PRESS RELEASE: Fetzer v. Pozner in the United States Supreme Court: Petition for Rehearing Filed (1 November 2022)

Ron Avery

Why is the Fetzer v. Pozner case in the Supreme Court of the U.S. important to you?

[Editor’s note: As it happens, I have filed a Petition for Rehearing on the Court’s Denial of my Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, which is supported by new legal arguments and new factual evidence. Click here to download the Petition for Rehearing. Click here for Appendices A-D (which includes the FEMA Manual for the Sandy Hook Exercise and the CT FEMA Bridgeport Scheduling of that Exercise}. Click here for Appendix E (which is an Affidavit by Texas Licensed Private Investigator, Brian Davidson, of crime scene photos from the CT Stater Police Archive but which not only do not show indications of a mass murder but do not even show classrooms with student desks and chairs}. Ron Avery has an archive of the whole case:]

1.  Do you have a 7th Amendment right to a trial by jury?

Do you have a right to trial by jury in common law matters over $20 in state courts under the 7th Amendment of the United States Constitution? The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in 1916 that you do not.[1] A Federal District Court ruled in 2014 that all citizens of the states and territories are also U.S. citizens under the 14th Amendment and they have 7th Amendment protection to a trial by jury in matters of common law in state courts.[2] The ruling was vacated by a Federal Appeals Court on the grounds that the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held “that states are not constitutionally required to provide a jury trial in civil case.”[3]

2.  Is “Selective Incorporation” a U.S. Supreme Court Prerogative?

The Supreme Court of the United States has been “incorporating” the First Ten Amendments, individually, one by one, into rights applicable to state citizens in state courts by operation of the 14th Amendment. How does the High Court obtain such authority to deny the applicability of any U.S. Constitutional provision to state citizens in state courts? It is the states that ratified the U.S. Constitution and agreed to its terms. Why would the citizens of Georgia with a right to trial by jury in their state courts want to be unequally yoked to a union where the same was not uniform throughout all the states? How can the Supreme Court rule that the 2nd Amendment via selective incorporation be applicable to state citizens in state courts but not the 7th Amendment?[4] The prerogative of the U.S. Supreme Court to trickle down rights under “selective incorporation” cannot be supported by logic of any kind. How do citizens of the United States under the U.S. 14th Amendment not possess all rights declared in the U.S. Constitution in state courts? The whole idea of the 14th Amendment was to secure the rights all others had to recently freed slaves. How is that accomplished if rights in the U.S. Constitution do not apply to 14th Amendment citizens of the United States in state courts? It is time for the Supreme Court of the United States to make sound logical precedent finding all rights enumerated in the U.S. Constitution and apply to all citizens under the 14th Amendment and replace arbitrary whim trickle-down “selective incorporation” with comprehensive incorporation.

3.  Summary judgments should protect the right to trial by jury:

James H. Fetzer, Ph.D., was deprived of his right to a trial by jury in Wisconsin in a defamation case brought against him by Leonard Pozner using a non-jury trial conducted by the judge under the pretense of a summary judgment. The judge’s grant of a phony summary judgment against Dr. Fetzer was affirmed all the way through the Wisconsin Supreme Court proving that the summary judgment methodology used in Wisconsin does not protect the 7th Amendment rights of the citizens in common law matters in Wisconsin.

4.  Summary judgments cannot find facts, only agreement to them:

Summary judgments are judicial tools to bypass a jury if the parties agree to the facts. The judge can then apply the law to the facts agreed to by the parties. Juries find facts, and if they are agreed to, why call a jury? But the public presumption in all the “Sandy Hook Mass Shooting” defamation and firearm liability cases is that children were shot to death at Sandy Hook Elementary else why find people guilty of defamation for saying the shooting was a hoax? Shockingly, no jury has determined any facts related to the reality of any deaths at Sandy Hook Elementary. No jury has ever been called to hear any evidence supporting or denying that Sandy Hook ever happened.

