gave
potential developers one place to "take down the deal" rather than dealing with many other
professionals at the same time. It was a much more efficient process for all. Stan Caterbone
was capable of providing a mortgage, while at the same time selling shares in a shopping
center through it's vast client base of investors at FMG. This also gave Stan Caterbone a
formidable presence into the venture capital markets, by way of his strong ability to raise
capital through his vast portfolio of clients of FMG. And this was a rarity that developers and
investors loved. Investors were attracted because they could invest in equity type real estate
projects with real sense of knowing the developer, or "kicking the bricks" of the project. This
was far different than investing in a nationally syndicated project, with properties scattered all
over the country, and with developers that they did not know. The synergistic approach to his
organization began paying dividends by developing other peripheral markets and businesses.
Given the complex nature of Stan Caterbone's design of FMG, internal struggles within the
organization readily became the challenge. Orchestrating the relationships among all of the
different professionals, and trying to adhere to the interests of the clients, the professionals
and of the firm, FMG, managing the daily activities required immense thought and prudence on
the part of the principals. Of, course, Stan Caterbone assumed honesty and integrity to be a
given. And for most it was. However there were times when the senior partner engaged in
tactical rights of power.
In the later part of 1986, after Stan Caterbone had developed FMG to the point where it's
future was on stable grounds, his two partners conveniently attempted to circumvent his
position and regain control of his stock and the firm. In fact, after Stan Caterbone refused to
collaborate on a scheme to "set up" his other partner, the remaining two partners began to
attempt to regain Stan Caterbone's control. Through intimidating techniques, the partners
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 12 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
began to attack his presence. Stan Caterbone became agitated, especially because he played
the lead role and was responsible for the formation of the company, methodically designing and
developing its foundation, with great success. And now after the company was beyond it's point
of greatest risk, due to in large part Stan Caterbone's efforts, the other two partners wanted to
take advantage of his work, and "take the cream of the pie" for their own financial gain. It was
a difficult task to carry out because Stan Caterbone was the most respected of all three
partners, consistently keeping their respective policies in the best interest of the firm and of the
other associates and stockholders. In fact, most feared that the loss of control of Stan
Caterbone would ultimately lead to adverse consequences. However the two partners trued
unsuccessfully to weaken his position, and when that didn't work, they focused on weakening
Stan Caterbone, via intimidation and humiliation The coup and hostile environment caused a
state of depression for Stan Caterbone, although he kept to his daily duties and responsibilities,
accordingly, he called a client and friend who was a psychiatrist, whom he trusted and
respected. It was easy access to a professional, yet on a very informal basis. Because Stan
Caterbone had a family history of "mental deficiencies", he wanted to seek the proper help.
The psychiatrist had diagnosed Stan Caterbone as having Bi Polar Mood disorder. The
psychiatrist had quickly discounted any correlation between the current state of affairs, and his
partner's abuse. The psychiatrist rationale was that "because the startup of the company was
so successful in such a short period of time" , and his demonstrated intelligence and creativity,
Stan Caterbone must have been in a state of mania, and of course now, was subsiding in a
state of depression, the typical cycle for manic depressants. Stan Caterbone complied with the
psychiatrist. And after refusing to sell out to his partners, vowed to regain his business and
rescind any efforts to give up his claim to his accomplishments. The depression soon faded.
Stan Caterbone never disclosed the fact that he had sought help to anyone other than family
members. This coup lead to Stan Caterbone's aggressive approach to grow the business, and to
posture himself in projects that would ultimately remain in his control, out of the influence of
his partners. Particularly of most interest was saving the mortgage banking activities and the
digital movie, which he did successfully, but apparently too successfully.
THE "DIGITAL MOVIE"
Through an act of fate, in February of 1987, Stan Caterbone found himself in a meeting with
Tony Bongiovi at Power Station studios. Through one of his partners, he reluctantly traveled to
New York to consider financing a motion picture. Stan Caterbone's own lack tolerance for the
risk associated with film investments was overshadowed by the opportunity to visit a recording
studio. Although his associate was a friend of Tony's, he was not familiar with his
accomplishments, or his work, so he thought. If nothing else, it was a weekend away from
Lancaster, and a chance to visit the Big Apple. Intriguingly, he found more than he had ever
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 13 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
imagined on that weekend excursion. Tony Bongiovi, a musical genius, who's credits include
one of the most recognized recording studios in the country, Power Station Studios. Tony
Bongiov produced the sound track for "Star Wars", and is responsible for the format of one of
the most successful recording artist of the 80's, Jon "Bon Jovi", his cousin. Power Station has
recorded the albums for some of the most influential artists of all time, including Diana Ross,
Madonna, The Rolling Stones, Steve Winwood, Bruce Springsteen, etc., Tony, an eccentric
genius, of Italian decent, had many talents, from music to aerospace engineering. Stan
Caterbone's associate's sister met Tony while he flew his plane into Lancaster's airport for
repairs. They dated for some time and Stan Caterbone's associate and Tony became friends,
which led Stan Caterbone to Tony's Power Station Studios.
Tony was looking to finance his new project, which was to be the first digital movie. And, given
Stan Caterbone's extreme appetite for technologies, coupled with his amazing sense of
perception, he dramatically recognized the future evolution for the technical merits of delivering
digital video and digital audio entertainment to the mass markets. By June of 1987, Stan
Caterbone was positioned as the Executive Producer, collaborating with Flatbush Films of
Hollywood California, the movie producers, entrusted with the mission of finding investors to
provide funding for the "first digital movie", and to manage the ensuing business elements it
required.
The movie was to be shot "on-location" at the Jersey shore points, mostly in Wildwood. Tony
strategically envisioned making a movie in the horror genre. There were several specific
reasons that supported this strategy. First, he determined that it was the least expensive
format to produce, we all estimated a budget of $4 million for the production and post
production. Secondly, the horror genre would compliment a very intense sound track. The
sound track was important to enhance the new digital format, and also provide the means to
introduce a new band that he had been grooming in his studio for the past several years,
"French Lick", his predecessor to "Bon Jovi". There had been bad blood between Tony and his
cousin "Bon Jovi", which resulted in legal disputes pertaining to Tony's financial interests in
Jon's success. It was an unfortunate situation considering Tony's father and Jon's father were
brothers living in the same area. It was a subject that Tony never wanted to discuss, except for
his contributions toward Jon's career.
If by another act of fate, Stan Caterbone had the privilege of meeting one of the many
superstars while working at Power Station studios. While growing up, at an early age, Stan
Caterbone would sneak up into the bedroom of his oldest brother, and start up his old General
Electric stereo phonograph and listen to his favorite album - Diana Ross and the Supremes. It
was a passion and a ritual that provided an early infatuation to music, and to Diana Ross. Stan
Caterbone was only 10 or 11 years old. And at this early age, he noticed and listened to the
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 14 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
annoying hiss, that conventional hiss that always seemed to overshadow the music, whether
played on an album, on the radio, 8-track tape, or cassette.
And in a mystical twist of fate, while engrossed in a project dedicated to delivering music
without that hiss (digital) - Stan Caterbone opened the door to the recording suite to pack his
bags for the journey back to Lancaster; - and there she sat, with a glowing array of beauty,
more beautiful than any picture could ever tell, Ms. Diana Ross. She was pregnant and in the
middle of a recording session, for a new album. Her assistant quickly demanded, in a stern and
protective voice, that we leave, and Stan Caterbone and his associate replied "this is our
makeshift bedroom, we are just gathering our belongings". Stan Caterbone walked toward
Diana Ross, who was seated near his bag, and she asked "and who are you?", Stan Caterbone
calmly replied his name and absorbed as much of her beauty as his eyes could behold before
walking out the door. The room that was his bedroom the nigh before, and suddenly transfixed
into the recording suite of Diana Ross, thinking back some twenty years earlier, one of the
many gifts that God would bestow upon him. A living memorial and reminder to his older
brother, who died on Christmas day of 1985, his best friend who taught him two of his greater
pleasures in life, Diana Ross, and listening to music. He prayed that his brother was watching
from above.
And so, the digital movie project that Stan Caterbone had embraced in 1987 had personal
significance, and he never ever doubted his instincts regarding the technical merits of the
project. Stan Caterbone's perception that the entertainment industry would deliver full length
motion pictures in a truly digital medium will later become a truly remarkable vision.
The technical merits of this project and at this particular time with respect to Stan Caterbone's
extreme sense of perception require analysis. To truly understand this time perception, some of
the attributes of digital technologies need to be fully understood. In 1987, Compact DISC (CD)
technology was only now being introduced to the commercial markets. Stan Caterbone's own
crafting of his joint venture proposals, dominated by the term "digital movie", is in itself some
4 or 5 years away. In 1987, there was very little use of the term "digital", with the exception of
research and development engineers. Stan Caterbone will, throughout the documentation of
this story, will have preceded a terminology that has literally become the root of most
technological advancements in the computer and telecommunications industries of our present
day, 10 years after Stan Caterbone's vision. Today, "digital" is found to be part of or referred to
in just about every product available in the commercial markets.
During May of 1987, Stan Caterbone had created a joint venture proposal for SONY
Entertainment, Inc., for the digital movie. After weeks of researching the current state-ofaffairs within SONY, and after his proposal was completed, SONY publicly announced their
desire to open the markets for new and emerging technologies on the cover of TIME magazine,
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 15 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
another demonstrated sense of perception. It was this proposal, when delivered to one of the
Hollywood producers in Santa Monica, California, after reading a draft of the proposal she said
"you are a genius". The proposal was introduced to Tony Bongiovi at the Wildwood Boardwalk,
where many of scenes were to be shot, and he approved of the proposal and thought that it
had great merits. Tony, who wanted very to do with the business elements of his project, gave
Stan Caterbone complete authority to secure the financing of the project, with a salary as
Executive Producer, and a percentage of the profits on the back end.
After review of Stan Caterbone's research and proposal's, his vision and his passion,
unfortunately without his efforts, has come to be known as Direct Satellite System, or DSS,
which is Sony's satellite entertainment system (TV), delivering digital audio and digital video
entertainment. That technology is fast eroding at the cable industry. Stan Caterbone had his
patent research center around the PSDMS system, the Power Station Digital Movie System. And
that was in 1987, some seven years before SONY delivered his dreams. Later Stan Caterbone
would also accurately predict that the 90's would become the "Information Age" because of the
direct contributions and advancements of "digital technologies", which is directly responsible for
the development of the "INTERNET".
Stan Caterbone's obsession with his "digital movie" has proven to be one of his most
remarkable demonstrations of his keen sense of perception.
The author admitted in an affidavit in 1998 that he did not know the criminal culpability of Lisa
Michelle Lambert, and further argues that it was because of the prosecutorial misconduct and
the erroneous handling of the crime scene that the truth evaded both the prosecution and the
defense as to who actually killed Laurie Show.
_________________________________________________
Date: April 28, 2016
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
/S/
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
(717) 669-2163
Page 16 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
EXHIBIT
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 17 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
1250 Fremont Street
Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
November 12, 2015

