Whether federal obstruction of justice statutes and national security concerns can override state probate proceedings involving a decedent's estate when allegations of fraud and witness tampering are present

No question identified. : 5. Court of Appeal reversed my four days factual win hearing decision, with facts evidence provided in abundance joint property, bank account, etc, Robert Bodnar’s in his own handwriting, writing my name as Bina Bodnar his emergency contact. Incorrect information used in reversing the decision, including the testimony of Bill C linked to Robert’s death, forged Will testimony attached and other documents, wrong interpretation of my faith and twisting the testimony of Imam. Without giving me any opportunity of retrial evidentiary hearing. Opinion diverted to probate and spousal case but the real aspect is my beloved husband passed away in a tragic manner while getting instructions on a call and national security matter. I was the witness. I have no legal representation and I am being chased threat of life. I request for legal help, and security. 6. The failure to acknowledge evidence and its impact on the prejudice analysis conflicts with the United States Supreme Court’s decisions. I have highlighted these and many other points to the court, along booklets of proofs but these not addressed in decisions. 7. Federal Law and National Security Issues Here, the case is covering up tragic death security matter by diverting it to marriage/probate case. For benefits, these civil citizens counsels and parties, interference of hidden powerful hands concealing the matter. Counsels and Parties are not letting me highlight the main issue involved National security, technology and my husband tragic death. Federal law, Chapter 73 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, defines various specific crimes that constitute obstruction of justice, including: * Witness tampering and retaliation * Jury tampering * Destruction of evidence * A broad provision, the Omnibus Clause, also criminalizes anyone who "corruptly... endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice" in connection with a pending court proceeding. 8. Validity and Decisions of The Case. How is the entire case and outcomes being valid? When the case is executing on of the fraud intentions, concealing national security interest matter, embezzlement, looting, forged and fabricated testimonies, forged and fabricated documents. Jeopardizing tragic death proofs. Legal counsel’s links and conflict of intertest. In Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944), the Supreme Court set aside a judgment after more than one year because it found a party and its attorneys engaged in "a deliberately planned and carefully executed scheme. 9. 10. 1 Right after Robert’s tragic death his estranged relatives came to Oklahoma within hours and joined hands with people linked to his death, national security. They jeopardized his death proofs when his blood was not even cleaned, and I was in the hospital in the state of shock, and traumatised with the tragedy. Ongoing trespassing my home, accessed my safe lockers, looted my own ancestral jewellery, cash, valuables, deeds, property, business and documents worth more than the estate. Messed mortgage, looted 90 plus guns, lying on police report proven, then entire police report missing, parties and their attorneys in depositions, emails, police report confessed. Counsels and especially Patrick Bodnar, Mary and Anne Poling a practicing attorney perjured, and hiding man and others liked to my husband death in Ecuador, USA and using them in this case as witness. So, Robert’s issues with them and his messages to me before his tragic death were a lie? Attached. My brother-in-law Col Tom and I contacted police about parties and counsels’ access to my home. And about data compromised. Data Privacy Act (HB 1030), §74-3113.1. Till date my attempts to attack to my data, proofs available. . Repeated Insurance Fraud life insurance, guns, my own valuables documents looted, then they claim theft from their own custody and claim insurance. They confessed accessing to safe and lockers in evidence repeatedly prov