Continued from Bill Windsor Sworn Affidavit – Part 2
- Canon 1 of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct: A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY: An independent and honorable judiciary is indispensable to justice in our society. A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining, and enforcing high standards of conduct, and shall personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved. The provisions of this Code should be construed and applied to further that objective.
- The Commentary says: “Deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges. The integrity and independence of judges depend in turn upon their acting without fear or favor. Although judges should be independent, they must comply with the law, including the provisions of this Code. Public confidence in the impartiality of the judiciary is maintained by the adherence of each judge to this responsibility. Conversely, violation of this Code diminishes public confidence in the judiciary and thereby does injury to the system of government under law.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton is not honorable. He maintains the lowest possible standards. He does not comply with the law or the Code of Judicial Conduct. My only confidence is that Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton should be removed as a judge and disbarred. He is a menace to the citizens of the State of Florida.
- Canon 2 A JUDGE SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL OF THE JUDGE’S ACTIVITIES: A. A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
- The Commentary on Canon 2A says: “Irresponsible or improper conduct by judges erodes public confidence in the judiciary. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on the judge’s conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. Examples are the restrictions on judicial speech imposed by Sections 3B(9) and (10) that are indispensable to the maintenance of the integrity, impartiality, and independence of the judiciary. The prohibition against behaving with impropriety or the appearance of impropriety applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the proscription is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances that a reasonable inquiry would disclose, a perception that the judge’s ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and competence is impaired.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton gets an “F” on complying with the law and acting in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. ANY reasonable mind, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances that a reasonable inquiry would disclose, would find that Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton’s ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and competence is impaired. He has no integrity. He is hopelessly biased against me, and he may be absolutely incompetent to serve as a judge. He may be mentally ill.
- Canon 3 – A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY: (4) A judge shall be patient, dignified, and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers, and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and shall require similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge’s direction and control. (5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic status, and shall not permit staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so. This section does not preclude the consideration of race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, or other similar factors when they are issues in the proceeding. (8) A judge shall dispose of all judicial matters promptly, efficiently, and fairly.
- Administrative Responsibilities: (1) A judge shall diligently discharge the judge’s administrative responsibilities without bias or prejudice and maintain professional competence in judicial administration, and should cooperate with other judges and court officials in the administration of court business. (2) A judge shall require staff, court officials, and others subject to the judge’s direction and control to observe the standards of fidelity and diligence that apply to the judge and to refrain from manifesting bias or prejudice in the performance of their official duties.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton and his Judicial Assistant, Keitra Davis, are both biased liars.
- Disqualification: (1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where: (a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party’s lawyer, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton’s impartiality has been proven, not just “reasonably questioned.” Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton must disqualify himself.
- Commentary to 3B(5): A judge must perform judicial duties impartially and fairly. A judge who manifests bias on any basis in a proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary into disrepute. Facial expression and body language, in addition to oral communication, can give to parties or lawyers in the proceeding, jurors, the media and others an appearance of judicial bias. A judge must be alert to avoid behavior that may be perceived as prejudicial. Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton is either so mentally ill or so self-righteous that he does and says improper things regularly expecting no repercussions.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton is not impartial, and he has done nothing fairly in regard to me and my case. By manifesting his bias in a variety of ways, he has impaired the fairness of the proceeding and has brought the judiciary into disrepute. Facial expression and body language at the 4/5/2021 hearing, in addition to oral communication, gave me and the lawyers in the proceeding the appearance of judicial bias. The same goes for other hearings.
- Commentary to 3E(1): Under this rule, a judge is disqualified whenever the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, regardless of whether any of the specific rules in Section 3E(1) apply.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton is DISQUALIFIED.
- At the hearing on 4/5/2021, Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton established his bias against me as a senior citizen and a person with a disability:
- WINDSOR: “Sorry, Your Honor. I do suffer from a cognitive decline that makes it impossible for me to remember if I just took my pills.
- THE COURT: “Well, sir, since you’ve raised that, if you suffer from that cognitive decline so that you can — as you said you can’t remember — you have no short-term memory, how is it that you can represent yourself if you can’t remember whether you took your pills a few minutes ago?” [APPENDIX 82 – Transcript – P. 21: 4-12.]
- All I want is to have someone fair and impartial with an open mind to listen to the facts and review as much of the evidence as is needed to prove each of my claims. It is established that Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton doesn’t care about the facts and doesn’t want to apply the law.
- The United States Constitution allegedly guarantees an unbiased judge who will always provide litigants with full protection of ALL RIGHTS. Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton is biased against me. Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton has demonstrated this.
- My motions, affidavits, certificates of good faith, and memorandum of authorities meet the requirements for a motion to disqualify.
- This Affidavit of Prejudice states the facts and the reasons for the belief that bias and prejudice exist. The reasons for the belief are material and stated with particularity.
- On 1/5/2023, a deposition was held with Florida Highway Patrol Trooper Gregory S. Linzmayer. I believe Trooper Gregory S. Linzmayer has committed crimes relative to this case. When I began to cross-examine him, I asked if he had an attorney. He didn’t. He refused to answer my questions. He was supposed to resume his deposition when he had legal counsel, but he never did.
- On 2/10/2023, a hearing was held on my Motion for Contempt against Trooper Gregory S. Linzmayer. It was denied. Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton said I THREATENED the Trooper and told a large group “I don’t believe for a second what you say.” These are clear violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
- On 2/21/2023, there were supposed to be two hearings in this case. I happened to notice a standard efiling notice hit my in-box. I opened it, and I was surprised to see the hearings canceled. I was SHOCKED to see that Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton entered an order allegedly revoking my right to self-representation. [EXHIBIT A.] This had never been discussed, and there was no notice or opportunity to be heard. The judge had no jurisdiction to do what he did. It is a void order. The cases cited as “authority” by Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton both indicate it’s a denial of due process to do what he did without notice and an opportunity to be heard. So he takes an action that is a violation of my Constitutional rights, and he does it in an order citing cases that establish he can’t do what he had just done.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton knows the DEFENDANTS are liable, so he needs to dismiss my case before my Motion for Partial Summary Judgment can be heard. He knows I have been unable to obtain an attorney. By requiring me to have an attorney, he knows I will not be able to comply with his order and will lose.
- The accident has given me five herniated discs in my neck, four in my back, and an abdominal injury, Diastasis Recti. I have lost all sense of balance. I have fallen dozens of times. When I fall, I can’t get up. I can no longer walk unaided. I am always in pain unless seated in a special chair. I have lost the use of my left hand, and I have gone from a two-finger typist to a one-finger typist. I am always in pain. I live alone in a trailer, and I have no help. I am denied medical care (Medicare) because the case is still pending. I am bankrupt. Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton knows all of this, and it seems he is ready for me to die injured and bankrupt.
- My case will be dismissed because I can’t obtain an attorney. Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton is well aware of this. This is why he did what he did on 2/21/2023.
- Judge Jeffrey L. Ashton could be mentally ill. Or he is simply a corrupt narcissist. Or he has been bribed to do whatever it takes. One thing’s for sure, he has committed a significant number of violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct. He needs to be removed and disbarred.
FURTHER SAITH AFFIANT NOT.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this 24th day of February, 2023,
William M. Windsor
Pursuant to Florida Statute 92.525, under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing document and that all facts in it are true.
This 24th day of February, 2023,
William M. Windsor
My name is William Michael Windsor. This is my story, and I’m stickin’ to it. Copyright 2013, William Michael Windsor. See http://LawlessAmerica.com, http://facebook.com/billwindsor1, and http://youtube.com/lawlessamerica.