5.  Can a judge be a jury in a summary judgment proceeding?

Dr. Fetzer compiled a book entitled Nobody Died At Sandy Hook: It was a FEMA Drill to Promote Gun Control containing findings of 13 investigators including six Ph.D.s concluding that Sandy Hook Elementary was permanently closed by 2008, four years before the alleged mass shooting. Dr. Fetzer filed and entered into evidence the entire book at the hearing of the Pozner’s Motion for Summary Judgment against Dr. Fetzer. The judge simply said that all of Dr. Fetzer’s facts and evidence seemed “unreasonable” while Mr. Pozner’s facts and evidence seemed “reasonable and plausible.” This may not be done by a judge in a summary judgment proceeding. He cannot weigh the reasonableness or plausibility of facts and evidence as a jury can and should. The judge can only find agreement to the facts and evidence. If the parties agree to facts and evidence the judge can then apply the law to those facts and grant the motion for summary judgment if the movant provides all elements of their claim or deny the motion if they cannot.

6.  Can you question the validity of mass media narratives?

The effect of the “Sandy Hook Mass Shooting” defamation and deceptive trade practice lawsuits has been to freeze all public questions related to narratives of the mass media cartel. None of these lawsuits called a jury to hear evidence proving the shooting took place. So far, the parties have been found guilty by summary judgment, stipulation, assumption and sanction. The amounts of damage include: $450,000 in the Fetzer case; $73 Million in the Bushmaster case; $4 Million, $965 Million, and $2.75 Trillion in punitive damages requested so far in the Alex Jones cases. This operation by the courts converts unproven narratives into adjudicated reality regardless of proof to the contrary never seen by a jury. The mass media cartel becomes the unquestionable Ministry of Truth.

7.  What are the correct summary judgment procedures?

Dr. Fetzer does not challenge the judicial concept of summary judgment per se but rather shows the court that not all summary judgment procedures protect the 7th Amendment rights or state rights to a trial by jury. Dr. Fetzer invoked the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States by showing that two states differ on what the correct procedures are for summary judgment in order to protect the rights of the nonmovant (Defendant). He compared the Texas method with the Wisconsin method revealing the flaws in the latter.

8. What are the correct procedures for a summary judgment?

If a (Plaintiff) movant’s motion for summary judgment is denied, they may continue the suit and have a trial by jury determine the facts where the judge can then apply the law. The nonmovant is the party at risk of losing their right to a trial by jury because if a summary judgment is granted against them, they will never see a trial by jury to prove their position. Therefore, the summary judgment procedures must be as specified in Texas:

8.1. The burden must be on the movant to show there are no genuine material fact issues in dispute;

8.2. The judge must take all the nonmovant’s facts supported by evidence as true;

8.3. The judge must indulge all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the nonmovant’s facts supported by evidence;

8.4. The judge must resolve all questions in favor of the nonmovant.

8.5. If the movant does not agree with the nonmovant’s facts supported by evidence the judge must deny the motion for summary judgment without going any further.

8.6. If the movant agrees with the nonmovant’s facts supported by evidence and can show all elements of their claim, the judge may grant the summary judgment while having protected the right of trial by jury of the nonmovant.

9.  The inverted summary judgment method used in Wisconsin:

9.1. The burden is on the nonmovant to prove there are genuine material fact issues in dispute to win their right to a trial by jury which they already have and which should be preserved by the judge;

9.2. The judge must verify that the movant has stated a claim;

9.3. The judge must determine if there are any material fact disputes;

9.4. If there is a material fact dispute, the judge verifies that the movant has made a prima facie case with their proof;

9.5. If the movant has established a prima facie case, the judge looks at the nonmovant’s facts and evidence to determine if there are any fact disputes or inferences from undisputed material facts;

9.6. The judge may take either party’s facts and evidence as reasonable, plausible and true and dismiss the other’s facts and evidence as inadmissible, irrelevant or non-existent and grant the summary judgment while denying the nonmovant’s right of a trial by jury.

