Here is another example that Eric Schneiderman is not exactly forthcoming, to say the least, in his efforts to root out corruption in New York State government.
First of all, Eric Schneiderman did not seek an indictment of Sheldon Silver and Dean Skelos, and now that the U.S. Supreme Court has amended the Hobbs Act by interpretation in U.S. v. McDonnell, there is a chance that their convictions will be reversed and they will go free and will not be made accountable.
Until Silver and Skelos were indicted, Eric Schneiderman was their attorney, officially, as a matter of law, under New York Public Law 17.
There is a real conflict of interest where a prosecutor is investigating and prosecuting his own client, for conduct that occurred during such representation.
The same kind of conflict of interest when the FBI is investigating Hillary Clinton while the legal advisor of the FBI is Loretta Lynch, former attorney for Hillary Clinton:
"Lynch was with the Washington-headquartered international law firm Hogan & Hartson LLP from March 2002 through April 2010.
Under the law of agency, every attorney in a law firm is deemed to represent every client represented by the law firm, and especially if Lynch was a partner in the firm, sharing in every client's payment financially.
Eric Schneiderman, same as Loretta Lynch in relation to investigating and/or prosecuting the Clintons, has an irreconcilable conflict of interest in investigating and prosecuting Judge John Michalek - as he did in investigating and prosecuting in state court of Dean Skelos and Sheldon Silver.
For example, if Dean Skelos and Sheldon Silver would be sued for corruption in civil court, Eric Schneiderman will be representing them.
So, how could Schneiderman prosecute them, or his other clients - state employees?
A real conflict of interest, and a conflict put into statutory law by legislators who knew what they were doing in putting upon the same attorney a statutory duty to both defend them in civil rights lawsuits charging corruption, and investigate/prosecute them for corruption criminally. Legislators knew that such a conflict will effectively kill criminal investigations and prosecution into state government's corruption in New York - as it actually did.
And now we have the consequences where corruption in New York state government is rampant, there are practically no criminal investigations and prosecutions of state government officials for corruption - as the cases of Skelos and Sivler demonstrate, and those cases which are brought, are concluded, as with John Michalek, so that to hush up and not exposed people and documents involved, raising issues of possible corruption of Eric Schneiderman himself to hush up the prosecution.
Eric T. Schneiderman is still, as a matter of statutory law, an attorney for the now former New York Supreme Court Justice John Michalek - if he is sued in civil rights cases (statute of limitations in New York - 3 years) for any civil rights violations. Schneiderman was, for the entirety of Michalek's stay on the bench, Michalek's official legal advisor.
Anything that Michalek did was committed during the time when Michalek was Schneiderman client - so Schneiderman could not possibly be the prosecutor on the case.
If former Justice Michalek is sued for civil rights violations, Eric T. Schneiderman has a statutory duty, under New York Public Law 17, to represent Justice Michalek in that civil rights lawsuit.
But, Attorney General Schneiderman just obtained an indictment - and a conviction - of John Michalek for accepting a bribe and "filing a false public instrument", and Schneiderman accepted a plea from Michalek eliminating other counts, involving specific lawsuits, documents and people.
If people on the other side of the case-fixing would sue Judge Michalek in federal court within the next 3 years, Schneiderman will have to DEFEND that lawsuit, after he criminally prosecuted Michalek.
It is interesting that Schneiderman even considered filing a false public instrument by a judge a crime - he did not consider such conduct by a judge a crime previously.
When I raised the issues of similar fraud in a civil rights action on behalf of my husband Frederick J. Neroni in federal court, specifically, that the now-former judge Carl F. Becker has conspired with the Chief of Republican Committee of the Delaware County (NY) Board of Election and filed a false certificate of 2002 elections, and asked Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman to oust Carl F. Becker as a usurper of public office following AG's duty to do that under the writ of quo warranto,
- refused to bring a petition for such a writ,
- did not investigate or criminally prosecute Carl Becker, but instead,
- REPRESENTED the corrupt judge, and
- obtained a dismissal of the lawsuit against the judge - from another corrupt judge, James Tormey, Eric Schneiderman own recent and ongoing client who Eric Schneiderman represented and did not criminally prosecute for engaging court personnel in political espionage against another judge.
In fact, Schneiderman regularly obtains dismissals of civil rights lawsuits against judges claiming absolute immunity for MALICIOUS and CORRUPT acts of those judges.
