Dr. Matthews holds press conference, alleges court misconduct involving Justice Kristin Guiney

本站添加: 2026-06-05

[00:00:00]I'm Dr. Kenneth Matthews, a national reowned human civil rights activist, advocate, and author. We are here at the Court of Appeals right here in Harris County. That's right here on Fannon. We are here with Mr. Richardson and his wife because there has been some some egregious activity that's been going on behind these doors right behind me. And the judge that we are gonna be exposing with this situation is Judge Kristen Guinea.

[00:00:32]Kristen Guinea is the judge. We have direct documents and direct evidence to show that there is corruption that is going on with Mr. Richardson's case.

[00:00:46]>> Yes.

[00:00:51]First order of business, the case that he's here fighting right now was in regards to a commission uh security guard. Okay, this commission security guard clearly arrested this man uh illegally. Um what we have here is how the commission officer lied on the report.

[00:01:14]We have because with the report that he did on Mr. Richardson, he tried to put him to where he was trespassed.

[00:01:27]Okay, we have direct evidence that he was not trespassed because you know why?

[00:01:34]The very address that was used is on his driver's license. So, we shouldn't even be here based on what that security officer did. And that security offic also have a actual history of these false type of reports that he's made.

[00:01:54]We even have the the Houston Police Department report where it shows that this stuff is not a line. Okay? Now, mind you, all of these documents is behind these doors. This explains why he's still trying to fight this case. He shouldn't even be dealing with this.

[00:02:11]Next order of business we have.

[00:02:18]What we notice with his with his documents, why does he have the same case number uh that was in 2022 and is the same case number now?

[00:02:33]>> That right there is a miscarriage of justice. This is what we have.

[00:02:40]Next order of business.

[00:02:45]We have Judge Giddy um with an order uh of refusal with a rid of habius corpus. Why would she do that?

[00:02:56]Yeah. See, >> we have that. Why?

[00:03:00]>> Why are we Why is this court being weaponized on Mr. Richardson? Why?

[00:03:10]Here's the Rita habius corpus right here.

[00:03:17]>> I'm not understanding why.

[00:03:19]Why is this being Why is this court Why is this judge weaponizing Mr. Richardson? Mr. Richardson should even be here.

[00:03:28]Next order of business.

[00:03:32]We have evidence of judge guinea with her rule with the uh habius corpus and then also the violation of article 5 section 11. Then the right to appeal was a defective on the faith and then proof of how uh the case was done correctly with by him representing himself. That was actually a case that's just like his and he did not get the same treatment as well as the person who actually had an attorney. The law is the law regardless if you have an attorney or not. You see what I'm saying? See, it's a lot of weaponization that's going on right here behind these doors. A lot of it. And all of these documents, you'll be able to see these documents. Okay.

[00:04:21]next due process violation which is 41.1A 41.2C and I'mma have Mr. Richardson tell you more about that but we got it right here it's here due process violations and everything and then I'mma let you know more about it after Mr. Richardson said when we bring him up then also how do you have a ruling right but no record right right here all of this is direct evidence then they never had jurisdiction in his motion order here it is right here.

[00:05:09]So again, they they are weaponizing this court on Mr. Richardson's case. Okay. So now I'mma have Mr. Richardson come up and let him explain, you know, what he experienced, what he's been going through, so he can because what he's doing right now, he's fighting for justice. Then once we do that, then I'm going to run by the audit that our legal team pulled so you can see the discrepancies that they're doing in this office, this court. Go ahead, Miss Brit.

[00:05:39]Good afternoon. I'd like to thank Dr. Matthews and her team uh for putting this press conference together so we can bring these matters to light. Uh she she pretty much said everything I can say better better than I could but the the the thing is is you know in these type of cases sometime even silence equals a due process violation. That's and that's what I get from the 183rd to the first CO8. They judge you the referral order.