Ms. Kathleen Kane
Pennsylvania Attorney General
16th Floor Strawberry Square
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Re: Old Boys Network filed in GENERAL OAG QUESTIONS November 11, 2015
November 11, 2015 7:42am
"Kane, the first woman and Democrat elected to the position of Pennsylvania's top
prosecutor, has dismissed the case as a backlash over her challenge to what she
calls the old-boys' network in Pennsylvania law enforcement." LNP, Attorney
General Kane faces trial on more charges, by the Associated Press on November 11,
2015.
Back in 1998 I had a meeting with an NSA (National Security Agency, Ft. Meade, Md)
operative in a parking lot of a former car dealer in York, PA. I had just attended a job
fair and he approached me as I was about to get into my car. He introduced himself
as being from the NSA and I questioned him about why they would not leave me
alone. His response was "It is not US (NSA) it's the Good Ole Boys". I also have
a huge problem with modified, stolen, and planted documents. We parted ways in an
amicable fashion.
Stan J. Caterbone Advanced Media Group
717-669-2163
See the enclosed as well as U.S.C.A. 15-3400 LISA MICHELLE LAMBERT APPEAL,
APPELLANT, Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se
https://www.scribd.com/doc/284639091/Federal-Whistleblower-and-TargetedIndividual-of-U-S-Sponsored-Mind-Control-Executive-Summary-Updated-October12-2015
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 18 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 19 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 20 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
EXHIBIT
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 21 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Freedom From Covert Harassment & Surveillance,

