Systemic Denial of Self-Defense
An Expanded Personal and Legal Certainty
By Experience
Author: Kevin Perelman
Date: 8/26/2025
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Judicial Power—and Judicial Refusal
3. Conflict of Interest Statement: Debbie Wollman, Court Reporter
4. Judicial Inaction and Police/Community Complicity
5. Black-and-White (All-or-Nothing) Thinking: Judicial, Societal, and Historical
6. Evidence Suppression & The Ritual of Denial
7. How the System is Engineered: Police, Psychology, and Destroying the Target
8. Inside Jail: The Orchestration Deepens and Profits Rise
9. Internal Affairs, Prosecutors, and the System’s Lock
10. News, “Rational” Voices, and Society
11. Society, Black-and-White Thinking, and History
12. Our Constitution and Why We Migrated
13. Final Conclusion: Attacks Ongoing, Silence Enforced
1. Introduction
In America’s legal system—especially in California—self-defense is supposed to be a shield for the innocent, a bedrock right to protect oneself against violence and abuse. Yet for victims of coordinated harassment, gang stalking, and community-based targeting, the self-defense argument is categorically denied by design—no matter how grave, relentless, or orchestrated violence becomes. This is not a loophole. It is a deliberate design flaw engineered to ensure that victims have no meaningful remedy, no matter how much they are hunted, provoked, or destroyed. Time and again, the courts will refuse to let you use “self-defense” as a shield for the truth and your salvation. This is the core flaw—and the weapon—of the entire judicial, institutional terror system.
2. Judicial Power—and Judicial Refusal
You expect the courtroom to be the last hope for truth and justice. But for victims of community targeting, coordinated harassment, and conspiring stalking groups, the courtroom is where the final act of erasure plays out.
Self-defense—historically a fundamental legal right—is methodically neutralized before you ever reach a jury. No matter how overwhelming your evidence, no matter how many years of provocation you can show, the judge possesses—and refuses to use—the absolute power to dismiss your case outright “in the interest of justice” under California Penal Code § 1385.
> “The judge or magistrate may, either of his or her own motion or upon the application of the prosecuting, or defense attorney, and in furtherance of justice, order an action to be dismissed.” (Penal Code § 1385)
California Penal Code § 1385: Dismissal In Furtherance of Justice
- (a) The judge or magistrate may, either of their own motion or upon the application of the prosecuting attorney, and in furtherance of justice, order an action to be dismissed. The reasons for the dismissal must be set forth in an order entered upon the minutes.
- (b) This section does not authorize a judge to strike any prior conviction of a serious felony for purposes of sentencing in a matter governed by the Three Strikes Law except as provided in Section 1385.1.
- (c) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, a judge shall not dismiss any enhancement or allegation unless they set forth, on the record, the reasons for dismissing the enhancement or allegation.
(2) In exercising its discretion in accordance with subdivision (a), the court shall consider and afford great weight to evidence offered by the defendant to prove that any of the mitigating circumstances in subparagraphs (A) to (I), inclusive, are present. Proof of the presence of one or more of these circumstances weighs greatly in favor of dismissing the enhancement, unless the court finds that dismissal would endanger public safety. (A) [Specific mitigating circumstances as listed in the statute—such as the offense not involving violence, lack of prior convictions youth, etc.]
- (d) Subdivision (a) does not authorize the dismissal of any provision of law that imposes a mandatory minimum sentence.
- (e) Nothing in this section precludes dismissal based on judicial findings related to unconstitutional statutes, insufficient evidence, or defects in the complaint.
How It Works
- The law lets a judge dismiss criminal charges or enhancements if “in the furtherance of justice.”
- The prosecutor or judge can request it; the defense can also bring it up.
- Dismissal reasons must be written in the record.
- Judges must weigh mitigating factors, especially when enhancements are involved.
- Penal Code § 1385 gives judges power to prevent injustice arising from coordinated targeting or abuse.
3. Conflict of Interest Statement: Debbie Wollman, Court Reporter
Background
- Debbie Wollman is a court reporter who owns the property adjacent to my wall but has never lived there in over 20 years.