[00:06:08]she she's talking about it put it puts my case on the 1107 track which is a different procedure vehicle then 11072 which applies to my case which was community supervision and it allows a collateral attack of of any due process violation or constitutional violation in your case 1107 works different so I wasn't able my my claim was suppressed basically because the court didn't have the power to rule on the motion because Judge Guiney's referral order specifically because of that. And if you you understand the magnitude of that, that means pretty much everything else followed is is not right in the brief, especially with the with the trial court certification is no signature. Judge Lance Long who denied through it. He did not sign it. And in the place where it's designated for me to sign, someone wrote in curses proay wave, it it appears it attempts to to forge a signature and so everything look normal to the high reviewer in court. So when when they send the record, it it it looks legit if someone just standing over. But the thing is they haven't sent the record. How do you have a appeal without a record? And this this this document Dr. Matthew do you say uh trap 252 the certification appeal can't even start until this this this >> I'm sorry you can't start with this defective document >> you can't even initiate >> outside of the the court matters this you know this been going on since 2003 my my my reabus corpus claims are four grounds in effect council and one the prosetor misconduct. The prosecutorial misconduct is again from the from the security officer, Kenny King. And I'm talking to the city, Harris County, South Park, Sunny Side, Southwest. Y'all know Kenny King and what they do. This this happened over 20 years ago. And people still not clear whether this guy's a security guard or not or a cop and and he's still in business. He's been he's he's had civil damages for the same thing paid to a guy uh on the same street where where he did the same thing to me. The guy lawyer filed a motion to compel suppress and the case was dismissed pretty fast and they got one civil suit against King for false imprisonment where King had to pay a judgment. And pre even previous to that in that case was 2002. In 97 they assaulted uh another neighbor of mine who refused their legal search and they won a settlement against Kinder King and Park Houston Apartments. So this is it's a pattern. It's not a oneoff. It's not a oneoff with with the violation of 411 and 41.2 in the court of appeals. Now the the order came to disqualify Justice Guinea after the judgment which means the case would need to be resubmitted to a new panel fresh panel who haven't seen this. A judge can't rule on her case below and then two months later she she wanted to addition to a court of appeals and what judge going to say they was wrong about they lower decision. That's just not going to happen. That's why Williams versus Pennsylvania exclusively for me is this like it's it's no harmless error if it happens. Period.

[00:09:39]The case is is void. It must be started over like this. And from Williams, Pennsylvania, the Texas version, like Dr. Matthew said, article 5, section 11 just strictly prohibits this because the deliberation is a is a collective process. So basically just getting once she was here she wasn't even supposed to see one pay for this bill to put it in a nutshell of how the disqualification works.

[00:10:06]So you know other than that you know the hardships it makes in my life I have paper saying I was disposed on defer adjudication but I still fulfill any consequences. So, there's lost a job opportunity.

[00:10:20]Uh, second amendment rights. I'm I'm being subjected to criminal enhancements when it's not even a valid conviction. In another case, >> that's what's makes this more egregious right now.

[00:10:35]Uh, you know, activities with with our kids in school, you know, coaches, I can't be a part of that because because of this putting apartments in my own name. It's it's a struggle because of this. Like, so I'm still I'm still confined because of this. And that's I got to say, that's all I got to say.

[00:10:53]>> Okay. And so so people, you have to understand your local your local political parties, your local political elected officials affect you. You understand? That's why it's so important to vote. That's why it is very important because look what he look what Mr. Richardson is going through. This is unacceptable. And then what even made it so even so much more egregious was the audit based on the audit because what we did the legal team what they did they took his legal documents that we have and they ran these legal documents so you could see exactly where the red flags are. And the red flags is simple.

[00:11:40]We have core constitutional violations of red flags. One, you got scientific contraband, fraud, and weight class inflation. This is based on his case.

[00:11:51]Two, you got verifiable record backdating schemes. The evidence is not going to lie. It's backdated documents in there. It's documents where they sign this man like he's a prosay litigate and he never signed it.