Registered in Pennsylvania
1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
www.amgglobalentetainmentgroup.com
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
April 20, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone/Advanced Media Group Biography

Present - Advanced Media Group, President, Owner, and Founder.
In 1987 I became a federal whistleblower for the case of local defense contractor International Signal
and Control, or ISC. ISC was a black ops program for the NSA and CIA that was convicted in 1992 for
an elaborate scheme to arm Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries with a broad array of weapons,
most notably cluster bombs. It was the third larges fraud in U.S. History at that time. I have been a
victim of organized stalking since 1987 and a victim of electronic and direct energy weapons since 2005.
I had also been telepathic since 2005. In 2005 the U.S. Sponsored Mind Control turned into an all-out
assault of mental telepathy; synthetic telepathy; hacking of all electronic devices; vandilism and thefts
of personal property, extortions, intellectual property violations, obstruction of justice; violations of due
process; thefts and modifications of court documents; and pain and torture through the use of directed
energy devices and weapons that usually fire a low frequency electromagnetic energy at the targeted
victim. This assault was no coincidence in that it began simultaneously with the filing of the federal
action in U.S. District Court, or CATERBONE v. Lancaster County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288. This
assault began after the handlers remotely trained/sychronized Stan J. Caterbone with mental telepathy.
The main difference opposed to most other victims of this technology is that I am connected 24/7 with
the same person who declares telepathically she is a known celebrity. Over the course of 10 years I
have been telepathic with at least 20 known persons and have spent 10 years trying to validate and
confirm their identities without success. Most U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to cooperate, and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's Office refuse to comment and act on the
numerous formal complaints that are filed in their respective offices. Most complaints are focused on
the routine victimization's of a targeted individual including but not limited to stalking, harassment,
threats, vandalism, thefts, extortion, burglaries, false imprisonments, fabricated mental health warrants
or involuntary commitments, pain and torture to the body, and most often the cause of obstruction of
justice is the computer hacking.
I have a very sophisticated and authentic library of evidence of the use of U.S. Sponsored Mind Control
technologies on my father and brother that dates back to the 1940's while my father was in the U.S.
Navy after he graduated with honors from Air Gunners School in Florida, including an affidavit motorized
and authenticated by my father in 1996. My brother served in the U.S. Air force and was victim to LSD
experiments of the infamous MKULTRA program in the late 1960's.
In 2015 I filed an amicus curie on behalf of Lisa Michelle Lambert who was convicted in 1992 of the
murder of Laurie Show, both of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. I currently am in litigation in the U.S. Third
Circuit Court of Appeals and in February of 2016 Lisa Michelle Lambert published her book titled
Corruption in Lancaster County My Story, which is available in bookstores and on Amazon.com. I
am in frequent contact with her co-author, Dave Brown of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Stan J. Caterbone/Advanced
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
Media
re Kathleen
Group Biography
Kane
Page
Page22
1 of 48
6
Wednesday,
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28,
20, 2016
In 2009 I Proposed an ORGANIZED STALKING AND DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS HARASSMENT BILL
to Pennsylvania House of Representative Mike Sturla (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) and City of Lancaster
Mayor Richard Gray in 2009. The draft legislation is the work of Missouri House of Representative Jim
Guest, who has been working on helping victims of these horrendous crimes for years. The bill will
provide protections to individuals who are being harassed, stalked, harmed by surveillance, and
assaulted; as well as protections to keep individuals from becoming human research subjects, tortured,
and killed by electronic frequency devices, directed energy devices, implants, and directed energy
weapons. I again reintroduced the bill to the Pennsylvania General Assembly in 2015 and frequented
the Pennsylvania Capitol trying to find support and a sponsor; which I still do to this day.
In 2006 I began his role as an Activist Shareholder for Fulton Financial, which is listed as "FULT" on the
NASDAQ stock exchange. As a founder of Financial Management Group, Ltd., a full service financial firm,
Stan J. Caterbone has drawn upon the success in developing the strategic vision for his company and
the experience gained in directing the legal affairs and public offering efforts in dealing with Fulton
Financial. I have been in recent discussions with the Fulton Financial Board of Directors with regards to
various complaints dealing with such issues as the Resource Bank acquisition and the subprime failures.
I believe that Fulton Financial needs management to become more aggressive in it's strategic planning
and the performance it expects from it's management team in order to increase shareholder value.
Expanding the footprint of the regional bank has not yielded an increase to the bottom line that is
consistent with the expectations of shareholders. Lancaster County has seen several local banking
institutions acquired by larger regional banks, thus increasing the competition Fulton Financial will see in
it's local marketplace as well as in it's regional footprint.
In 2005 I, as a Pro Se Litigant filed several civil actions as Plaintiffs that are in current litigation in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States Third District
Court of Appeals, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, The Pennsylvania Superior Court, the
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, The Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
These litigations include violations of intellectual property rights, anti-trust violations, and interference
of contracts relating to several business interests. Central to this litigation is the Digital Movie, Digital
Technologies, Financial Management Group, Ltd,/FMG Advisory, Ltd., and its affiliated businesses along
with a Federal False Claims Act or Federal Whistleblowers Act regarding the firm of International Signal
and Control, Plc., (ISC) the $1Billion Dollar Fraud and the Export violations of selling arms to South
Africa and Iraq. This litigation dates back to 1987. Stan J. Caterbone was a shareholder of ISC, and was
solicited by ISC executives for professional services. The Federal False Claims Act is currently part of
RICO Civil Complaint in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the
Third Circuit Court of Appeals, as docket no. 05-2288.
In 2005 Advanced Media Group/Project Hope filed a Civil Action in the Court of Common Pleas of
Lancaster County against Drew Anthon and the Eden Resort Inn for their attempts to withhold the
Tourism Tax and Hotel Tax that supports the Downtown Lancaster Convention Center & Marriot. We also
proposed an alternative plan to move the Convention Center to the Hotel Brunswick and Lancaster
Square to all of the major stakeholders. The Lancaster County Convention Center is finally under
construction with a March 2009 Opening date.
In 2005 I was selected to attend the Clinton Global Initiative in New York City after submission of
an essay with and application. I received the invitation from Bruce R. Lindsey, Chief Executive Officer of
