May 17, 2017

Colonel Edwin C. Roessler Jr. Commonwealth Attorney Raymond F. Morrogh
Chief of Police Fairfax County Virginia
Fairfax County Jennings Building Judicial Center
4100 Chain Bridge Rd. 4110 Chain Bridge Rd. #123
Fairfax, VA 22030 Fairfax, VA 22030

Re: Request for the Investigation, Arrest, Indictment, and Prosecution for misprision of a felony B2.Petition VA Gen Ass December 12 2017


In support of the attach Petition filed with members of the General Assembly of Virginia for an Oversight Investigation (Complaints Exhibit 1), I request that the Fairfax County Police Investigate and the Fairfax Commonwealth Attorney arrest, indict and prosecute government attorneys, employees, and Justices/Judges for complicity in a business conspiracy and misprision of a felony in violation of VA Code §§ 18.2 481 & 482, and 18.2 499 & 500.

Said government attorneys, employees, and Justices/Judges have deprived the Undersigned Attorney of his right to due process under Article I of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the 5th, 7th & 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution by systematically denying access to an impartial court and civil trial by jury to prevent the securing of accountability, including monetary damages, for the ongoing violations of the prohibitions under Art. VI §§ 1, 5, & 7 of the Constitution of Virginia, and VA Code § 54-1-3915 & 54.1 3935, and the Void Ab Initio Order Doctrine. This complicity to violate Virginia’s constitutional prohibitions has been compounded by the refusal to investigate the issuance of unlawful court rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia and take legislative by my elected representatives, including Democrat Senators/former VA Governors Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine, Congressman Gerry Connelly, Democrat former VA Governor Terry McAuliffe, Democrat VA Governor Ralph S. Northam, Democrat VA Senator Richard L. Saslaw, and the other Democrat NOVA General Assembly members (see ( and, (

Query, “[t]o what purpose are court’s powers limited, and to what purpose are a limitation in writing on the court if these limitations may, at any time, be passed over and ignored by the courts who are intended to be restrained, controlled and limited?” [Chief Justice Marshall, in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) at 176 (1803)]. I am not delusional for more than 200 years ago, Virginian James Madison wrote that it is a clear and present danger to the Rule of Law, when, “[there has been an] accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Federalist No. 48, Feb. 1, 1788. This is because, “[t]here is no crueler tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of law, and with the colors of justice,” U.S. vs. Jannottie, 673 F.2d 578, 614 (3d Cir. 1982).

The Undersign Attorney alleges that the evidence confirms that the motive for the business conspiracy and misprision of a felony was in retaliation for the past 28 years of successful civil litigation as an independent Virginia attorney, including prevailing before the United States Supreme Court in Katia Gutierrez de Martínez v. Lamagno and DEA, 115 S.Ct. 2227 (1995) (remand for an evidentiary hearing before a jury for employee accountability for acts outside of the “scope of employment” not within the Federal Torts Claim Act), against the pattern and practice of former Attorney General Eric Holder during the Obama Administrations to use legal sophistry to not hold government employees, including attorneys, judges, and judges accountable for acts outside the scope of employment, jurisdiction, and judicial authority. If the vaunted rule of law can be disregarded as evidenced here by self-proclaiming “impunity” for government attorneys and jurists for using unlawful court rules and other felonies, then clearly, our Republic will not long survive the unbridled tyranny of a judiciary in collusion with government attorneys to place themselves above and beyond the law (See

Consequently, the attach Petition is my Statement of Probable Cause and will serve to draft a Criminal Complaint. Knowledge of the crime of misprision of a felony, and the jurisdiction to pursue those responsible imposes upon you, the legal obligation to do so.

I also request that as a victim of the alleged crimes I am kept informed of the status of the investigation as required under crime victim law.


Isidoro Rodriguez

cc: The Honorable Ralph S. Northam The Hon. Delegate M. Kirkland Cox
Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia General Assembly Building, Room 607
P.O. Box 1475 P.O. Box 406
Richmond, VA 23218 Richmond, Virginia 23218

The Hon. Richard L. Saslaw Senator Mark D. Obenshain
P.O. Box 1856 P.O. Box 555
Springfield, Virginia 22151-0856 Harrisonburg, Virginia 22803

Delegate Marcus B. Simon Delegate Robert B. Bell
P.O. Box 958 General Assembly Building, Room 801
Falls Church, VA 22040 P.O. Box 406
Richmond, Virginia 23218
1. VA Code §§ 18.2 481 & 482, defines “misprision of a felony” as “[r]esisting the execution of the laws under color of authority,” and makes it a Class 2 felony to which there is neither “impunity” nor absolute immunity for said acts outside of the scope of employment, judicial authority and jurisdiction.
2. Pursuant to the holding in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 1 Cranch 137; 2 L. Ed. 60; 1803 U.S. LEXIS 352 (1803), the Void Ab Initio Order Doctrine mandates that when an entity does not have either constitutional authority, or legal power, or jurisdiction to render any act or order, said act or order is void ab initio—it therefore is neither lawful nor subject stare decisis/res judicata or enforcement because said act or order is a complete nullity from its issuance, and may be impeached directly or collaterally by all persons, at any time, or in any manner. See, Collins v. Shepherd, 274 Va. 390, 402 (2007); Singh v. Mooney, 261 Va. 48, 51 52(2001); Barnes v. Am. Fertilizer Co., 144 Va. 692, 705 (1925); Rook v. Rook, 233 Va. 92, 95(1987).
3. Senator Daniel Webster noted, “[t]here can be no office in which the sense of responsibility is more necessary than in that of a judge; especially of those judges who pass, in the last resort, on the lives, liberty, and property of every man. The judiciary power, on the other hand, acts directly on individuals. The injured may suffer without sympathy or the hope of redress. The last hope of the innocent, under accusation and in distress, is in the integrity of his judges. If this fail, all fails, and there is no remedy on this side the bar of Heaven.” Daniel Webster, The Writings and Speeches of Daniel Webster, (Boston: Little, Brown, & Co., 1851), Vol. III, pp. 6 7.