The Wisconsin summary judgment allows the judge to weigh facts and evidence of both parties rather than being limited to finding agreement only after accepting the nonmovant’s facts supported by evidence as true etc., etc. This procedure is simply a non-jury bench trial conducted under the pretense of a summary judgment.

10.  Uniform rules of summary judgment must protect 7th Amendment in every state court:

Dr. Fetzer’s case is the most important before the U.S. Supreme Court at this time because it reveals that any member of a minority group can be found guilty without a trial by jury in a summary judgment proceeding in Wisconsin or in any other state or federal court with a similar summary judgment methodology.

If you believe that the right to trial by jury should be protected in every state court dealing with common law matters over 20 dollars, then you need to be interested in Fetzer v. Pozner Writ of Certiorari before the U.S. Supreme Court. But if you believe individuals and companies should be found guilty without juries and then destroyed by absurd damage awards found by juries that have no evidence of a crime or tort, then you should go back to sleep.

Donate to the cause:


[1] Minneapolis & St. Louis R. Co. v. Bombolis, 241 U.S. 211, 217 (1916)

[2] Gonzalez-Oyarzun v. Caribbean City Builders, Inc., 27 F.Supp.3d 265 (D. P.R. 2014)

[3] Gonzalez-Oyarzun v. Caribbean City Builders, Inc., 798 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2015)

[4] McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 177 L.Ed.2d 894 (2010)

Please follow and like us:

29 thoughts on “PRESS RELEASE: Fetzer v. Pozner in the United States Supreme Court: Petition for Rehearing Filed (1 November 2022)”

  1. Pingback: Jim Fetzer, SCOTUS Petition for Rehearing DENIED: The Story as Told via Twitter - James H. Fetzer
    1. !2/2 is very soon, Jim …about 23 days from now. Let’s hope the Supremes come to the correct decision.
      You’ve done an historic amount of work in your continuing follow up of this case.

  2. >I have made some tweaks to the blog

    This is unimportant — what’s important is that you make changes and corrections to the petition you filed (if at all possible) — it is not well organized or written — it has missing punctuation and run-on sentences — worse, it has bad errors, e.g. on pg 7 it says ‘Application To Stay & It’s New Evidence’ — note: it’s = it is, whereas here you want the possessive form its — an error like that should NOT be in a petition filed with SCOTUS.

    Simple question: if per this blog post the ‘U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held’ that ‘states are not constitutionally required to provide a jury trial in civil case’, then what is the fundamental basis for your new petition? — are you still hoping SCOTUS will decide it is important to make sure criteria and procedures for summary judgment are uniform across all 50 states? — didn’t they fail to act on that previously?

    In *only* the following sense, Sandy Hook is roughly equivalent to the ‘Holocaust’: you will not be allowed to litigate whether anyone died at SH or not in an American courtroom — it’s just not going to happen — so I think the appendices are pointless, and in fact may help to undermine whatever other aspects of the law you are trying to highlight.

    Although I do believe the differences between the various versions of the (alleged) Pozner death certificate, as described by you, were very material/relevant to your original case, and the judge was just plain wrong to disregard those — but that’s not the same as disputing whether anyone died at SH.

    Also, I think it would prudent if you stopped publicly mentioning SH parents by name.

    Some time ago, during the call-in portion of a Raw Deal episode, a listener offered legal opinion and advice that you seemed quite impressed with; do you recall that? — have you considered what he said in this most recent filing? — perhaps you ought to look up that episode and review what the caller said.

    In light of the recent controversy around Kanye West: I’m sure it hasn’t escaped your attention that it is Jews who are using the courts to persecute you — Jews were also behind the Charlottesville SLAPP suits.

    And I do think you are being persecuted — as Kevin Barrett said, it’s a legal lynching, and grossly unfair — an outrageous abuse of the court system.

