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.







Monday, June 6, 2016

Delaware County (NY) DSS attorneys are allowed to derive private benefit from their public employment


Policies of Counties in New York are, very clearly, made under the guidance of a County Attorney.

The Delaware County Department of Social Services is engaged in the following activities:

(1) as a "neutral" court-appointed investigator for purposes of adoption;
(2) as an investigator of child neglect and abuse, which may result in removal of children from parents into foster care where the Department of Social Services is the child's legal guardian, and adoption of the child out of foster care, for which DSS gets federal incentive money.

It is very clear that attorneys for DSS as an investigator for purposes of all adoptions in the County, as legal guardians for children in foster care, as initiators of adoption proceedings out of foster care - should not have their own private adoption practice on the side, it is a complete conflict of interest.

I also know that former judge Carl Becker did have a private adoption practice on the side, concocted indicted reports on the Social Services side in cases where his private clients were involved absolving his clients so as to keep his lucrative private business intact.

I also know that the current County Attorney Porter Kirkwood was engaged in private practice representing individuals sued for elder abuse - which was completely contrary Porter Kirkwood's obligation as a prosecutor of elder abuse as DSS attorney.

With that in mind, I made a FOIL request with Social Services whether there are policies prohibiting private practice, and specifically, private adoption practice to DSS attorneys.


And, once again, County Attorneys are those who "guide" the County in creating (or not creating) such policies.

Obviously, County Attorneys and Assistant County Attorneys (for DSS) saw a direct financial benefit NOT to create policies prohibiting them a private practice on the side, or, specifically, a private adoption practice on the side.

So, DSS attorneys are at the same time acting as attorneys for investigators for all adoptions in the county, as prosecutors of child neglect which may result in removal of children and supply of children for adoption in the county, and as private adoption attorneys.

Nothing too corrupt.

No comments:

Post a Comment