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, October 31, 2016

The first reaction to the criminal complaint against Delaware County (NY) Clerk Sharon O'Dell and attorney/judge Jonathan S. Follender - the immediate resignation of Sharon O'Dell

On October 19, 2016 I have sent a criminal complaint and a demand of impeachment against Delaware County (NY) Clerk Sharon O'Dell, for knowingly filing a false multi-thousand dollar judgment fabricated by attorney (and town justice) Jonathan S. Follender, and against attorney Jonathan S. Follender and his client on whose behalf (as well as his own) he filed a fabricated judgment.

 On October 24, 2016, a Monday, the complaint was received by:

 1) Delhi Village Police;



2)  Delaware County Sheriff's Department;



3) Chairman of Delaware County Board of Supervisors James Eisel, with a demand to impeach and fire Sharon O'Dell and members of her personnel who knowingly filed the fraudulent judgment; and




4) Attorney Grievance Committee for the Appellate Division 3rd Department - asking for disbarment of Jonathan S. Follender who, once again, knowingly filed a fraudulent multi-thousand dollar judgment contrary to a clear court order.


On October 25, 2016 I also filed a complaint against Judge Follender with the New York State Commission for Judicial Conduct demanding the immediate suspension of Follender from his position of Town Justice of the Town of Denning, Ulster County, and to ultimately take him off the bench, after full prosecution, and prohibit him to ever be a judge again.

 Today, a reader of my blog has sent to me a photograph from a local newspaper circulated in Delhi, NY, Delaware County - "The County Shopper", of October 27, 2016,


Took Sharon O'Dell 3 days since the filing of the criminal complaint to suddenly and unexpectedly "retire".

 Sharon O'Dell is 65.  Of course, all predecessors of Sharon O'Dell died in office - the job of sitting and doing nothing for $63,245 a year in rural Delaware County, NY 

and have "absolute judicial immunity" for malicious and corrupt acts in office (not against a criminal complaint though) was too good to give up, and there was no prior announcement of her planned "retirement" - so it is obvious that Sharon O'Dell ran from office because of the criminal complaint and did not just suddenly "retire".

 Sharon O'Dell obviously tried to save her pension - had she been impeached and fired, she could have lost it.  I wonder if she will keep it if she is criminally prosecuted, indicted and convicted.

 NO elected public official would suddenly "retire" 12 days before the next elections outside of the election cycle.

 Here is the "sample ballot" in Delaware County for the upcoming November 8, 2016 elections.


Delaware County Clerk's position is not on the ballot this year.  The only Delaware County position up for elections this year is that of the County District Attorney - see the last column on the right on the "sample ballot".

 Had Sharon O'Dell's decision to "retire" been a regular decision, no tied to my criminal complaint against her, she would have announced her retirement a long time ago, to allow her replacement through elections this coming November.

 The "retirement" of Sharon O'Dell eliminates the need for her impeachment - and I wonder who will be her replacement (since the criminal complaint is filed against her AND her personnel who participated in filing of the fraudulent judgment).

 Yet, Sharon O'Dell's flight from the position of Delaware County Clerk does not cancel out the request for her criminal investigation and prosecution.  The sworn criminal complaint is filed, is based on irrefutable documentary evidence, and Sharon O'Dell's "retirement" does nothing to stop the criminal investigation and prosecution of herself and members of her now former personnel who knowingly filed the fraudulent multi-thousand dollar judgment, which is a FELONY punishable by years in state prison.

 I wonder whether before her retirement Sharon O'Dell corrected her "mistake" or left it in - if she did not correct her mistake and did not annul the fabricated judgment before leaving, that would only aggravates her criminal conduct.

 I wonder whether the newly formed and much celebrated "Del-Chen-O [Delaware-Chenango-Otsego County] Women's Bar Association" was notified that
  • a criminal complaint based on documentary evidence was pending against Sharon O'Dell
before they were asked to Congratulate Sharon O'Dell on her early "retirement" and wish her their "Highest Hopes" for a "Beautiful Life Ahead" -

but I would not be surprised to learn that they knew about the criminal complaint and

simply participated covering up the real reason for RESIGNATION of Sharon O'Dell - that she was caught in committing a bad crime and is RUNNING.

 A poor start and a poor advertisement for the "#Del-Chen-OWomen'sBarAssociation", supported by the Chief Administrative Judge of the 6th Judicial District (Molly Fitzgerald), a Judge of the Appellate Division (Elizabeth Garry) and the local Attorney Grievance Committee (Monica Duffy) - see all of them, together with Delhi, NY attorneys Larisa Obolensky and Rene Albaugh in the picture celebrating the start of the "Del-Chen-O"


to endorse a public official caught red-handed in commission of a felony, and to wish a criminal caught red-handed a "beautiful life ahead". 

In prison, life is usually not that beautiful.

 I will now have to ask Monica Duffy's Attorney Grievance Committee to disqualify herself from Follender's case since she endorsed the organization that endorsed Sharon O'Dell after the criminal complaint against O'Dell and Follender was filed.

 Of course, the local authorities will try to sweep the criminal complaint against public officials under the rug - as they usually do.  But, I will continue to cover how the criminal complaint against Sharon O'Dell and Jonathan S. Follender is - or is not - investigated and prosecuted in Delaware County.

 Stay tuned.



Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)