Before we begin, let's see what Federal Court Rules say about fraud-tainted verdicts.

FRCP Rule 60 (b)(3)

(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment, Order, or Proceeding. On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:

.....(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;


  It also seems that rulings perpetrated by fraud are not subject to any statute of limitations.



  This is likely NOT in your nightly news? --  WHY?

                                    The FALSE TESTIMONY  seems clear !

                                (Pssst, -- Perjury & justice are not synonyms.)

  The apparent PERJURY was admitted into evidence records in two federal courts, despite protest & proof it was false testimony!

                      Some items are highlighted to find them more easily.   

                               Pay close attention to those!  

Notice that item #4 on the 1st page (below) and item #5 (2nd page) both contain the name of the supervisor who signed the promotion document. It is the same person who later allegedly gave testimony that she never had anything to do with the male victim's promotion, whatsoever.

The fact that judges in the case were informed as to the perjurous nature of the YMCA testimony, given proof of it, then willfully used it as part of their reasoning for thrusting it all out of court without a jury trial, is itself Fraud on the Court.  They perverted justice, outright, then used their power - "Under Color of Law" -  to deprive the victim of his 7th Amdt. Constitutional right to a jury trial, which then constitutes another crime involving 18 USC, section 242- So, multiple crimes.

    First, look at the affidavit, below.  How can we know a Chevela Davis gave that testimony unless some official witnesses it?   Yet, the courts allowed the document as "evidence", though the Law seems to indicate a need for an official witness & oath on such documents. 

    Second, the document begins by stating that.....

(1) a notary public is personally testifying with signature of authenticity that...

(2) the witness appeared before him/her personally, that very day,...

(3) "duly sworn on her oath" and deposed and that her testimony was as followed. 

    Again, there is NO notary signature, date or official seal - it could be lies, and so in all the above items (1 - 3) must be called into question. 

     Actually, the first part is a lie for sure, since there is no " undersigned notary".  Otherwise, it would be on the document, as stated.  If the first words are untrue, why was it allowed in court?  Remember, this is all in a race & gender discrimination lawsuit that included matters of unpaid overtime (slave labor), retaliation, physical assaults, & more.  What's more, the (actually) sworn, notarized allegations of race-discrimmination against blacks...was made by a white man who also had email evidence about it!   (See

    Third, the documents' signatures look quite different!  Did someone forge the affidavit?  Without any notary authentication, it is clearly disputable.

     Next, we see that whoever claims to be Chevela Davis...states initially in her sworn affidavit (below) that she was a supervisor at Emmott Elem. when Mr. Noack worked there, yet, she signed Noack's promotion document,(above), saying she was his "Multi-Site Director".  It has become known that a Yolanda Martin was site director when Noack worked there, each subordinate to Chevela Davis, who had charge of multiple sites.  Giving misleading testimony is illegal, isn't it?

     There were many denials by the "supposed" Chevela Davis which seem to say she had nothing to do with the Noack promotion or assignment of position and that she, therefore, could never have denied him a position due to his gender. The YMCA allegedly did separate males working with children, as this is born out in YMCA internal investigation documents - notes made while questioning workers, it seems - including Ms. Davis' own reported comments.  Those also were introduced as evidence in court.  That seems like bias against men, implying guilt by gender as if men were suspect  with children even if clearing all background checks.  It would show the YMCA guilty of discrimination if found to be true; so,...(ahem)...why all the lies?

      Chevela Davis DID sign the promotion documents (above), stating she was his supervisor.  So, she either lied at work or to the court, or it was not her who signed the affidavit, (below). It sure looks like perjury...or fraud!   

      How do two federal courts allow that?  --   IS THAT HOW AMERICANS WANT THE COURTS TO OPERATE?               What happens when it's YOUR turn in court?  (Call your politicians, ASAP, & protest -- info for some Texas residents is seen via this link:

      Also, the affidavit claims the incident happened "in 2004" (See "3", below), but the promotion documents (above) are dated "July 27, 2000".  Mr, Noack was a site director at only one location.  Other records show him appointed to multisite director in 2004.  Much of the testimony below seems to be an attempt to not confess and to wiggle out of the truth via double-talk, half-truths, and lies.  Yet, if the affidavit was not authored by Davis, that may explain the ignorance on some points.  Amazingly, with 5-6 lies in the pages below, the magistrate still cited the following affidavit as she booted the case from court, taking the false words of the (alleged) Davis over Noack's sworn testimony.  -  Isn't that illegal?

      What I've learned indicates Chevela Davis was an African-American, single mother with foster children who put in many years at the YMCA.  Was she threatened, or did she feel compelled to lie to save her career or retirement?   It seems she was afraid to admit the truth.  Mr. Noack was there over 8 years.  Davis was a supervisor before he was, so if he was driven out, that could have sent a message that scared her, directly or indirectly.  