the William J. Clinton Foundation.
In 2005 I began our philanthropic endeavors by spending our energies and working with such
organizations as; ONE.org, Livestrong.org, WoundedWarriors.org, The Clinton Global Initiative,
Lancaster Convention Center Authority, Lancaster Chamber of Commerce, Toms Project Hope, People to
People International, GlobalWarming.org, Contact Lancaster/24 Hour Suicide Hotline, Schreiber Pediatric
Center, and numerous others.
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
Media
re Kathleen
Group Biography
Kane
Page
Page23
2 of 48
6
Wednesday,
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28,
20, 2016
In 2004 I embarked on our past endeavors in the music and entertainment industries with an emphasis
on assisting for the fair and equitable distribution of artists rights and royalties in the fight against
electronic piracy. We have attempted to assist in developing new business models to address the
convergence of physical and electronic mediums; as it displaces royalties and revenues for those
creating, promoting, and delivering a range of entertainment content via wireless networks.
In 2000 to 2002 I developed an array of marketing and communication tools for wholesalers of the
AIM Investment Group and managed several communication programs for several of the company
wholesalers throughout the United States and Costa Rica. We also began a Day Trading project that
lasted until 2004 with success.
In 1999 I developed a comprehensive business plan to develop the former Sprecher Brewery, known as
the Excelsior Building on E. King Street, in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. This plan was developed in
conjunction with the Comprehensive Economic Development Plan for the Revitalization of Downtown
Lancaster and the Downtown Lancaster Convention Center for the former Watt & Shand building.
In 1999 I contributed to the debate, research, and implementation of strategies to counter the effects
of the global Y2K threat to the worlds computer technologies. I attended the U.S. Sponsored Y2K
symposium and Conference in Washington, D.C. hosted by the Senate Y2K Subcommittee and Senator
William Bennett.
In 1998 I had began to administer the charity giving of Toms Project Hope, a non-profit organization
promoting education and awareness for mental illness and suicide prevention. We had provided funding
for the Mental Health Alliance of Lancaster County, Contact Lancaster (The 24/7 Suicide Prevention
Hotline), The Schreiber Pediatric Center, and other charitable organizations and faith based charities.
The video "Numbers Don't Lie" have been distributed to schools, non profit organizations, faith based
initiatives, and municipalities to provide educational support for the prevention of suicide and to bring
awareness to mental illness problems.
In 1996 I had done consulting for companies under KAL, Inc., during the time that I was controller of
Pflumm Contractors, Inc., I was retained by Gallo Rosso Restaurant and Bar to computerized their
accounting and records management from top to bottom. I had also provided consulting for the
computerization of accounting and payroll for Lancaster Container, Inc., of Washington Boro. I was
retained to evaluate and develop an action plan to migrate the Informations Technologies of the Jay
Group, formally of Ronks, PA, now relocated to a new $26 Million Dollar headquarters located in West
Hempfield Township of Lancaster County. The Jay Group had been using IBM mainframe technologies
hosted by the AS 400 computer and server. I was consulting on the merits of migrating to a PC based
real time networking system throughout the entire organization. Currently the Jay Group employees
some 500 employees with revenues in excess of $50 Million Dollars per year.
In 1993 I was retained by Pflumm Contractors, Inc., as controller, and was responsible for saving the
company from a potential bankruptcy. At that time, due to several unpaid contracts, the company was
facing extreme pressure from lenders and the bonding insurance company. We were responsible for
implementing computerized accounting, accounting and contract policies and procedures, human
resource policies and procedures, marketing strategies, performance measurement reporting, and
negotiate for the payment of unpaid contracts. The bonding company was especially problematic, since
it was the lifeline to continue work and bidding for public contracts. The Bank of Lancaster County
demanded a complete accounting of the operations in order to stave off a default on the notes and loans
it was holding. We essentially revamped the entire operation. Within 3 years, the company realized an
increase in profits of 3 to 4 times its previous years, and record revenues.
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
Media
re Kathleen
Group Biography
Kane
Page
Page24
3 of 48
6
Wednesday,
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28,
20, 2016
In 1991 I was elected to People to People International and the Citizen Ambassador Program, which
was founded by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956. The program was founded to To give
specialists from throughout the world greater opportunities to work together and effectively
communicate with peers, The Citizen Ambassador program administers face-to-face scientific, technical,
and professional exchanges throughout the world. In 1961, under President John F. Kennedy, the State
Department established a non-profit private foundation to administer the program. We were scheduled
to tour the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe to discuss printing and publishing technologies with
scientists and technicians around the world.
In 1990 I had worked on developing voice recognition systems for the governments technology think
tank - NIST (National Institute for Standards & Technology). I co-authored the article Escaping the Unix
Tar Pit with a scientist from NIST that was published in the magazine DISC, then one of the leading
publications for the CD-ROM industry. Today, most all call centers deploy that technology whenever you
call an 800 number, and voice recognition is prevalent in all types of applications involving
telecommunications.
In 1989 I had founded Advanced Media Group, Ltd., and was one of only 5 or 6 U.S. domestic
companies that had the capability to manufacture CD-ROM's. We did business with commercial
companies, government agencies, educational institutions, and foreign companies. I performed services
and contracts for the Department of Defense, NASA, National Institution of Standards & Technology
(NIST), Department of Defense, The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and the
Defense Mapping Agency, Central Intelligence Agency, (CIA), IBM, Microsoft, AMP, Commodore
Computers, American Bankers Bond Buyers, and a host of others. I also was working with R.R,
Donnelly's Geo Systems, which was developing various interactive mapping technologies, which is now a
major asset of Map Quest. Map Quest is the premier provider of mapping software and applications for
the internet and is often used in delivering maps and directions for Fortune 500 companies. We had
arranged for High Industries to sell American Helix, the manufacturer of compact discs, to R.R. Donnelly.
We had brokered a deal and the executives from Donnellys Chicago headquarters flew to Lancaster to
discuss the deal and perform due diligence of the manufacturing facility located in the Greenfield
Industrial Park.
In 1987 Power Station Studios of New York and Tony Bongiovi retained me as executive producer
of a motion picture project. The theatrical and video release was to be delivered in a digital format; the
first of its kind. We had originated the marketing for the technology, and created the concept for the
Power Station Digital Movie System (PSDMS), which would follow the copyright and marketing formula
of the DOLBY technology trademark.
