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).

“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.



“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.

Friday, November 4, 2016

A complaint was filed with the NYS Judicial Conduct Commission requesting to take Judge Richard Gumo of Delhi Town Court of the bench

I have just filed a complaint against Judge Richard Gumo of Delhi Town Court requesting to take him off the bench because of his continued misconduct in rubber stamping and allowing his court clerk to rubber-stamp warrants (and, possibly, other court documents), as well as for lying to attorneys and to the Delaware County Court under oath, and for having people put in jail and criminally prosecuted in based on arrest warrants that he knew to be false.

I attached to the complaint the following documents:

1) Gumo's testimony in front of NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct on September 18, 2014;
2) Gumo's testimony in front of Delaware County Court on February 24, 2016 when he was caught by attorney Joseph Ermeti about
  • the time when he left to New York City to testify in front of the Judicial Conduct Commission,
  • that he has a disability that prevents him from signing his own warrants - which is the requirement of Criminal Procedure Law;
  • as to the day when he stamped the warrant;
  • as to the fact that he himself stamped the warrant, and not his court clerk Cathy Fletcher;
4) the transcript of a felony hearing that I personally handled in front of Gumo on behalf of Barbara O'Sullivan, when Gumo failed to disclose to me that he or his clerk stamped Barbara's arrest warrant, making it illegal - that would have resulted in my immediate motion to dismiss, and would have saved Barbara 1.5 years of criminal litigation, and would have saved the Delaware County costs of the grand jury proceedings, of jailing Barbara and of prosecuting Barbara;

5) Judge Lambert's ruling that the warrant is invalid because of Gumo's misconduct;

6) Acting DA John Hubbard's request to dismiss the indictment because of the pre-trial ruling that no evidence derived from the illegal arrest warrant may be used at trial; and

7) Judge Lambert's dismissal of Barbara O'Sullivan's case on February 25, 2016 - see items 5), 6) and 7) published in my earlier blog here.

Since Gumo continues, according to witnesses, to rubber-stamp or allow his court clerk Cathy Fletcher to rubber stamp warrants, I do not know how he will wiggle out of this one.

The question that remains is - why Acting Delaware County DA John Hubbard did not prosecute Judge Gumo for perjury and did not investigate him for official misconduct?

Because Acting DA Hubbard benefits from Judge Gumo's misconduct by drumming up convictions that allowed him to run for the office of the District Attorney and claim to voters that he is "tough on crime"?


No comments:

Post a Comment