Whitnum seeks Guilt Verdict Against Jane Emons and John Whalen

Write-in candidate for Governor Lee Whitnum is seeking justice for an alleged criminal frame by former judge Jane Emons and Assistant Chief States Prosecutor John Whalen. In Whitnum v. State of Connecticut, Whitnum has reclaimed an Application for Investigation under CGS 54-47c and is seeking a three judge panel issue an ‘order authorizing the investigation into the commission of a crime’ to prove Whitnum’s accusation that Jane Emons and her buddy John Whalen criminally framed her. Whitnum is also seeking to clear her name, the disbarment of Jane Emons and disciplinary action against John Whalen.

“I have fought for justice for six long years all part of the reign of Jane Emons terror in my life,” said Whitnum. “I aim to prove that Jane Emons abused her power to destroy my life.”
Whitnum’s reclaim comes after she testified before the CT Legislators ( on March 26, 2018.

The JUD Committee upheld the Claims Commission decision that Whitnum could not sue the state for the actions of Jane Emons and John Whalen, a ruling Whitnum calls a “typical move in the unlawful State of Connecticut. Of course they are not going to grant permission to sue the state.”

“Fine, I can’t sue the state for money but can I get some justice please? CGS 54-47c is the closest thing we have in Connecticut to a grand jury. It is essentially the only way to get justice against state players,” said Whitnum. CGS-54-47 is an application for an investigation to determine if criminal conduct was committed.

Jane Emons accused Whitnum of ringing her bell and running at 1:38 am on the morning of June 22, 2013 and demanded Whitnum’s arrest by name. In the Woodbridge Police report Emons claims she did not see anyone but demanded Whitnum’s arrest nonetheless. Whitnum was charged with stalking and other charges.

“It is an absolute lie, I was two hours south that night in New York City,” said Whitnum who was at a restaurant on the eve of her birthday at the time that Emon’s doorbell allegedly depressed. “I have better things to do then drive 1 ½ hours from my home in Greenwich, in the middle of the night, to ring a bell. I’m very brave, if I have something to say, I say it - I don’t ring bells and run. To what end? It is a lie.”

Whitnum claims her rights have been violated by the 'predatory Connecticut Judiciary' for seven years and she has little faith in Connecticut Courts. For this reason, Whitnum is asking the public and the media to examine the evidence which she has made public: the Woodbridge Police Report of the 6-22-2013 arrest, Whitnum’s true phone records and John Whalen’s report #2013-0213.

Whitnum has also included a narrative which explains how John Whalen on his report allegedly altered Whitnum’s true phone records in order to get an arrest:
https://www.leewhitnum.com/pro...

Whitnum is also seeking to clear her name and she states the media is as biased as the courts. Whitnum claims that while the media widely reported that Whitnum ‘stalked a judge’ based on Emons’ accusation, they have failed to even once mention the three cases that encompass this bogus charge. They have also failed to report that the stalking charge was long dropped.

There are three cases filed by Whitnum seeking justice for the ring and run arrest: federal case Whitnum v. Emons 3:15-CV-0959, Superior Court Whitnum v. State of Connecticut et al FST-CV16-5015817-S, and FST-CV-15-5014842-S Whitnum v. Emons against Emons personally.

Whitnum aims to prove that Assistant Chief State's Prosecutor John Whalen altered her phone record on his report #2013-0213 to get an arrest warrant. Whitnum faced nine charges and 14 years in jail for the alleged ring-and-run and other contrived charges. Whitnum was forced to appear 41 times in criminal court over the course of 3 ½ years which cost her 3 years of salary as a teacher. Whitnum has accused Whalen of allegedly using the court system to torture her in violation of her Sixth Amendment right to speedy trial.

Whitnum is alleging the ring-and-run was a criminal frame and part of a longstanding effort by former judge Jane Emons to destroy Whitnum’s life for what Whitnum believes are political reasons regarding Whitnum’s foreign policy stand against the U.S. funding of Israel back when she was a Congressional candidate.

“Originally I thought Emons was a pro-Israel zealot who targeting me just me because of my political views, but then I met so many other people aggrieved by Emons and they weren’t political at all. In my opinion, Jane Emons is a cruel and sadistic. The CT Legislature did right by not reappointed her,” said Whitnum referring to the fact that Jane Emons was not reconfirmed as a judge this past legislative session – a first in Connecticut history. This was primarily due to more than 100 complaints by litigants aggrieved by Emons.