In other words, if a judge is bribed, and is sued by the victim of the fixed case, Schneiderman will represent THE JUDGE and will seek the dismissal of the civil rights lawsuit on the grounds that the judge is ABSOLUTELY IMMUNE FROM LAWUIST FOR FIXING THE CASE - see quote from the court case about the "Kids for Cash" judge Marc Ciavarella in the header of this blog.
For the above reasons, I firmly believe that the recent investigation and prosecution - for accepting a bribe - of Judge John Michalek of Buffalo Supreme Court - has nothing to do with Schneiderman's desire to root out judicial corruption.
There must be some other reasons for the prosecution.
Maybe, the judge's place, now paying $193,000, was needed for somebody else in power.
Maybe, the feds are too close on Schneiderman's own back, so Schneiderman wants to produce some show of MINIMAL prosecutorial zeal to fight corruption of high-raking state officials.
Who knows what the real reasons for the prosecution was, but, the fact remains that Eric Schneiderman is Judge John Michalek's own attorney. And, Eric Schneiderman's office, even though not Eric Schneiderman himself, represented the presiding judge Donald Cerio in civil rights actions in federal court and, should Donald Cerio be sued, will represent Donald Cerio again.
Eric Schneiderman, by the perverted New York law, Public Law 17, as it is interpreted by federal courts, has been, throughout investigation and prosecution of Judge Michalek, until Judge Michaled plea of guilty and resignation, a standby counsel of all State of New York employees, including BOTH the presiding judge and the defendants in People v. Michalek - judge John Michalek and Judge Donald Cerio.
So, on Schneiderman's indictment, a Supreme Court judge in New York out of Buffalo, a 65-year-old John Michalek, a graduate of Albany Law School, was just convicted on a plea bargain, for only two out of multiple charges, for taking a bribe and for filing a false instrument. The sentencing of John Michalek is reportedly set for September 1, 2015.
The taking a bribe charge was reportedly from a powerful and politically connected attorney G. Steven Pigeon, a friend, ally and political advisor of:
- billionaire Tom Galisano;
- Bill and Hillary Clinton; and
- Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Since Pigeon was a close ally and advisor of billionaire Tom Galisano, Bill and Hillary Clintons and Governor Cuomo, I can only imagine who those friends were for whom court cases were fixed.
I wonder whether bribes were involved in Madison drug court cases, too, since Mulvey, a former counsel for Senator Seward, together with Cerio (presiding judge in the Michalek's case) went so far as to eliminate an elected judge from all criminal cases altogether because the judge insisted on following the law in who is and who is not entitled to drug court, while Mulvey and Cerio wanted more criminal defendants to go to drug court.
I wonder whether Cerio received a handsome bribe himself in accepting a plea to just two, and the least revealing, counts of the indictment.
Knowing Mulvey's bias against indigent defendants, it is clear that Mulvey's interest was not to help anybody, but there is a very clear possibility that Mulvey and Cerio were bribed in drug court cases in Madison county, too.
At least from the circumstances, it is quite likely that Judge Cerio was bribed to accept the lenient plea bargain of Judge Muchalek in order to protect those influential people who could otherwise be exposed by a public trial.
And of course, I do not expect AG Schneiderman to investigate those people, and to investigate other judges outed daily (including on my blog) in acts screaming of corruption - after all, he is busy representing them.
Schneiderman never indicted Carl F. Becker, who was never indicted for any of his shenanigans, including filing a false certificate of elections in 2011.
After Becker quickly resigned in July of 2015, he put his friend, the Delaware County DA Richard Northrup, in the position overseeing the drug court (Northrup was running unopposed and had Becker swear Northrup in, even though Becker was by that time a lay individual who had no authority to swear in a judge). I wonder whether the drug court continues as a money producing operation for both Judge Northrup (in addition to his salary) and Judge Becker.
It appears that AG Schneiderman sought to close judge Michalek's case as soon as possible, and before the elections - the sentencing is scheduled for September 1, 2016 - and without much exposure of people involved, and that is NOT conduct of an honest prosecutor.
As I stated above, I will try to get a copy of the indictment through my own FOIL request, but, knowing how the government usually stalls such requests, I do not expect an answer to it for several months.
Yet, when I receive an answer, I will report on it.