Debbie Wollman’s Actions
- Spread false claims in my neighborhood and courthouse community that I have a mental illness schizophrenia.
- Aggressively confronted me and demanded I “admit” to mental illness without any basis.
- Coerced and sought false confessions regarding my mental health, both directly and by influencing others.
- On video, has stated I am not allowed at the courthouse during my 2017 illegal arrests, showing active involvement in efforts to alienate and intimidate me from accessing the legal system.
- Directly involved in my legal cases, using her professional role to spread misinformation and manipulate proceedings.
- Influenced judicial staff, clerks, and even the presiding judge, and the rest of the Van Nuys Court House, Employees, creating bias and undermining my right to a fair process.
The Judge’s Knowledge and Involvement
- The presiding judge is aware of Wollman’s actions and ongoing campaign to discredit me.
- The judge knows Wollman, as a court employee and neighbor, manipulates court staff and spreads rumors.
- Despite clear conflict of interest and evidence, the court has not acted to address her behavior in the courthouse, all the neighbors, and all the witnesses in the cases.
Conflict of Interest
- Serious conflict exists when a courthouse employee—specifically Ms. Wollman—owns property next to mine, harbors documented animosity and is involved in my legal cases while allowed undue influence in court.
- Her dual status creates both actual and apparent bias, tainting the impartiality required by law.
Summary of Issues
Debbie Wollman’s behavior, including spreading false accusations, manipulating staff, coercing false confessions, and repeated confrontations—combined with her influence over the judge and staff, constitutes a continuous and severe conflict of interest. Her unique position as court reporter at Van Nuys Courthouse and neighbor directly undermines the integrity and fairness of these proceedings.
4. Judicial Inaction and Police/Community Complicity
Judges have consistently refused to act despite having the power and responsibility to do so. Overwhelming evidence of police and witness misconduct has not changed outcomes in my case. The involvement of police officers and detectives—including Lead Officer Charles Sean Dinse, Officer Jensen (both LAPD), Detectives Ruiz, Angela Stewart, Shapiro, and Sgt. Cooper (West Hills PD) with Internal Affairs—went beyond investigation; these individuals orchestrated campaigns of manipulation, community mobbing, entrapment targeting me. Both Dinse and the city of Los Angeles were named in a federal lawsuit (the Rex Schillenberger case) for inciting vigilante mobs using Facebook, the very methods approved by Chief Michael Moore and later deployed against me. Despite these federal findings, the judges in my case never issued the necessary Pitchess Motions for Charles Sean Dinse with a track record and history of this in which he is known for, never intervened, and never held the involved officers accountable. These actions are not isolated errors but represent official policy and practice, overseen by Chief Michael Moore, to support unlawful police and vigilante programs aimed at eradicating selected individuals.
5. Black-and-White (All-or-Nothing) Thinking: Judicial, Societal, and Historical
Judges and legal actors frequently enforce a binary perspective: unless you are facing immediate, physical danger, you are viewed as a criminal rather than a victim. This rigid mentality spreads throughout the public, neighborhood groups, private security personnel, online mobs, the media, and so-called “rational” commentators. Using this leverage to break the law to get what they want. Once someone has been branded “the problem,” all efforts at self-defense or self-preservation are weaponized against them. Mainstream news amplifies these official narratives, erasing nuance and depth, while society repeatedly cycles through provocation, silencing, escalation, and, ultimately, permanent exclusion—mirroring some of the darkest chapters of state oppression in history in our present.
6. Evidence Suppression & The Ritual of Denial
Judges wield broad discretion to exclude crucial context, history, and supporting evidence for self-defense. Proof of long-term harassment, or evidence of orchestrated provocation, is often dismissed as “irrelevant.” Efforts to present a self-defense claim are blocked, whether by sustained objections or by reframing the victim’s responses as supposed “instability.”
