EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY:

"If the judges interpret the laws themselves, and suffer none else to interpret, they may easily make, of the laws, [a shredded] shipman's hose!" - King James I of England, around 1616.

“No class of the community ought to be allowed freer scope in the expression or publication of opinions as to the capacity, impartiality or integrity of judges than members of the bar. They have the best opportunities of observing and forming a correct judgment. They are in constant attendance on the courts. Hundreds of those who are called on to vote never enter a court-house, or if they do, it is only at intervals as jurors, witnesses or parties. To say that an attorney can only act or speak on this subject under liability to be called to account and to be deprived of his profession and livelihood by the very judge or judges whom he may consider it his duty to attack and expose, is a position too monstrous to be entertained for a moment under our present system,” Justice Sharwood in Ex Parte Steinman and Hensel, 95 Pa 220, 238-39 (1880).


“Because the law requires that judges no matter how corrupt, who do not act in the clear absence of jurisdiction while performing a judicial act, are immune from suit, former Judge Ciavarella will escape liability for the vast majority of his conduct in this action. This is, to be sure, against the popular will, but it is the very oath which he is alleged to have so indecently, cavalierly, baselessly and willfully violated for personal gain that requires this Court to find him immune from suit”, District Judge A. Richard Caputo in H.T., et al, v. Ciavarella, Jr, et al, Case No. 3:09-cv-00286-ARC in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Document 336, page 18, November 20, 2009. This is about judges who were sentencing kids to juvenile detention for kickbacks.


"The legal profession must take great care not to emulate the many occupational groups that have managed to convert licensure from a sharp weapon of public defense into blunt instrument of self-enrichment". Walter Gellhorn, "The Abuse of Occupational Licensing", University of Chicago Law Review, Volume 44 Issue 1, September of 1976.


This case illustrates to me the serious consequences to the Bar itself of
not affording the full protections of the First Amendment to its applicants for
admission. For this record shows that [the rejected attorney candidate] has
many of the qualities that are needed in the American Bar. It shows not only that [the rejected attorney
candidate] has followed a high moral, ethical and patriotic course in all of
the activities of his life, but also that he combines these more common virtues with
the uncommon virtue of courage to stand by his principles at any cos
t.
It is such men as these who have most greatly honored the profession of the law.
… The legal profession will lose much of its nobility and its glory if it is
not constantly replenished with lawyers like these. To force the Bar to become
a group of thoroughly orthodox, time-serving, government-fearing individuals is
to humiliate and degrade it.”


In Re Anastaplo,

18 Ill. 2d 182, 163 N.E.2d 429 (1959), cert. granted, 362 U.S. 968 (1960), affirmed over strong dissent, 366
U.S. 82 (1961), Justice Black, Chief Justice Douglas and Justice Brennan, dissenting.







Friday, September 18, 2015

A disciplinary complaint was filed against Richard Northrup, the Delaware County DA

I have been informed that a disciplinary complaint has been filed against Delaware County District Attorney and judicial candidate Richard Northrup on the grounds that:

  • he knowingly engaged in a case where he knew he was disqualified;
  • knowingly proceeded in prosecution of a criminal case for the benefit of his office's employee and against the interests of the People of the State of New York;
  • failed to prosecute a heinous and violent crime because the perpetrator was a close blood relative of an employee of the DA's office;
  • prepared to use forged evidence at a felony criminal trial in the case that Northrup knew was fabricated that is to commence next week.
At the recent public hearing in Albany, NY before the Statewide Commission for Attorney Discipline, Monica Duffy, Chief Counsel of the Professional Conduct Committee, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department, claimed, in answer to public criticism of the Committee for non-prosecution of rampant prosecutorial misconduct, that the Committee does not engage in selective enforcement of attorney disciplinary rules and that the Committee does investigate and prosecute criminal prosecutors committing misconduct.

Evidence complained about in the just filed disciplinary complaint against Northrup is overwhelming, documentary, and should result in his disbarment.

We will see if the Committee will stick to its word and prosecute the prosecutor who knowingly and intentionally, knowing that he is disqualified, and while using falsified evidence, tried to attain a criminal conviction for political reasons.

Stay tuned.

No comments:

Post a Comment