    1. Well, yes, there were too many typos and such, but those are formatting issues. If they made a difference, the Clerk of the Court would not have docketed the case. On the arguments and the evidence, I respectfully disagree. And Ron Avery’s blog certainly makes it clear why this case is so important to the United States, to Wisconsin, and to me (in descending order). Thousands upon thousands of residents of this state have had their right to a trial by jury denied and nullified by the WI Summary Judgment protocols. And I am floored that proof it was a FEMA drill–which includes not only the FEMA manual for the drill and the CT FEMA HQ Scheduling of the drill for 14 December 2012–could have a negative impact on my Petition for a Rehearing. The kinds of proof that matters most are affidavits, in this case, from a licensed private investigator in TX, who had been going through the CT State Police archives and finding proof after proof that nobody died at Sandy Hook, which is precisely the evidence I would be introducing were I to be granted a new trial. So while you are right on the formatting (which is regrettable but insignificant), you are wrong about the content and argument (which are devastating to the “official account” and PROVE why a trial by jury–WHICH HAS NOT OCCURRED IN ANY SANDY HOOK CASE TO DATE–must be granted on 7th and 14th Amendment grounds. You, alas, have missed the boat.

    2. eah, I have seen this happen so many times with you and others that I have to mention it. If a comment does not have a reply button, simply scroll UP to the nearest visible reply button and click on it. That will put your reply in the correct place and make the thread much easier to follow. Thanks to you and others.

    3. eah: your criticisms of Jim’s writing verge into the shill realm of comments. On one of your points, the names of the parents are well known in the media and have been mentioned many times in the past.


  3. The following happened in Lake City where I do some shopping and go to the local Paneras. The arraignment is on the 17th. If it’s public (I have no idea) I plan to show up with an American flag bandana or hat. I’ll keep everyone posted. Very sad to see this happen in Florida….and yes, I already sent DeSantis an email. This happened on Rte 90, which is the major thoroughfare through Lake City.

  4. Sharp shooter professionals have told us that trying to kill 20 children in one room would be impossible for them. First of all the noise and gun smoke would be so horrific that they would be forced to leave the room after a few shots. Secondly, the idea one could kill all 20 is absurd….some would be only wounded.
    The clownish behavior of the state coroner is evidence that Sandy Hook was a hoax. He is seen in aerial photos lounging around the scene eating donuts and drinking something from a cup both before and after the non-event.

    My file photo shows a state cop laughing his head off during the coroner’s talk to the press.


  5. Jim, your case is the dictionary picture of “raw deal”. I can see why they picked Wisconsin, far more reasons than it’s your state of residence. The Bushmaster case still steams me up. They laid down like a prom date. All the other gun builders must be horrified by that Kangaroo court proceeding. This case going to the Supreme Court and winning is now so important, especially to firearms manufacturers that I’m shocked one of them has not written a check to cover all legal costs. There are so many people that have an emotional investment in Sandy Hoax, their critical thinking is just shut down. People that have no connection what-so-ever to the victims are prepared to come to blows when you question their religious doctrine. I experienced the visceral hatred at close range. You might think they would be thrilled to learn no kids died. But it’s the polar opposite. The soulless beasts behind Sandy Hoax are doing back flips over how well such a shitty, half assed production was swallowed hook line and sinker. They could have covered their tracks with a first rate production. I think they take extra pleasure in mocking us with the Z grade.

    1. “They laid down like a prom date”. What an insight into your culture. I watched lots of the TV shows and movies about prom dates, they always seemed niave and nice. It never dawned on me that getting laid was obligatory it ads a smutty layer.

    1. If I knew Bill Gates had of predicted covid I would have kept CSL vax shares that went up ten times, instead I bought Nylex that went bankrupt.

  6. Jim, I hope you get your reconsideration–for all of us. Civil lawsuits are now becoming the main way for the elites and their corrupt judiciary to silence opposition. I had no idea that SCOTUS has not applied the 7th Amendment to the states; since when are individual states not part of the U.S.? We are fast becoming a pathetic hypocrisy of a liberal democracy to the rest of the world.

