The Perjury, The Court, and The Silenced Speech | The Lie That Killed A Business

Court Location: Second Judicial District Court, Weber County, Ogden, Utah.

PART I: THE FOUNDATION OF PROVABLE FRAUD

This document serves as an Independent Review of Judicial and Procedural Failures, based solely on the public record and documented evidence. The final Protective Order rests on findings that were factually contradicted by objective evidence and distorted by the Petitioner's attorney, resulting in a severe violation of Mr. Thompson's constitutional rights.

1. The "Five Houses Down" Perjury: A Breach of Professional Duty

The Judge's critical finding against Mr. Thompson's credibility—the fulcrum upon which the case turned—rested on a sworn allegation of stalking presented by the Petitioner's attorney, Ron W. Haycock, Jr., of the Strong & Hanni Law Firm. By presenting this provably false claim (the "five houses down" lie), Ron W. Haycock, Jr., actively crossed the line from representation to professional misconduct.

• Objective GPS Data: Mr. Thompson has unrefuted GPS records proving he remained at his own residence during the exact time of the alleged stalking.

• Courtroom Defamation Proof (Eyewitness Testimony): Immediately following the hearing, the Petitioner’s father verbally assaulted Mr. Thompson in the courtroom, calling him a "piece of shit." This incident, recounted by Mr. Thompson and not recorded in the official transcript, proves the Petitioner was actively smearing him outside the court record.

• Intentional Deception: The "five houses down" comment was a private ruse, twisted into a false stalking allegation.

2. Censorship and the Attack on Creative Expression

Ron W. Haycock, Jr., successfully framed Mr. Thompson's artistic work and metaphorical language as physical threats, resulting in a judicial order that censored his speech.

• Weaponizing Metaphor: The attorney convinced the court to treat common metaphorical expressions (like the phrase "You have blood on your hands," an accusation of culpability) as literal threats of violence, which the Judge failed to distinguish.

• Exaggerated Threat (The Song): The actual lyric, "The truth is like a bullet" (singular), a metaphor for devastating disclosure, was wildly exaggerated by the Petitioner's attorney to imply a threat of mass violence, a claim the court accepted without demanding proof.

PART II: THE COURT'S MORAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FAILURE

The core of the grievance is that the court's actions were an active failure of its core duty to filter emotion and determine truth based on evidence.

3. Denial of Due Process and Institutional Endorsement of Fraud

Despite having foreknowledge of the flawed case, the District Judge failed to cure the error and actively restricted the defense, making the system itself complicit in the fraud.

• Judicial Foreknowledge: The Judge affirmed he listened to the entire prior Commissioner's hearing, placing him on explicit notice that the original Petition was built on weak claims and that Mr. Thompson's evidence had been ignored.

• Denial of the Agreed-Upon Evidentiary Hearing: Mr. Thompson requested, and the Judge explicitly agreed to grant, a full evidentiary hearing (a half-day commitment) before making any final finding. The resulting, severe time restriction was a calculated tactical maneuver that forced Mr. Thompson to lose precious minutes frantically attempting to re-prioritize and locate evidence, guaranteeing his defense would be disoriented and incomplete before the final, premature ruling was made.

• Emboldening the Liar: By ruling in favor of the fabricated narrative and suppressing contradictory evidence, the court used the full power of the State to grant legal weight to a known lie, which serves to embolden the dishonest party and encourage future perjury.

4. Procedural Weaponization and Hostage Motion

Mr. Thompson's attempt to obtain post-judgment relief was met with direct obstruction, demonstrating collusion to block the path to the Appellate Court.

• Ex Parte Communication: Undermining Judicial Integrity: An email from Ron W. Haycock, Jr., sent directly to Judge Hansen’s chambers team instructed the court staff: "please to do not enter the order." This documented violation proves the attorney attempted to use secret contact to block a judicial order.

• The Coordinated Attack: The Judge's chambers staff member (Shawnie Brocious) then used a reply-email to improperly flag the technical defect ("bilingual Notice"). This specific flaw was immediately exploited by opposing counsel.

• Clerk's Unlawful Rejection: Mr. Thompson's vital Rule 60(b) Motion was unlawfully rejected by the Commissioner's clerk hours later, based on the exact technicality introduced by the District Judge's chambers staff. This confirms the rejection was a coordinated act of procedural sabotage involving multiple court personnel.

• Hostage Motion: By refusing to properly process the motion, the system is holding it hostage, preventing Mr. Thompson from obtaining a final, appealable order.

THE DEVASTATING RESULT: A PRINCIPLED STAND AGAINST CORRUPTION

The final court order imposed an overexpanded, ill-defined "all weapons" ban on Mr. Thompson, directly targeting and destroying his legitimate business, Spartan Tactical (Titan LLC).

The Ultimate Irony of Justice (The Principled Stance):

Mr. Thompson maintains a principled stance: he is morally refusing to hire an attorney, insisting that the undeniable facts and truth of the case should be sufficient to prevail in an American court of law. He is demanding that the courts uphold the law impartially, not just for those who can afford legal defense. He is now forced to spend all his time and energy learning complex procedural law just to teach the courts and opposing counsel the rules they violated, resulting in complete economic and professional paralysis.