We had also created and developed marketing and patent research for the development and
commercialization of equipment that we intended to manufacture and market to the recording industry
featuring the digital technology. Sidel, Gonda, Goldhammer, and Abbot, P.C. of Philadelphia was the lead
patent law firm that We had retained for the project. Power Station Studios was the brainchild of Tony
Bongiovi, a leading engineering genius discovered by Motown when he was 15. Tony and Power Station
Studios was one of the leading recording studios in the country, and were responsible for developing Bon
Jovi, a cousin. Power Station Studios clients included; Bruce Springsteen, Diana Ross, Cyndi Lauper,
Talking Heads, Madonna, The Ramones, Steve Winwood, and many others. Tony and Power Station
Studios had produced the original Sound Track for the original Star Wars motion picture. It was
released for distribution and was the number one Sound Track recording of its time.
Tony Bongiovi was also active in working and researching different aerospace technologies. * We had
developed and authored a Joint Venture Proposal for SONY to partner with us in delivering the Digital
Movie and its related technologies to the marketplace. The venture was to include the commercialization
of technologies, which Tony Bongiovi had developed for the recording industry simultaneously with the
release of the Digital Movie.
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
Media
re Kathleen
Group Biography
Kane
Page
Page25
4 of 48
6
Wednesday,
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28,
20, 2016
I also created the concept for the PSDMS trademark, which was to be the Trademark logo for the
technology, similar to the DOLBY sound systems trademark. The acronyms stand for the Power Station
Digital Movie System. Today, DVD is the mainstay for delivering digital movies on a portable medium, a
compact disc.
In 1987 I had a created and developed FMG Mortgage Banking, a company that was funded by a major
banking firm in Houston Texas. We had the capability to finance projects from $3 to $100 million dollars.
Our terms and rates were so attractive that we had quickly received solicitations from developers across
the country. We were also very attractive to companies that wanted to raise capital that include both
debt and equity. Through my company, FMG, we could raise equity funding through private placements,
and debt funding through FMG Mortgage Banking. We were retained by Gamillion Studios of Hollywood,
California to secure financing of their postproduction Film Studio that was looking to relocate to North
Carolina. We had secured refinancing packages for Norris Boyd of and the Olde Hickory and were in the
midst of replacing the current loan that was with Commonwealth National Bank. We had meetings and
discussions with Drew Anton of the Eden Resort, for refinancing a portion of his debt portfolio. We were
quickly seeking commitments for real estate deals from New York to California. We also had a number of
other prominent local developers seeking our competitive funding, including Owen Kugal, High
Industries, and the Marty Sponougle a partner of The Fisher Group (owner of the Rt. 30 Outlets). We
were constantly told that our financing packages were more competitive than local institutions.
In 1986 I had founded Financial Management Group, Ltd (FMG); a large financial services organization
comprised of a variety of professionals operating in one location. We had developed a stock purchase
program for where everyone had the opportunity for equity ownership in the new firm. FMG had
financial planners, investment managers, accountants, attorneys, realtors, liability insurance services,
tax preparers, and estate planners operating out of our corporate headquarters in Lancaster. In one
year, we had 24 people on staff, had approximately 12 offices in Pennsylvania, and
several satellite offices in other states. We had in excess of $50 million under management, and our
advisors were generating almost $4 million of commissions, which did not include the fees from the
other professionals. We had acquired our own Broker Dealer firm and were valued at about $3 to $4
million.
In 1985 I developed the Easter Regional Free Agent Camp, the first Free Agent Camp for the
Professional Football industry; which was videotaped for distribution to the teams scouting departments.
(See Washington Post page article of March 24, 1985) Current camps were dependant on the team
scouts to travel from state to state looking for recruits. We had developed a strategy of video taping the
camp and the distributing a copy, free of charge to the teams, to all of the scouting departments for
teams in all three leagues FL, CFL and WFL. My brother was signed at that camp by the Ottawa
Roughriders of the CFL, and went on to be a leading receiver while J.C. Watts was one of the leagues
most prominent quarterbacks. My brother also played 2 years with the Miami Dolphins while Dan Marino
was starting quarterback. We were a Certified Agent for the National Football League Players
Association. Gene Upshaw, the President of the NFLPA had given me some helpful hints for my camp,
while we were at a Conference for agents of the NFL. The Washington Post wrote a full-page article
about our camp and associated it with other camps that were questionable about their practices.
Actually, that was the very reason for our camp. We had attended many other camps around the
country that were not very well organized and attracted few if any scouts. We had about 60 participants,
with one player coming from as far away as Hawaii. We held the camp at Lancaster Catholic, with a
professional production company filming the entire camp, while I did the editing and produced the video.
The well respected and widely acclaimed professional football scout, Gil Brandt, of the Dallas Cowboys,
had given me support for my camp during some conversations We had with him and said he looked
forward to reviewing the tapes for any hopeful recruits.
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
Media
re Kathleen
Group Biography
Kane
Page
Page26
5 of 48
6
Wednesday,
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28,
20, 2016
In 1985 I was elected Vice President of the Central Pennsylvania Chapter of the International
Association of Financial Planners, and helped build that chapter by increasing membership 3to 4 times.
We had personally retained the nationally acclaimed and nationally syndicated Financial Planner, Ms.
Alexandria Armstrong of Washington D.C.; to host a major fundraiser. More than 150 professionals
attended the dinner event that was held at the Eden Resort & Conference Center. Ms. Armstrong
discussed financial planning and how all of the professions needed to work together in order to be most
effective for their clients. We attracted a wide variety of professionals including; brokers, lawyers,
accountants, realtors, tax specialists, estate planners, bankers, and investment advisors. Today, it has
become evident that financial planning was the way of the future. In 1986 executives approached us
from Blue Ball National Bank to help them develop a Financial Planning department within their bank.
In 1984 I had helped to develop strategic planning for Sandy Weill, former President of Citi Group (the
largest banking entity in the U.S). We were one of several associates asked to help advise on the future
of Financial Planning and how it would impact the brokerage and the investment industry at large. Mr.
Weil was performing due diligence for the merger of American Express and IDS (Investors Diversified
Services). We were at that time a national leader in the company in delivering Fee Based Financial
Planning Services, which was a new concept in the investment community and mainstream investors.
That concept is now widely held by most investment advisers.
Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
ACTIVE COURT CASES