    1. …and I present two other errata…..if this is pedantic, so be it, but in a case of filing docs to SCOTUS, it may be quite important. This is in the spirit of help, not derision. The document itself is brilliant…imo.

      ….aside a moot on that occasion.

      If these pictures crime scene pictures where are the bodies and blood, not why take the pictures at all?

  7. In the original case, from the best I remember and understand, Dr. Fetzer was never allowed to present any evidence that SH was not a real occurrence. The judge based his decision on WHAT HE BELIEVED AND NOT ON ANY FACTS that had been established OR presented by Jim. Would I be correct?

    1. YES. The SJ procedure in WI allows the judge to decide which facts are “reasonable” or “unreasonable” and to set them aside or exclude them as though they did not exist, which is why I am asking SCOTUS to reverse my case and insure uniformity across all 50 states both with respect to Summary Judgments but also the application of the 7th Amendment to each and every state.There are excellent reasons why the Court should take this case.Let us hope they act accordingly.

      1. I hope not. It’s a rather pressing and important issue. Yes, there were far too many typos and that one sentence was garbled. Long story. I have made some tweaks to the blog, including an additional paragraph Ron added.Tell me about the appendices.

      2. If the US Supreme Court does not take this case, that means that the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights are dead.
        If I recall, Jim was shouted down by the WI judge and not allowed to show evidence that Sandy Hook was a non-event. Jim is 100% correct in presenting his current case before the Supremes for proper adjudication.
        If they deny his Petition, then the place called the USA is a non-existent piece of land between the two oceans.
        It also says that I served the US military in two service units for NOTHING.

      3. Jim, there’s a wealth of information in the appendix. Everyone would do well to read it and share their take. I’m still going through it. Right off hand, I see no reason to withhold the identities of the surviving children unless they were trying to hide something along the lines of “the children saw nothing because nothing happened other than a drill”. What the hell good is a FOIA if the info cannot be accessed because of some rule they made up?

        That particular info is from this letter which cannot be copied but appears on page 4 and 5 of Appendix E:

        The cover letter for the public investigation and signed by
        Commissioner Reuben Bradford provided to the public states on
        page 2 the following:

        Again, go to page 4 and 5 of Appendix E for the letter.

        Don’t miss Davidson’s statement…it’s detailed to the bone and amazingly incriminating for anyone with any ability to reason.

        Snippet from Davidson’s statement:

        As a professional and independent researcher, I have studied
        the available crime scene photography and find many reasons
        to believe that the event did not take place as portrayed. In a
        mass casualty shooting blood spatter and pooling would be
        evident as it is described in reports, however the photographic
        evidence from the crime scene strains credibility. Therefore, I
        simply do not believe that the extraordinary lack of blood
        depicted at the crime scene is possible given the
        circumstances. I am not an expert in blood spatter or how it
        would pool under these circumstances. I do believe that as long
        as a human heart is pumping blood will continue to pump from
        the wounds due to the fact that the heart is creating blood
        pressure in the body of the victim.

        Still reading…more to come.

        …and, just to add, the FEMA drill manual in and of itself would be enough for any judge to question what happened on that day without any other evidence. But, let’s face it, no judge who values his life and bench would take on that responsibility which could ultimately bring down some big players and feasibly a corrupt to the core US government.

  8. You deserve the support of millions of people in this case. All of your arguments are extremely valid. This may be the single most important issue brought before the Supreme Court in my lifetime.

  9. Judges seem to have forgotten that the 7th Amendment is STILL a part of the Bill of Rights and needs to be followed as the Framers intended.

    The Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ensures that citizens’ civil cases can be heard and decided upon by a jury of their peers. The jury trial provides a forum for ALL the facts to be presented, evaluated impartially and judged according to the law.


Leave a Reply