    I'd say, "EXPLAIN THIS, YMCA!" 

    I'd say, "EXPLAIN THIS, Chevela Davis!"

    I'd say, "EXPLAIN THIS, JUDGES!"


     Mr. Noack showed the courts there was falsehood in that affidavit testimony, using these documents. 

     Look at the bottom, right-hand page-corners -- at the "USCA5" markings.                                        

     That shows it was filed in United States Court of Appeals - Fifth (5th) Circuit.   To be there, it had to be part of the district court record, something sent up in a "Record On Appeal" to the appellate court.  So, two federal courts had this proof of perjury - a felony crime - and lots of other evidence, then ignored all that and accepted the lies!  That's crazy!  There was at least 1 judge at the district court level and 3 on appellate court panels that reviews such cases.  So, at least 4 judges did such perversities to cast Mr. Noack out as "guilty",...refusing to allow a jury to see his evidence. 

      BTW, a jury trial is a Constitutional right guaranteed by the U.S. 7th Amendment!  (See more of the evidence on other pages here and on another site, Supremely Unjust - http://www.SupremelyUnjust.Weebly.Com.)  Mr. Noack  also showed  more than enough evidence to warrant a jury trial, by Law, as seen in his Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed with the U.S. Supreme Court (- most of it on PDF's on the main page, here).


      It's totally OUTRAGEOUS that this is happening in the USA!  Judges need to explain themselves and possibly be impeached; and, SOMEBODY needs to make things right for Mr. Noack, who has already lived in tents for 4 years, mostly  unemployed, destitute, and his car-repossessed.  This corruption should not be happening in America!  The case also involved not only claims of discrimination against himself but allegations he was ordered to committ racial and anti-male discrimination against others, was physically assaulted on multiple occasions, sexist emails (at least one documented for court), disparate pay, massive unpaid overtime, and so forth.  With utter proof of perjury in court, fraud, lying to labor investigators, and emails showing an employer excuse for what the Law says is a crime (, how did this case not make it to a jury? - How?!


                                    So, what else did they lie about while denying that poor man's right to a jury?

                                                     Scroll down a few pages to see more about the corruption!

    On the pages above, also notice the apparent conflict between statements 1) and 5).   In 1), the worker says, "I was a supervisor at Emmott Elementary when the Plaintiff worked there as a counselor."  However, in 5), she stated, "I determine the assignment of work sites based only upon...."

     So, was she simply working at Emmott Elem. or was she supervising over that program (& others)?  This looks like a deliberate attempt to cover up and deceive or mislead the court, which is illegal - criminal behavior, if so.  As can be seen by the top document, she was lying in various parts of her declaration.  If perjury entertains the notion as to the existence of two or more contradictory statements in testimony and whether there was deceit, etc. involved, that criteria may well have been met, however it is viewed. 

      Another problem? -- Wouldn't the YMCA HR office keep work histories on their employees?  They would know when she worked, and where.  Why was this presented as evidence at all, since they would know it was conflicting and untruthful?  That, too, seems like a willful act of deception, or fraud, against the court.  If so, when such includes two or more persons, doesn't that become some kind of "conspiracy" to committ fraud?

Something to think about could be whether the following might apply in such things

(Cf. "What Crimes?" page.)

  Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 Conspiracy Against Rights 

  18 U.S.C. § 1623 - False Declarations Before Grand Jury or Court

18 USC § 1512 - Tampering With A Witness, Victim, Or An Informant  


State of Texas -- PENAL CODE




     The next two pages show a series of questions & answers while Mr. Noack was under oath while being deposed by YMCA legal counsel...alone, without any attorney of his own, at the offices of YMCA lawyers.  It must be noted Mr. Noack (a self-litigant) wasn't allowed the cross-examination stipulated by Law during such a deposition!  However, his answers shed light on a matter already tainted by YMCA false testimony -- all ignored by the judges!

      Now, these deposition pages were used by the YMCA, so they got into court records, and Mr. Noack used some of them.  He was two poor to afford copies of them, himself.  Notice, when the YMCA used them in court, they whited out many lines.  Maybe they didn't like that evidence, and other pages were done the same way and worse.  What's unclear about this?  YMCA testimony was proven false on this matter, and Mr. Noack gave contrary, sworn testimony here and in affidavit form.  At the "summary judgment" stage, Law clearly requires that judges defer to the testimony of the non-movant (Mr. Noack).

    Now, look at the documents below!

