On July 10, I drove back to Greensboro in yet another storm just to file motions that should have taken minutes to upload electronically—if I had been granted CM/ECF access. Instead, it took three hours round trip. I filed amended complaints in both of my federal cases. In the § 1983 case, I submitted a 165-page amended complaint to address the Rule 12(b) motions filed by Defendants and added two new parties—Judge Turrentine and Anna De Santis—based on newly triggered violations and confirmed evidence. I had to add 12 additional constitutional claims stemming from the court’s refusal to rule on my Rule 59(e) motion and motion to compel. It’s absurd that this level of documentation is required just to survive procedural sabotage, but this is the standard they’ve imposed on me.
I also amended my Fair Housing complaint to remove the Title II ADA claim in order to avoid duplication, and I filed a motion to extend the summons deadline after the Durham County Sheriff’s Office finally confirmed Anna has been actively evading service. That motion should have been granted immediately—it’s a standard filing supported by proof. But, as usual, I’ve heard nothing back.
Alongside those complaints, I filed two critical notices in the § 1983 case. The first—a Notice of Procedural Misconduct—called out blatant misrepresentations of law by the Attorney General’s office, including a citation to a fabricated rule (“Rule 16.06”) and a broken hyperlink being used to justify the concealment of judge identities. I also documented the retaliatory timeline of Yopp’s sanctions motion, which was filed just five days after I served him, and the use of that tainted July 1 dismissal order in his federal motion—despite it being unsigned and legally void. I made clear that omitting this context to the Court is not harmless; it is a violation of professional ethics.
The second filing—my Notice of Ongoing Harm—was deeply personal. I laid out in human terms what this process has done to me: the isolation, financial strain, procedural trauma, and psychological harm. I connected the dots from childhood abuse, to system betrayal, to what’s happening now—a repeating pattern of disbelief, dismissal, and silence from those in power. I reminded the Court that I am not a case number—I’m a human being. And I deserve to be treated as such. These weren’t just legal filings. They were declarations of reality. If this Court refuses to act, it will not be because I didn’t document what’s happening. It will be because it chose to ignore it.