“In the way Emons kept me from my infirmed husband, Emons has unethically kept parents from their own children and other bizarre rulings. In my divorce case, Emons denied conciliation with my husband on July 16, 2012 which was my right, I was railroaded into divorce without a private conversation with my husband, awarded not even a dime despite being married to a man worth $5 million,” said Whitnum.

Not satisfied Emons then allegedly set out to frame Whitnum for incarceration.

“When do I get justice for what Emons did to me and my husband? How can I get back these seven years of hell – plunged into full-time legalities: fighting to see my husband, fighting to not be railroaded into divorce, fighting to not be railroaded into jail, fighting for justice?” asks Whitnum. “Why other judges followed Emon’s lead is the biggest mystery in all of this. It is symptomatic of a court system with no rules governing judicial behavior.”

Whitnum claims she was happily married when she and her husband notice his $5 million portfolio had been fraudulently conveyed into a trust controlled by his adult children. “My already infirmed husband had what appeared to be a nervous breakdown, he went to get his artwork and disappeared; I was never able to speak with him in private again. The judges in the State of Connecticut empowered and enabled the self-interested. The judges before and after the railroaded divorce unlawfully kept us part until his death on October 16, 2016.”

In divorce court Whitnum was denied over-and-over, Requests for Production and Capias of the Wells Fargo transfer documents to prove the fraudulent conveyance of her husband’s portfolio. “By denying due process the Judges took away the only bargaining chip I had to negotiate with my husband’s adult children to get my infirmed husband home,” said Whitnum who was railroaded into divorce and awarded not even a dime.

The judges who unlawfully denied due process, allegedly following Emons lead were: Judge Emons, Judge Schofield, Judge Richards, Judge Heller and Judge Munro. Even four Motions for Telephone conversation were denied by judges: Emons, Mottolese and Adams. Whitnum has always maintained the judges were going by circulating dossier on Whitnum that seemed to follow her to every courtroom.

“It takes a lot of effort to compile a file to make sure the other judges know what a horrible person you are - long before you walk into the court room. And I’m sure the tales grew taller down the line,” said Whitnum who maintains that four judges let slip the existence of the file. “I just wish a brave member of the judiciary, at Emons’ hearing or directly to the Bar Association, would come forward and admit that they received the circulated file.”

Whitnum claims criminal court, was as crooked as divorce court. Judges Hernandez and Wenzel enabled John Whalen to use the court system to torture allowing Whalen to drag Whitnum into criminal court for 41 court appearances. In criminal court, in violation of her right to due process, Whitnum was denied the ability to subpoena her phone records four times, by three judges: Judge Hernandez, Judge Arnold and Judge Wenzel. Whitnum finally got her true phone records with a federal subpoena.

“The criminal court judges literally allowed the prosecutor who allegedly framed me, to prosecute me. I could prove Whalen’s report, Statewide Prosecution Bureau report #2013-0213, differed than my true phone records, but no judge would listen.”

Despite the truth presented and spelled out clearly in six Motions to Dismiss, the Norwalk Court judges would not hear even one motion to dismiss. Whitnum asks, “So how are innocent people supposed to get out from under?”

Whitnum testified before the legislature on that matter but it was ignored. The transcript if viewable at:
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2017/ju...

Whitnum fared no better at the federal level. At the 20th Norwalk criminal court appearance, Whitnum filed an injunction in federal court for the violation of her 6th Amendment Constitutional right to speedy trial. Whitnum called upon Federal Judge Stefan Underhill at the time, to intervene and order Whalen, a named party in case 3:15-CV-0959, to bring to trial or drop the charges.

“Underhill was useless, that injunction request remains unanswered to this day,” said Whitnum. “Underhill’s inaction allowed named defendant John Whalen to continue his torture by dragging me into criminal court for another 21 court appearances for a total of 41 appearances.”

“I paced for 17 months every night trying to get to my infirmed husband, not knowing if he was drugged, strapped down, grieving for me - no contact was allowed, not even a phone call. At the end of that stretch I found myself pacing for another 2 ½ years believing I was being railroaded into jail in the way I was railroaded into divorce. It was torture,” said Whitnum. Whitnum claims it is a testament to Emon’s power that so many people allegedly acquiescing to her will. Even the media echoed Emons claims that she is the victim.