J.C. No. 03-16-90005 Office of the Circuit Executive, United States Third Circuit Court of
Appeals - COMPLAINT OF JUDICIALMISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY re 15-3400 and 16-1149
U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-1149;15-3400; 16-1001; 07-4474
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 15-03984; 14-02559; 05-2288; 06-4650
Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 1561 MDA 2015; 1519 MDA 2015
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349, CI-06-03401
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for The Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case No. 16-10157
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
Media
re Kathleen
Group Biography
Kane
Page
Page27
6 of 48
6
Wednesday,
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28,
20, 2016
EXHIBIT
Superior Court
Superior
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Amicus
Amicus
re Kathleen Kane
Page 28 of 48
Thursday,
Thursday,April
April 28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone

1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
April 16, 2016
My Story of Victimization for Derrick Robinson's Document to the FBI

In 1987 I became a federal whistleblower for the case of local defense contractor International
Signal and Control, or ISC. ISC was a black ops program for the NSA and CIA that was convicted in
1992 for an elaborate scheme to arm Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries with a broad array of
weapons, most notably cluster bombs. It was the third larges fraud in U.S. History at that time. I have
been a victim of organized stalking since 1987 and a victim of electronic and direct energy weapons
since 2005. I had also been telepathic since 2005. In 2005 the U.S. Sponsored Mind Control turned
into an all-out assault of mental telepathy; synthetic telepathy; hacking of all electronic devices;
vandilism and thefts of personal property, extortions, intellectual property violations, obstruction of
justice; violations of due process; thefts and modifications of court documents; and pain and torture
through the use of directed energy devices and weapons that usually fire a low frequency
electromagnetic energy at the targeted victim. This assault was no coincidence in that it began
simultaneously with the filing of the federal action in U.S. District Court, or CATERBONE v. Lancaster
County Prison, et. al., or 05-cv-2288.
This assault began after the handlers remotely
trained/sychronized Stan J. Caterbone with mental telepathy. The main difference opposed to most
other victims of this technology is that I am connected 24/7 with the same person who declares
telepathically she is a known celebrity. Over the course of 10 years I have been telepathic with at least
20 known persons and have spent 10 years trying to validate and confirm their identities without
success. Most U.S. intelligence agencies refuse to cooperate, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation
and the U.S. Attorney's Office refuse to comment and act on the numerous formal complaints that are
filed in their respective offices. Most complaints are focused on the routine victimization's of a targeted
individual including but not limited to stalking, harassment, threats, vandalism, thefts, extortion,
burglaries, false imprisonments, fabricated mental health warrants or involuntary commitments, pain
and torture to the body, and most often the cause of obstruction of justice is the computer hacking.
I have a very sophisticated and authentic library of evidence of the use of U.S. Sponsored Mind
Control technologies on my father and brother that dates back to the 1940's while my father was in the
U.S. Navy after he graduated with honors from Air Gunners School in Florida, including an affidavit
motorized and authenticated by my father in 1996. My brother served in the U.S. Air force and was
victim to LSD experiments of the infamous MKULTRA program in the late 1960's.
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Amicus
and
Amicus
Evidence
re Kathleen
of Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Individual
291of
of48
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
In 2015 I filed an amicus curie on behalf of Lisa Michelle Lambert who was convicted in 1992 of
the murder of Laurie Show, both of Lancaster, Pennsylvania. I currently am in litigation in the U.S. Third
Circuit Court of Appeals and in February of 2016 Lisa Michelle Lambert published her book titled
Corruption in Lancaster County My Story, which is available in bookstores and on Amazon.com. I
am in frequent contact with her co-author, Dave Brown of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
In 2009 I Proposed an ORGANIZED STALKING AND DIRECTED ENERGY WEAPONS HARASSMENT
BILL to Pennsylvania House of Representative Mike Sturla (Lancaster, Pennsylvania) and City of
Lancaster Mayor Richard Gray in 2009. The draft legislation is the work of Missouri House of
Representative Jim Guest, who has been working on helping victims of these horrendous crimes for
years. The bill will provide protections to individuals who are being harassed, stalked, harmed by
surveillance, and assaulted; as well as protections to keep individuals from becoming human research
subjects, tortured, and killed by electronic frequency devices, directed energy devices, implants, and
directed energy weapons. I again reintroduced the bill to the Pennsylvania General Assembly in 2015
and frequented the Pennsylvania Capitol trying to find support and a sponsor; which I still do to this
day.
In 2005 I, as a Pro Se Litigant filed several civil actions as Plaintiffs in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States Third District
Court of Appeals, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, The Pennsylvania Superior Court, the
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, The Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania. These litigations included violations of intellectual property rights, anti-trust
violations, and interference of contracts relating to several business interests, harassment,
extortion, fraud, etc.,. . Central to this litigation is the Digital Movie, Digital Technologies,
Financial Management Group, Ltd,/FMG Advisory, Ltd., and its affiliated businesses along
with a Federal False Claims Act or Federal Whistleblowers Act regarding the firm of
International Signal and Control, Plc., (ISC) the $1Billion Dollar Fraud and the Export
violations of selling arms to South Africa and Iraq. This litigation dates back to 1987. In
1987 I microfiched some 10,000 pages of documents that prove this story without any doubt.
I also have recorded conversations of persons and government officials.
Stan J. Caterbone, Pro Se Litigant
1250 Fremont Street