[00:12:08]That's unacceptable. Then you got institutional Brady suppression of complaining witness criminal history. So this is like a critical impeachment and uh pattern evidence was completely suppressed by the state of Texas in his case. That's unacceptable.

[00:12:28]And this is happening right here behind those doors. Then the next you got adjudication mismatch and procedural panel contamination.

[00:12:37]So, the first court of appeals based on his application of the equitable defense of latches on the false legal premises uh that Richardson was a convicted felon who sat on his rights uh for 20 years.

[00:12:50]Uh the act uh the actual June 2nd, 2008 discharge exhibit P exhibits proves that Richardson was on deferred adjudication stating that the court never proceeded to the adjudication of guilt. So, furthermore, Kristen, Justice Christian M. Guinea actively participated on the panel that denied Richardson's mandamus petition in July of 2025, reviewing the exact structural track she initiated as the trial judge via her August 24 of referral violating Texas Rap16.2.

[00:13:26]So the current status of this audit and recommendations while the criminal appeal tract within the state courts has Texas officially concluded with the criminal with the court of criminal appeals refused of the petition for his discretionary review on April 3rd 2026. The structural integrity of the record is sever severely compromised. The concurrent presence of an active NGRI committee warrant file created in August 2024 requires immediate collateral inquiry. So Richardson's panel tracking his move outside state boundaries via the former US Department of Justice civil rights uh division complaint against the trial judiciary alleging official oppression which is Texas Penal Code 39.03 03 and systemic obstruction of justice which is 18 USC 15/19. So further actions should prioritize leverage the unredacted label weights and verify document inconsistencies within federal habius or civil rights litigation channels to nullify the state record. So we got direct audits based on the documents the evidence that he provided the court documents and this is exactly what this audit have put out here. We have a problem in our appellet courts. Justice needs to be done for Mr. Richardson so him and his family can go on with a normal life. This is unacceptable. Do we have any questions from the media?

[00:15:09]>> I have one more. One more comment, Mr. Richardson.

[00:15:14]>> Now, after everything you heard, you may ask a logical question. Why would a court do this? How would a court do this? Well, it's it's it's basically a matter of someone making a mistake and not wanting to admit it and making more to cover it up. So, what what blocks my claim is is not that the courts are saying my claims are wrong. They're saying I took too long to bring the charge. It's called lashes. It's a bar.

[00:15:37]You could be absolutely right in every claim. But if you they the court decides you take too long and it's your fault for the delay, then they can they can refuse review. What happened in this case, the dismissal Dr. Matthew speaks of uh in 2020 after the plenary powers expired in 2008 with my deferred duplication order. The state goes and files a motion to dismiss this case which allowed the destruction of evidence.

[00:16:06]>> Mhm. Then they recall the same dismissal three a few days later. Why you dismissing the case 12 years after it's exposed? It's because it destroys the evidence in the case and it prevents these type of collateral attacks and appeals on on what they done. So with the with the state the the biggest contradiction is latches mean we lost evidence over time of witnesses deceased or unavailable. But in this case, the state's order dismissed the case and permitted the destruction of evidence.

[00:16:38]And then they turn around and claim they're prejudiced by uh materially prejudice by evidence loss. And they don't point to a single str of evidence because they know they dismissal after the case was over. No plenary power with no jurisdiction.

[00:16:53]>> That's some dirty work >> under cover. Under the color of law.

[00:16:57]>> That's some dirty work. And that's why it got to be exposed. people. This is why it has to be exposed. Look what Look what Mr. Richardson had to go through, y'all. This is dirty work. And that's why we are here. We are here to stand steadfast for Mr. Richardson and his family and any other >> citizens of Harris County and across this state that's going through this.

[00:17:18]Because in order for us to correct the problem, we have to shine a light to it.

[00:17:21]>> Because if not, they're going to continue to operate in the dark in the name of the color of law.

[00:17:28]Thank you. And we done.