OLATHE KANSAS – The Johnson County judiciary under large scrutiny as the 10th district courthouse is showing a large problem of potential corruption that is affecting the rights of Kansas Children. The Clerk of the US court in the District of Kansas shows Chief Judge Charles Droege was issued a summons to answer complaint brought by the Kansas dad making large waves in the Kansas judiciary.
https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/51592544/https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/51592544/Escalante_v_DroegeEscalante_v_Droege
The chief judge suit, joins now three other against an alleged hierchy of misconduct in the Olathe Courthouse located at 150 W Santa Fe. St Olathe KS 66061.
The federal complaint entered by Kansas pro se father on Dec 05, 2023 contains Document #1, that alleges the Defendant Chief Judge has decieved the civil custody case and docket of Escalante v Escalante, 18CV03813. There is a strong suggestion of this allegation being true when the civil public docket is seen at CASE HISTORY (ROA) (jococourts.org) and searched for civil “18CV03813”.
The case was purportedly transferred ‘out-of-county’ by designation of the Chief Judge in notation seen above as (JUDGE:DROEGE) on November 16, 2023. The Kansas father brought grievance to the high court that his civil case hasn’t actually been transferred out at all. And the father alleges that he is just not being allowed to practice law inside of his custody case, as pro se litigant. The Kansas Constitution grants any individual acting pro se, full authority to act as an officer of the court and practice law inside the own civil and criminal cases. The Kansas high court issued summons within hours of Doc #1 submitted time stamps on Tuesday morning. Document #1 alleges the chief judge is knowingly depriving constitutional amendment right under 14.S1.5.8.1 Parent and Child Rights and Due Process of the Law. The complaint states that a verification of the docket being deceived to deprive rights in the most recent stamp of 12/05/23 FILE STAMP TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING(TAKEN OCTOBER 18, 2023). The father informs the high court that nothing should be docketing in Johnson county public record if the Droege comments was accurate or true of fact. Father states that no other county can be seen as assuming 18CV03813, and that the Judge is lying in a county case notation.
7
The father on page 4 and 5 of Doc #1, further asserted that the court appointed counsel Edward Bigus, was forced onto the father by district judge Burmaster in March 2023, and on 12/05/23, Mr Bigus could be seen speaking from within the county case of 18CV03813, in some directives to Mr Escalante. And the federal pleading questions how a counsel who is marked as ‘removed’ in the above docket image on 11/28/23, but yet still be receiving knowledge of the ongoing situation in the county case. The father builds a claim that the High Court has now summoned Chief Judge to give explanation. These cases involving
Burmaster family court judge have taken a large detour from common, and they are showing as very unprecendented. As these lawsuits continue to litigate, there is more sure to be revealed.