Lancaster, PA 17603
scaterbone@live.com
717-669-2163
ACTIVE COURT CASES
J.C. No. 03-16-90005 Office of the Circuit Executive, United States Third Circuit Court of
Appeals - COMPLAINT OF JUDICIALMISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY re 15-3400 and 16-1149
U.S.C.A. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 16-1149;15-3400; 16-1001; 07-4474
U.S. District Court Eastern District of PA Case No. 15-03984; 14-02559; 05-2288; 06-4650
Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. 1561 MDA 2015; 1519 MDA 2015
Lancaster County Court of Common Pleas Case No. 08-13373; 15-10167; 06-03349, CI-06-03401
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for The Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case No. 16-10157
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Amicus
and
Amicus
Evidence
re Kathleen
of Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Individual
302of
of48
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone Affidavit
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3113of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3224of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3335of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
! "
"
$% &
!
" #
%
"&#
(
'
!
(
,
"
"
")
"
""
-
)
!
! "
!
'
%
" !
"
!
)
+
!
" *
"
"
,
,
,
*
%
*
(
%
!
/"0
1
1 ,
"
"
4
!
"
"
!
!
#
.
.
&,,0
%
1 ,
2"3
!
)
** ! "
&,,..$/
&,,
%
&,,
%
&
, "
"
00
"
!,
"
6
7
7 , !
&,,-
8,
:
(
$;$
"2
! " ,
, ,
** !
;
5
$
!
&,,@
,
.
&<;=
>
1
9
,
&,,=
$
,
>
A
1 B3
.+
&,,=
1 B3
2
>
%
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3446of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
<
1
1
* "
!
"
C#
"$
"
<
*
&, ,
24
#9
; "
&,,@(&,,= A
3
24
5
!
%
&,,0 4
! %3
"
"
!
&,,
%
!
4
'
5
4
D
%
%
"
""
,! "
0 =
0 =9
9
00&9 00
:
9
&,,-
&, , $
!
%
!
D
%
%
=
F
!
))
+
/4
),
"
0 =
/
$
G
3
%
00
3
3
"
%#
$
$
&, ,
&,,4
!- "
.
&,,@
,
*
&,,<
E
&,,
-) !
/ 4
24
/
$
D
&, ,
D
$
&,,-
&,,0
%
D
!
D
D %
7F !
>
!
D
$
A
8F
$
%
;
D
.
%
&,,3
E
$
*
00=; 00
$
5
! 7
0 =
00
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3557of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
)
A
24
$;$
00
(F
&
%
B
5
00 9
" * <
00=( 00 9
:#
> ) "" ""

$
;3
#, " !
&,,-
"
"
"
0 =
&, ,
/
.
$
B
3
3
=
0 =
) "
.
&,,1
0 =
24
" "
3
"
&,,@
" E
""
B
$
<
&,,1
.
&,,-
,-(&&
2
=
@,
"
&,
3
&,,!
&,,@
&,,@
0 =
@, 1
&,,@
9
!
@,
#" !,
0 =
" "1 ,
"
"*
":
" E
F
&,,-
!
B
/
!
"
00=( 00 9
B
:
9
$
'
.
&,,1
9
0 =
&, ,
/
.
00 9
/
&,,9
&,
( "
!
.
00
$
!
&, ,
F
3
7
8
!
&,,
&, ,
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3668of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
&
, * "
&&
*#
"
&:
;!
&<
:
%
$
&, ,
$
&,,-
!-
,
5
%
"
>
$
$
< !-
24
? "
;
>
&,,0
B
&,,%
(
$
&, ,
&-
A
.+ $
&@
! :
&,,$
: , *
&, ,
* @
&,,@
"
E
3
&,,
"
&,,0
7 "!
7 "
0 =
*
&=
) "
":
)"
&,,@
"
&
&0
!
< ")
+
9 &,,@
:
9
&, ,
&,,
00
:,
!6
"
"
" .
9 &,,0
0 = "&#
, *
&,,@
/
" F
0 =
;A
0 =
F
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
3779of
of
of48
27
29
0 =
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016

3
"
+
$
1
$
.
0 =
I $
!
0 =
.
$
"2
'
+$;F
D
"$
&,;&,
3
A
00
'
$ 24
"1E1# $
K
E
A
00&
>
L
F
F
B
F
+
0=,K
A
$
$
1
+
>
1
$
>
B
!
3
F
1
00
) % 3
&,,-
!
>
! A !
00,K
1 B3
>
F
F
& 1
F
8
! 4
'
A
! 4
A
0=,K
F
00,K
0 ,K
0<,K
3
/
>
%
&,,
) %$
0@,K
0@,K
$
2!
A
D 1
"
$
0 <9 F
4
A? D!B
#
*
$
7
+
00
D 18
.
E
$
M 1
00= E
0 =
%
0 ,K
$
0 =
M
00
!
&,,9
(
9
!
1
,-(
$ !2B+EF2
(&&
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
38
10
8 of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
") !
"
7!
N
.
!
5
F
(
(
5
G
*
A'
, ?
*
? 1
!,
A
(
> "
!, '!
,
B
A
" " * #" !, " "
$C
* #" !, D
73
8
* 7
,
"
"
&
"
#
.
"
#(
5
7
9
'
5
%
7A
8 !
8 !
'
!
7D .2
O
% 8
'
7
'
(
(
%
%
4
K
K
M %
%
K
'
7E
(
8
"
%
'
%(
(
(
4
;
(
7
7
87
(
(
8
8
- 7 > !,
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
39
11
9 of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016

!
!
@
E
!
DD
@
E
!
DD
B &. @
DD
B@
. DD
")
!
"
B@
& DD
)
B@
. DD
)
*
B@
& DD
)
!
B@
$ DD
")
!
B@
DD 7
B@
E
DD
"! "
*
. @
EB& DD
!
*
. @
EB DD
")
!
& @
& B DD 6, "
1
B@
DD 5
B@
& DD
B@
DD
)
1
B@
& DD >
B@
DD ' "
!
B@
)
B@
E DD
)
*
"E
* , "
,
!
1
3
1
))
1"
"
, "
*"
"
, "
!
*
"
")
"
7
*
)
*
, "
1 ,!
, "
)
!
"
"
!
!
1
"": !
, 1
"": !
"
1
"": !
!
"
! * !
*
!"
, "
"
"
"
1 ,"
DD
*)
PPPPPPP "
>7
%#
'?
Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"
Stan J. Caterbone
# PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"
June 19, 2015

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
Pennsylvania
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
$
Lancaster
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
19
PPPPPPP
15
June
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
&,PP
Stan J. Caterbone - I was a notary from '94-'98

PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
F
PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
SJC
I
.
I
&, ,
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
40
10
12of
of
of48
27
29
Don't Know When
24
$
$
Q &, , "!
I
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Samuel
P. Caterbone
Affidavit
Jr., (Father) Affidavit
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
41
11
13of
of
of48
27
29
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page 35 of 41
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
06/10/2007
Samuel P. Caterbone Jr., (Father) Affidavit
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
42
12
14of
of
of48
27
29
THE ADVANCED MEDIA GROUP
Page 36 of 41
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
06/10/2007
Sammy Caterbone (Brother) Affidavit
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
43
13
15of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
44
14
16of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
45
15
17of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
September 25, 2009
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
46
16
18of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
47
17
19of
of
of48
27
29
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
What is CCHR?
1 of 2
http://www.cchr.org/about-us/what-is-cchr.html
ABOUT US
VIDEOS
TRUTH ABOUT PSYCHIATRY
ALTERNATIVES
TAKE ACTION
ORDER
The Citizens Commission on

Human Rights was originally
formed in 1969 as a global
watchdog committed to
investigating and exposing human
rights violations in the field of
mental health. From its
headquarters in Los Angeles,
CCHR coordinates activities
amongst its chapters around the
world.
HOME ABOUT US WHAT IS CCHR?