    It's bad when two courts and four judges (3-judges, 5th Cir. panel)....allow KNOWN perjurous testimony to be used in court.  (Actually, a fifth judge might be faulted.  The district judge over the magistrate approved  her recommendations" -- her wrongdoings, whether knowingly or by robo-signing what she sent to him.  Yet, it gets worse.  The district magistrate repeatedly cited the known perjury, using it as an excuse for ruling against the plaintiff. (Noack, btw, was too poor to hire a lawyer.  Also, this all came after the judge refused to enforce her own orders: the YMCA withheld evidence when it began showing wage discrimination, but she  never made the YMCA turn over the rest of it - without explanation.) 

     That female district magistrate cited Mr. Noack's claims with apparent disdain and held to perjurous testimony as if absolute truth.  She illegally took over what IS a jury's role -- to decide who is telling the truth or lying; yet, the documents above all show the defendent's witness was lying on those same issues!     --- That's such an abomination on American justice!

    On the second document below, she not only explicitly pretends known falsehood to be fact, she then makes an untrue assertion about Mr. Noack supposedly admitting to something that never happened -- I checked out the records on this.  It is a mere accusation made by the defendent which Mr. Noack had contested at the time (it happened) and ever since Factually, in an evidence document enumerated as "USCA5  670", Mr. Noack said the email related his concerns of potential YMCA problems due to a controversy involving a company the YMCA did business with  -- sounds legitimate that a good employee would want to help his employer avoid trouble.  The document also indicated that email was forwarded to him.   By whom? 

     It seems like he was set up, and later they committ perjury in court as the judge goes along with it?  What was he onto?  Did he know something the YMCA wanted hushed up?  At any rate, a judge cannot take unproven allegations as fact and by Law must regard all matters in the light most favorable to the non-moving party during a motion for "summary judgment." (-That is, in the light most favorable to Mr. Noack on any questionable matters.  Courts cannot assume things in favor of the party that's trying to drive another party out of court without a jury trial -- that simply is not legal.)  

    This is yet another matter (within two pages) showing illegal bias against Noack that favors a big employer! 

1)  First, there was the mere fact of illegal use of known perjury.

2)  Then, the biased use of the false testimony, and...

3)  third, the use of contested assumptions as if factual data. 

4)  Oh, fourth -- don't forget the judge ignoring the law about the need to regard all matters in the non-movants' (Noack's) most favorable light (during summary judgment motions).

-- FOUR (4) illegal acts by a judge...within only TWO (2) pages of her "recommendations" against him??!           By the way, the case did involve allegations of reverse gender discrimination, and the judge was a woman.    Does anyone else find that seems a bit odd or inappropriate?  -- Hey, it's YOUR country, America.      Remember, the court of appeals reviews these cases, de novo ("anew"), so they had these same documents to review and were supposed to be doing so as if it were all a fresh, new case to them, re-reviewing the data. 


      The YMCA was shown to have lied to the labor investigator, too, ( ),...and more!  Seeing the caliber of YMCA testimony plus evidence that the labor board never questioned YMCA witnesses (, let's take a look at some other documents.

       Then, Mr. Noack's sworn, notarized affidavit testimony filed with the labor board soon after leaving the YMCA: .

        Here's some email evidence the courts disregarded: .

       --- Ah, maybe some proof of an odd, summer pay-cut of almost $3 per hour while a fulltime employee (although the YMCA "smoke-screened" this in their "Internal Investigation" by indicating it happened when Noack was a part-time worker         (-untrue, as can be seen on the top, left of each page - he was full-time, throughout):, Ms. Davis wasn't Mr Noack's supervisor by then, so more than one person was involved.  Note the "current status", date, and #5 Task on each document.  Other documents on that website show he was a very good employee.

        ALL these things (and more) were ignored or cast aside by the judges involved.  Sound crooked? -- Oh yeah!


            What do YOU THINK happened?!?   

                                 The case evidently involved much more than a simple site-director dispute. 

                                                                    Must have been important, huh?   -   To ruin a nice man like that?

       Well, the YMCA is a "Christian" organization, and Jesus Christ did lots of miracles - turning water into wine, healing the sick, raising the dead.  Maybe  the YMCA needs to do some soul-searching over what they did and didn't do.

    There seems to be a lot that isn't right about this case and how Mr. Noack was treated, both at the YMCA and in the courts.  People sometimes say "WWJD?", or "What Would Jesus Do?" In one parable, a woman pleaded with an unrighteous judge until he relented.  Maybe America isn't beyond hope; but, even if some unrighteous judges don't care, God still does.

    God is a God of miracles.  Is anyone praying and believing?  And yes, even the faith to believe comes from God.  It seems a shame there's proof of perjury by a group calling itself "Christian".  Jesus preached a gospel of repentance for forgiveness of sins, and the apostle Peter himself found forgiveness after  denying Christ.  King David, too, when confronted about murder, humbled himself.  God resists the proud,...but gives grace to the humble.

    Perhaps if people will believe such a gospel in these days, they may be helped to that end by seeing Christians, called by His Name, humbly setting a good example.



Make a free website with Yola