Whitnum says Emons’ powerful friends in the legislature and media have embarked on a mission to rewrite the history of Emons’ dismissal. Joette Katz in the Connecticut Law Tribune and Senators Kissel and Looney in testimony all publicly claimed, or alleged, Emon’s detractors are anti-Semitic with no proof to support the allegation.

“It is a testament to Emon’s manipulative power. The other judges allegedly did her bidding, Whalen allegedly did her bidding, and now she miraculously gets the media to do her bidding,” said Whitnum who claims to paint Emons as the victim of her detractors is outrageous.

“The recent lies in defense of Emons are easily provable,” said Whitnum who points out that 50 of the more than 150 complaints against Emons are public record and there is not an anti-Semitic word in the bunch. Also another 100 private citizens wrote to their legislators directly and Rep. Minnie Gonzales, at the 2-16-2018 reconfirmation hearing stated that she received a mountain of complaints about Emons and none mentioned “your religion or culture.”

To which Whitnum states, “End of story. Emons was not reappointed because she was unfit. Emons’ claim during the 2-16-2018 hearing that she is the victim of antisemitism is nonsense that is not supported by fact.”

Whitnum points out that several members of the biased Connecticut media have also jumped on the bandwagon and claimed Emons is the victim of her detractors who are motivated by anti-Semitism. They include Mark Pazniokas, of the Connecticut Mirror, Kevin Rennie of the Hartford Courant, the editorial boards a The Day and the Connecticut Law Tribune.

“Why don’t these reporters and news directors verify the facts before they print?” Asks Whitnum who cautions that some of Emons’ detractors, mainly parents aggrieved, are toying with filing a class action lawsuit against Rennie, Pazniokas, Kissel and Looney for their false public characterization of Emon’s detractors.

“It is amazing to me how many people have done Emons’ bidding, state employees, judges, legislators, and news organizations,” said Whitnum. “All open themselves up for liability to do the bidding of this woman. She is either a master manipulator or it is symptomatic of wide-spread corruption, or both.”

Since being turned away from the Connecticut judiciary, Emons has been working as an attorney with the law firm of Cohen and Wolf.

Whitnum says that if the three panel committee she is requesting on July 30, 2018 finds Emons and Whalen guilty of criminal wrongdoing, Whitnum will seek to have Emons disbarred and John Whalen fired.

“I think of how my life would be if Emons had not violated my right under 46b-53 on July 16, 2012 and other actions. My husband and I were very pleased with each other. We were retired; enjoying lovely meals, gardening, travelling, caring for animals, and watching old movies. I was working on a PhD and settling in for a quiet, lovely retirement, instead we discovered his portfolio was fraudulently conveyed, and I was suddenly plunged into seven years of hell of full-time legalities,” said Whitnum. “You seek justice from the courts instead you get prejudiced judges who violate general statutes to enable the self-interested. My husband died, warehoused, without the comfort of his wife, all contact disallowed.”

Whitnum blames Emons.

“This was a family problem which should have been resolved in family. A wise judge on July 16, 2012 would have seen the undue influence and called a conference for all players. Instead I got Jane Emons who allegedly had her own agenda,” said Whitnum. “My husband was never made to appear, kept in the dark up for 13 months until right before trial. We were denied all contact – even phone call. ”

“My husband had a right to younger wife, a right to a new chapter, a right not to be warehoused until his death, a right to be left in peace, a right to skip a generation and leave his wealth to his grandchildren. All of this was taken from him. I blame Jane Emons, and our Connecticut Judicial system with no enforcement against judges who deny due process or violate the law.”

In deposition, I asked my husband, “if these third parties had not taken such an interest in our marriage do you think we would still be married,” Baker response was ‘we would have managed.’ That is all I needed to hear,” said Whitnum. “The Judges in the State of Connecticut destroyed my marriage in their unlawfulness.”

Between June 18, 2012 and his death on October 16, 2016, 4 1/2 years, Whitnum was denied all contact with Baker despite asking for judicial intervention over-and-over again. “It is a travesty that breaks my heart every time I think about it and will for the remainder of my life. When do I get justice?”

The hearing will be on July 30 at 9:30 to choose the appointment of the three judge panel. A judge has not yet been assigned this matter.

Whitnum’s 15 steps to clean up the Connecticut judiciary have been painstakingly garnered the hard way “unfortunate no one can clean up the system like someone aggrieved,” said Whitnum. “We need a rolling impeachment option in this state,” said Whitnum which is Lee bill #1- on her website. Firing bad judges is Whitnum’s top priority as governor.

###