SUBSCRIBE
TO CCHR NEWS
< ;
WHAT IS THE CITIZENS COMMISSION ON HUMAN

RIGHTS?
! !"
#'
FREE INFORMATION KIT

AND DVD
$$!##!
($
))
* #
!
(
Restoring Human Rights and
Dignity to the Field of Mental
Health
'#/
, #!
About Us
Accomplishments
Message from the President
Board of Advisors
)#+
'
'#/
) . )! ! / (
'!
# % ##
#!
(
//
))
! (
$ !
$( )
!
! ! #!
'
!#
)!
!
(
#!# (
))
#+
'
.
,! #
')
!
$ !
#
! (
&
! (
))
#+
0 '#/
* !
, #
.! !
)+
!. #
'
#
' )! !
#+
!#)
)
.
))/ '
.!#
.
$
# /
')
#+ )
!# # *
!#
!
(
/$
!#
!# #+ ) */
!
! ))/ ! (
( 1#/
#
#!
6# 7
#+
( ##
!#9 2 '
#!
# ))
!#0# (
$
* /
'! !
!#
# 5
'! !
3'
#!
0!
) ( 4 !#
+ % & ))
( #
# ( * '#/
!# #+ '#/
!# (
.! *+ %7&
# !,
'
$
#
# ) )/
!.!)
!#
))
)8
0
*
$ , #!.
+*
# / #
!# #
)/ #0 !(
% &
)!
)
)# (
,)
, !
#+ # !
!# * ,#!
# #
)3
# $
( ##!
!.!
#*
!# #+
!" !
$ ) !,!))!
0
$
(!
#+ !
## '
') (
,! )
' !
#+ ,
What is CCHR?
'
)!
$
( #
' !
, #! !
)
#+ # !
(! $
!#0# ( '#/
'
+ ( )) ! (
)+ !.!)
! 3'
#+
#!#+
!$ *
!
! #
$$!##!
,/
# # ) )/ #
)# !
)! !
)!$!
!. #
#!
,/
Order a Free
Citizens Commission on
Human Rights Information Kit
" #"
( ))
+,
!
$ #
& !#
) )
( ##!
/ ( '#/
#2
# !''
'
+!
#%
- ) *# '
#)
)
! !$
)) . !) ,) $
)'!
!. '
(! )
$
#!,) (
$ !
()!
, !
%2&
$( )
Leadership
#*
CCHR Financials
Mental Health Declaration
! (
$ !
$!
#(
( )) ! (
!
# *!
'#/
. #
#
!
!
!
(! )
($
# #
# ! 0
'!
)
+
' ,)! !
0
!# !
! (
CCHR
CHAPTERS WORLDWIDE
(
!
: #
Psychiatry: An Industry of
Death Museum
CCHR Global Locator
!# #'! !
$ !
'
* '
#!
(!
$/
!" !
*!
*!
+ ! !#
Stan J. Caterbone
Superior
Superior
Caterbone,
Court
CourtNo.
1164
8423-15
Story
Targeted
Amicus
and
Amicus
Individual
Evidence
re Kathleen
of
Evidence
Kane
a TI
Targeted
Page
Page
Page
Individual
48
18
20of
of
of48
27
29
.!
#+ ,)
#+
*#+ $
) ;'
#
' ,)!
,)
Thursday,
Saturday,
Thursday,April
April 16,
28, 2016
11/6/2015 12:42 AM

USPS - Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. EDA 1164-16 Re Kathleen Kane Amicus in Support of Motion To Quash, April 28, 2016 Filed On May 2, 2016 Final Verification and APPEARANCE May 3, 2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

USPS - Superior Court of Pennsylvania Case No. EDA 1164-16 Re Kathleen Kane Amicus in Support of Motion To Quash, April 28, 2016 Filed On May 2, 2016 Final Verification and APPEARANCE May 3, 2016 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Stanley J.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case NO. 1164 EDA 2016

Montgomery Court Case No.

REQUEST THE COURTESY OF THE COURT TO APPEAR PRO SE AND TO FILE

Quashing the charges in case Montgomery Court Case No. 8423-15

Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.

Superior Court 1164 EDA 2016

Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Superior Court 1164 EDA 2016

Tuesday, May 3, 2016

PACFile - View Notification

Filing WSPRED00082210 rejected

Amicus Curiae Brief

210 Pa. Code Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.

Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.

210 Pa. Code Rule 531. Participation by Amicus Curiae.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

1164 EDA 2016

PROOF OF SERVICE - DRAFT

Amil Michael Minora

Amil Michael Minora

700 Vine Street

Print Date: 5/2/2016 11:33 am

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PROOF OF SERVICE - DRAFT

Robert Martin Falin

Robert Martin Falin

Montgomery County Courthouse

Print Date: 5/2/2016 11:33 am

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PROOF OF SERVICE - DRAFT

Print Date: 5/2/2016 11:33 am

The Unified JUDICIAL

Report Date: 05/02/2016

Submission Status: Not Submitted

Filing Type: Ancillary

X Select Filing Type

Establish the Participants

Case Caption: Com. v. Kane, K.

Current Filings in Progress

Document Name: Amicus Curiae Brief.pdf

Upload Date/Time: 5/2/2016 11:19AM

Filing Fee: $0.00

Printed: 5/2/2016 11:32:11AM

Stanley J. Caterbone, Pro Se

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case NO. 1164 EDA 2016

Montgomery Court Case No.

AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF KATHLEEN KANE'S (ATTORNEY GENERAL)

Attorney General has been quoted as

Superior Court 1164 Amicus re Kathleen Kane

Thursday, April 28, 2016

These documents are attached as

Date: April 28, 2016

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, as well as community leaders. A process that continues to

Date: April 28, 2016

November 12, 2015

Freedom From Covert Harassment & Surveillance,

1250 Fremont Street

April 20, 2016

Stan J. Caterbone/Advanced Media Group Biography

1250 Fremont Street