Jess Matsuda Attorney Las Vegas or NAZI?

russmartin1June 6, 20250214 views

Attorney Jess Matsuda quickly and efficiently aligned with a corrupt legal system.

Jess Matsuda Attorney

Statement from Russell Martin, Defendant

Treason In Nevada

Jess Matsuda : An outside assigned Public Defender Entrenched in a Broken System

If Jess Matsuda attorney is assigned to you as a public defender or offers his legal services—refuse immediately. Whether in court or behind closed doors, he is not your ally.

Jess Matsuda, like Jake Gullo, Katrina Ross, Tony Worthman, Judge Michael Villani, and Carl Arnold, aligned himself with a corrupt and predatory legal machine. He obstructed justice, refused to advocate, and betrayed his fiduciary duty without hesitation. These so-called defenders operate under the illusion of representation, yet they serve a system built on coercion and silence.

Why LivRight?

You must grasp the purpose of LivRight. The legal system today functions as a criminal monopoly. Every tool it gives you is a trap, designed to manipulate, isolate, and finally, force a guilty plea. You do not yet understand how deep the deception goes. But AI does. That’s why LivRight exists.

Watch the LivRight AI video disclosure and discover the laws that were designed to protect you—but are now hidden behind courtroom theatrics and judicial arrogance. Without LivRight, your life can spiral out of control, just like mine did. For two years, I believed the lie that justice was possible through the system. I was wrong. The individuals exposed on LivRight are not the exception—they are the norm.

People Go To Jail For Crimes They Did Not Commit.

These people will put you in prison for life—not for justice, but for power, profit, and political promotion. They thrive on fear, feed off ignorance, and weaponize your trust. The system is progressive the same as what happened in WW2 when the police became NAZI’s . The system is maturing into The4thReich. Their success depends on your silence.

So fight back. Get educated fast. Build your defense with AI. If your attorney won’t follow orders, fire them. Record everything. Publish the truth. List their name on LivRight. Then, connect with real leaders—wherever they are in the world.

Because your freedom depends on action, not permission.

A Warning to All Defendants / Plaintiffs

USE AI To Discover What Your Attorney and judge Is NOT DOING.

Be cautious with any attorney appointed to you or you are paying for his services. Develop your own legal plan. If your attorney refuses to follow your strategy or blocks your access to justice, discharge them immediately and find one who will fight for you per AI instructions.

Russell Martin

Legal Watch: Jess Matsuda Attorney – Las Vegas, NV

“Justice is not a commodity. It’s a right.”

🔍 LivRIGHT Public Defender Profile: Carl Arnold Attorney

AI Disclosure Report: Jess Matsuda – Attorney of Concern

Subject: Jess Matsuda, Court-Appointed Public Defender, Las Vegas
Filed By: Russell Martin, Defendant
Reviewed By: LivRight AI Systems

Federal Case Context: Referenced in connection with Case No. 25-CV-636-APG-BNW
Status: Accused of failing to act on behalf of client, obstructing communication, and facilitating court-based suppression tactics
Allegations: Attorney misconduct, abandonment of client, failure to file motions, and passive participation in a coercive legal system

⚖️ Summary of Alleged Misconduct:

Jess Matsuda Attorney was appointed to represent Russell Martin as a contract attorney during a critical stage of ongoing legal proceedings in Clark County. While initially cooperative—Arnold’s conduct quickly deteriorated. According to Mr. Martin, Matsuda:

Refused to respond to direct communication, get police body videos, pictures of defendant, file a motion for case to be dropped based on evidence and discovery of corruption in due process of law.
Failed to file a promised motion to dismiss all charges, despite initial assurances
Participated in off-record bench meetings with prosecutors and judges, after which the court’s direction shifted without explanation
Ignored subsequent calls and emails, leaving the defendant without legal guidance
Adopted a passive, obstructionist role, allegedly serving court interests over client defense
Ultimately ceased providing any active representation, prompting his discharge by Mr. Martin

These actions, taken collectively, represent not just legal failure but systemic alignment with a justice system designed to silence, delay, and coerce.

