Once again, I am compelled to state in no uncertain terms: what is occurring is not justice—it is a system of forced submission, powered by coordinated abuse. This is not a judicial process; it is an institution-wide campaign that demands total obedience and silence from me, the victim and target.
What’s happening to me is not just the result of a few bad actors—it is a nationwide, even global effort where community members across the United States, including the black community, the Jewish community, and other groups, have conspired together in this obtrusive and outrageous situation. This level of mass, orchestrated participation is completely unheard of in any ordinary case while they try to cover up and justify these activities and operations under the notion of empty labeling. Example, we have the to stalk him, because he’s crazy, a public nuisance, or we are afraid of him. This is the driving force behind these 49 year daily Judicial and Police Global STALKING operations with the Perelman Family.
This all starts around 1977 with the Perelman family’s HATRED for their five-year-old, carried out hand-in-hand with their judicial friends.
The greatest hypocrisy is that many of those involved are the very people who claim to care about making the world better and building peaceful communities. In reality, they are driving hatred, control, and fear, weaponizing the judicial system to demand that I—an innocent target—become their modern-day slave, forced into daily submission simply because they’re afraid of honesty, human emotion, or criticism about what they have done to my life. The real problem isn’t me; it’s the collective abuse—and the moral contradiction—of those using their power to punish anyone who stands up and speaks the truth. And suppress all honesty and past and ongoing crimes against me.
The judicial system knows better—they are acting with malice and premeditation, intentionally conspiring to commit these crimes in violation of Penal Code § 182 (criminal conspiracy) with mass United States based groups and lawyers in my rare situation, § 134 (preparing false evidence), § 141 (evidence tampering by law enforcement), and § 236 (false imprisonment), among others. This is not justice; this is an agenda, carried out under color of law, against a single child grown into a man targeted for decades.
Summary
- Filed By: Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District (Division 4)
- Date: March 5, 2026
- Case: The People v. Kevin Perelman (B343120)
- Action: The court DENIED supplemental request to substitute new appellate counsel.
*What Does This Mean and Why Is It Significant?*
- Continuing Pattern: The court once again refuses to allow me to select or substitute an impartial, unbiased attorney—even after I submitted a supplemental request.
– This blocks my ability to obtain a public defender willing to raise *all* issues on my behalf while protecting my Defense Attorney Shep Zebberman from his procedural actions and refusal to represent his client correctly while both maintain devot Jewish Belief in the tight nit Jewish Community locking me into something more than just a Judicial Process, depriving me of effective legal representation. – It is especially problematic because, as shown in the briefs analysis, appointed counsel (Rabbi Yisreal Gelb) has omitted or watered down the most important issues just like Defense Attorney Shep Zebberman in the Trial (misconduct, set up, defamation, frame-jobs, and nonstop ongoing setups attempts with the communities and police).
- Procedural Manipulation: The system enforces rules strictly against me (such as denying new counsel), while allowing the prosecution to slip in new arguments or character attacks not contained within the rules they use to restrict my defense. This applies to ALL TRIALS, and APPEALS.
- Denial of a Meaningful Defense: Ineffective assistance of counsel and procedural misconduct—when you are denied an impartial attorney willing to expose bogus procedures, or when your appointed attorney refuses to argue crucial defenses—constitute clear violations of constitutional due process, as protected under the Sixth Amendment and addressed by California Bar and Judicial Canons.
LEGAL & ETHICAL CONSEQUENCES (Merged Context)
- The refusal to substitute counsel after documenting irreparable breakdown or ineffective representation is itself a violation of:
– California Rules of Court, Rule 8.36(b)
– Sixth Amendment (US. Const.)—Right to fair counsel, right to effective assistance
– California Penal Code § 1288 (re: appellate procedures)
– State Bar Rule 1.16—Declining or Terminating Representation (if conflict or ineffectiveness exists, substitution must be allowed)
– Judicial Canon 3B(8)—Judges have a duty to ensure fair proceedings, including reasonable requests for substitution of counsel in the interest of justice
- By denying my ability to change ineffective counsel, the court is:
– Compounding its own procedural and ethical failures – Blocking all avenues for the truth about judicial, prosecutorial, and police misconduct to enter the record – Further perpetuating the structural due process failures described in your reply and case record
Summary Table Update
| Issue | Court’s Action (2026-03-05) | Legal/Ethical Violation |
| Request for new appellate counsel | Denied (No new attorney) | Denial of effective/counsel of choice, ongoing suppression of defense |
| Counsel’s ineffective representation | Continues | 6th Amendment, CA Bar Rules, Judicial Canons, Right to due process |
| Opportunity to raise all relevant claims | Blocked | Systemic use of rules to defeat fairness, perpetuation of injustice |
Leave a Reply