THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"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).

“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 cost.

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.

" I do not believe that the practice of law is a "privilege" which empowers Government to deny lawyers their constitutional rights. The mere fact that a lawyer has important responsibilities in society does not require or even permit the State to deprive him of those protections of freedom set out in the Bill of Rights for the precise purpose of insuring the independence of the individual against the Government and those acting for the Government”. Lathrop v Donohue, 367 US 820 (1961), Justice Black, dissenting.

"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.

“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.


Monday, May 16, 2016

Barbara O'Sullian's house fire: some investigation is under way, possibly by the feds, but it appears to be fixed already

Based on tips from readers, the house fire of Barbara O'Sullivan I've been covering since the day it happened, on the night of April 22/23, 2016, is being investigated - in a weird way.

First, Barbara's family member, an estranged brother Peter who Barbara sued, the one who worked as a Social Services Supervisor in Delaware County NY for years and to whom the former Commissioner Bill Moon owes approvals of multi-million dollar budgets (and jobs for friends and relatives), without talking to Barbara, without seeking permission, visited the site of the fire, apparently with a fire investigator.

A lot of good things can a disgruntled brother whom Barbara sued for fraud involved with the estate of their father, and for condoning the poor care of their father, can tell the fire investigator.

After Peter's visit to the site, the fire investigator started asking Barbara questions about certain cans that allegedly were in her garage.

And, upon Barbara's review of contents of her burnt house and the basement, everything that did not burn, somebody smashed.

The site of the fire has been wide open for anybody to come tamper with the evidence and to plant evidence.

The site was not covered with tarp to protect it from the elements, was not secured from access by people and animals for investigation by local authorities, and was obviously not reported to the state for investigation.

Barbara tried to report it to the FBI, and the FBI laughed her off, but 3 weeks later, a truck with equipment listing "FBI" on it, was spotted by a witness on the site of the fire.

It appears that somebody is trying hard to (1) stall the investigation into the real reasons, and real culprits as to the house fire, and to (2) frame Barbara for it.

It also seems that the feds are at work on the site, and in Delaware County, New York.

I will continue to cover the story.

Stay tuned.


No comments:

Post a Comment