7. How the System is Engineered: Police, Psychology, and Destroying the Target
Community websites, private security companies, and neighborhood watch groups work hand-in-hand with police and legal authorities to nullify any claim of self-defense. Over a period of 48 years, my own targeting only became more institutional and systematic. Officers like Dinse, Jensen, Ruiz, Angela Stewart, Shapiro, and Cooper, and many many other authoritative figures in and out of the Police—as well as concerted mass groups—actively manipulated and entrapped me to create a damaging public and legal perception of “craziness.” Facebook mobbing and the broad harassment seen in the Schillenberger case marked the escalation of community targeting under Chief Michael Moore’s supervision, while judges remained passive, never issuing required Pitchess Motions, despite full knowledge of what was occurring. Alongside police, the mental health industry further discredits survivors by labeling their natural responses as symptoms of mental illness, thereby justifying further exclusion. Threats from officers like Toro—who made it clear that ordinary expression could be criminalized—demonstrate that the system’s priority is to force silence, not provide justice.
8. Inside Jail: The Orchestration Deepens and Profits Rise
Inside jail, law enforcement and staff often orchestrate, direct, condone, or simply overlook targeted violence and psychological abuse. Inmates can be recruited, paid, or manipulated to attack targets; staff create situations designed to provoke conflict and escalate violence. Every act of self-defense within the jail context becomes another criminal charge or excuse to place someone in solitary isolation or get “add charges” to push them further down the path of destruction. Psychological torture—including chronic sleep deprivation, constant surveillance, persistent rumors, and forms of slow, insidious torment—turn the act of survival itself into a trauma. And while this is happening, Los Angeles County continues to profit—receiving approximately $133,000 per year for each inmate. Profit may be the financial motive, but for most, the true goal appears to be elimination.
9. Internal Affairs, Prosecutors, and the System’s Lock
Internal Affairs rarely, if ever, investigates or disciplines those responsible for orchestrated setups. Complaints submitted to oversight agencies are regularly ignored or, worse, used as justification for escalating the abuse. Prosecutors and police witnesses—including Dinse, Jensen, and Cooper—remain intent on convicting the target regardless of evidence, relying on pressured or even perjured testimony, with judges who are aware of the witness perjury, and steadfastly suppress any legitimate defense.
10. News, “Rational” Voices, and Society
Mainstream news and influential voices frequently parrot the denials made by police and the courts regarding self-defense. The public, whether shamed or simply intimidated, tends to rationalize state violence as necessary or just. This normalizes the destruction of those targeted by the system and reinforces a culture of silence and complicity. Weakening our government as we know it to become what we’ve always fought against to create a nation of strength and Integrity and freedom.
11. Society, Black-and-White Thinking, and History
Within society at large, the media and the public continuously reinforce narratives of guilt and suppress nuanced discussion. The result is a collective movement toward the destruction or exclusion of the target and our own country changing the people’s thought process into angry mobs who no longer care about what is right or wrong. The repeating cycle—provocation, suppression, escalation—mirrors history’s worst methods for marginalizing and erasing inconvenient or silenced individuals.
12. Our Constitution and Why We Migrated
The current system stands in direct opposition to the ideals that inspired so many immigrants, including my own family, to come to the United States: constitutional freedoms, protection from government overreach, due process, and the right to self-defense. Today, these rights are quickly eroding for those who challenge authority or simply strive to survive state-sanctioned persecution.
13. Final Conclusion: Attacks Ongoing, Silence Enforced
The coordinated and systemic attacks against me persist, compounding the effects of a lifetime of damage and trauma. The architects of this process, including police, mental health workers, prosecutors, judges, vigilante groups, profiteers, and the silent public—seek only to guarantee the continued enforcement of silence and abuse. Their tools include judicial suppression, media manipulation, psychological gaslighting, orchestrated mobbing, jailhouse violence, and relentless bureaucratic denial. Their mission is clear: to enforce silence around targets like myself. Only by breaking this manufactured silence and restoring our most basic constitutional rights—especially the right to self-defense—Even the first amendment freedom of speech—can justice, dignity, and national integrity truly be achieved.