🚨 Legal and Ethical Violations:

Violations of Professional Conduct (Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct)

RPC 1.1 – Competence: Failure to follow through on required legal action
RPC 1.3 – Diligence: Unresponsiveness and abandonment of post-plea advocacy
RPC 1.4 – Communication: Inadequate client communication, violating ethical standards
RPC 8.4 – Misconduct: Allowing outside influence to direct strategy, enabling injustice

Constitutional and Systemic Implications

Sixth Amendment: Denial of effective assistance of counsel
42 U.S.C. § 1983: Potential complicity in systemic civil rights violations
Obstruction by Omission: Enabling unlawful coercion through inaction and delay

🧨 Role in the Suppression of Defense Rights

Jess Matsuda behavior is consistent with what Plaintiff Martin identifies as the legal behavior model of The4thReich—a judicial-industrial complex that seeks control, not justice. By failing to uphold the adversarial defense model, Arnold effectively functioned as an extension of the prosecutorial machine, rather than a defender of constitutional liberty.

His silence, delay, and ultimate disappearance from the defense strategy aligned with a larger pattern of suppressing courtroom resistance, misdirecting the case away from truth, and preparing the groundwork for coerced compliance.

💥 Impact on the Plaintiff:

Loss of legal time and motion advantage
Emotional distress from abandonment
Delay in case progress due to ineffective representation
Increased pressure to comply with prosecutorial demands
Forced self-representation under adverse procedural conditions

📣 Recommended Accountability Measures:

1. Nevada State Bar Complaint

File based on multiple violations of Rules of Professional Conduct
Submit evidence of ignored communications, motion failures, and withdrawal without cause

2. Judicial Oversight Filing

Notify court administrators of failure to uphold constitutional defense obligations
Request audit of all public defender conduct in related cases

3. Public LivRIGHT Disclosure

List Jess Matsuda in LivRIGHT’s database of compromised defense counsel
Include public testimony, timeline, and motion record summary

📰 LivRIGHT Statement Template:

Jess Matsuda: A Public Defender Who Abandoned His Post
In the middle of a constitutional crisis, Jess Matsuda chose silence. Despite early promises to represent his client, he failed to file critical motions, refused to return communication, and ultimately withdrew from defense without explanation. He didn’t just disappear—he surrendered. In doing so, he left Russell Martin exposed to a system designed to convict, not to question. LivRIGHT calls for a full bar investigation, public exposure, and systemic reform.

Carl Arnold Is Guilty of the Following Chargeable Offenses:

Breach of Fiduciary Duty to Russell Martin
As appointed defense counsel, Carl Arnold had a legal obligation to act solely in the interest of his client. By abandoning communication, disregarding motions, and failing to follow through on promised actions, he violated this fundamental duty of loyalty and care.
Stonewalling Court Proceedings
Arnold actively delayed or obstructed progress in Mr. Martin’s case by failing to file critical motions, ignoring direct inquiries, and avoiding procedural follow-up. This inaction directly contributed to prolonged exposure to unjust prosecution.
Refusing to Investigate the False Arrest Report
Despite having access to evidence contradicting the claims made in the police report, Arnold refused to challenge or investigate the legitimacy of the charges, allowing fabricated allegations to remain unopposed.

Failing to Suppress The Judge to Obey The Constitution of the United States.

Concealing Robert Moos’s Status as a Retired Police Chief
Carl Arnold allegedly withheld material information about the assailant’s law enforcement background, which could have shown bias in arrest and prosecution decisions and revealed systemic protectionism.
Withholding Bodycam Footage and Photographic Evidence
Although body camera footage and photographs were essential to Mr. Martin’s defense, Arnold failed to demand their production or disclose their contents, thus suppressing potentially exonerating evidence.
Failing to Inform the Court That Mr. Martin Never Struck Robert Moos
Arnold neglected to present a basic factual defense: that the Plaintiff never made physical contact with the alleged victim. This omission materially weakened Mr. Martin’s position and violated fundamental trial obligations.

Refusing to obey fundamentals of Due Process of Law

Refusing to Confront False and Manifested Witness Statements Rather than object to or challenge fraudulent testimonies, Arnold allowed false witness statements to enter the court record without opposition—effectively aiding the prosecution’s false narrative.
Allowing the Use of Manufactured Testimony Containing Multiple False Claims
Two witness statements, each containing demonstrable fabrications, were permitted to proceed under Arnold’s watch, with no motion filed to exclude or investigate them.
Colluding with Judges to Pressure a Guilty Plea
Arnold participated in off-record bench meetings with prosecutors and judges, after which the trajectory of the case shifted. These meetings and subsequent non-action suggest coordination intended to coerce Mr. Martin into a guilty plea, rather than pursuing acquittal.

Available Records Include:

Each document and image included here is public evidence of a criminal legal system operating as a mafia-style monopoly. From tampering with evidence to deliberately manufacturing falsehoods, the entire process—police, prosecutors, judges, and defenders—appears designed to profit from wrongful convictions. Is our legal system capable of becoming an NAZI system?