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.

Sunday, May 25, 2025

On demented Delaware County supervisors

 I am reading materials of a certain federal lawsuit against a certain County's elected leaders.  For 1st Amendment retaliation.  The lawsuit survived the initial motion to dismiss and went into discovery stage.  The County stalls discovery.   4 (!) Court hearings, transcribed, held on the subject of stalling.  In one of them, appearance of all defendants is court ordered.


And then, the County uses this trick:


The attorney for the County claims, through an affidavit of one of the county's legislators/executives ' daughter that the person in question will be unable and no good testifying as a witness, because he, though never diagnosed, has 

(a) hearing loss, 

(b) Parkinson's disease and 

(c) profound memory loss, 







and for that reason even "decided " not to be re-elected, even though it is unclear how a demented person can decide anything, especially anything so serious as to whether to run for re-election or not.  We have the Biden syndrome revisited here, obviously.


In other words, the attorney for the County admits, on record, that at least one of the voting County legislators is incompetent to do his job.


The court allows him not to testify,  because of the stated grounds (hearing loss, Parkinson, dementia).

While allowing the demented defendant not to testify, the court did not question whether it has jurisdiction over the mentally and physically incompetent defendant,  and about the lack of authority of the "defendant 's" law firm and lawyer to represent him directly.  

The judge did not STOP the proceedings, did not declare the demented defendant's purported attorneys to be without authority representing the demented defendant, and did not order a stay in proceedings until and unless the demented defendant is properly adjudicated as incompetent in state court and his legal representative is substituted in the federal action.


Of course, that incompetency proceeding would have opened a whole different can of worms for Delaware County, so that avenue was not pursued and the court proceeded without jurisdiction. 


Within 2 days of the hearing, the demented supervisor participated in the vote to pledge unlimited taxpayer funds to his own legal defense, which he must fund from his own pocket -  it is not covered by insurance,  and the County has no duty to fund that expense. His hearing loss, Parkinson and dementia do not prevent him from voting.


Within a month from that, the same attorney provides to the same court a certificate from the same demented supervisor who could not testify, a "certificate" where "the supervisor ", or someone on his behalf,  claims that he was advised by his counsel about what electronic discovery is, complete with Bolean searches and such, and perfectly understood what it is all about.



Eh?


Why didn't the fellow testify about it one month prior? 


Or, did the demented elderly County leader who cannot even sign an affidavit on his own behalf to the court miraculously get cured of dementia? 


It is the public record, ladies and gentlemen. 


No newspaper, including the one that is litigating the action, dares to write about it.


The name of the demented supervisor is Thomas Axtell.


The name of the County is Delaware County, NY.


The name of the newspaper who did not cover the story is The Reporter from Walton, NY.


The name of the attorney who bamboozled the court was Giancarlo Facciponte.


The name of attorney Facciaponte' s law firm is Hancock Eastabrook, the law firm of the Senior Magistrate of the same court David Peebles, the same law firm that fixed the court case for Judge Brian Burns when he was sued for his role as a false witness in a retaliation case against an Oneonta, NY blogger.

The same law firm whose managing partner Timothy Murphy, the fixer in Judge Burns' case, is the son of a retired NYS Supreme Court Justice Thomas Murphy , and the brother of the ever-sitting NYS Supreme Court Justice James Murphy who took the seat of his father on his retirement in 2004. 

Coincidentally, Judge James Murphy is now also Deputy Chief Administrative Judge for upstate New York, conveniently overseeing assignment of judges to his brother's law firm's cases in state courts and, naturally, having a pull on federal courts, too.


The name of federal court that swallowed this bullshit from the inbred law firm and attorney Facciaponte whole is the US Disctrict Court for the Northern District of New York.


The name of the judge who accepted this obvious bamboozling without batting an eye is the former US attorney/prosecutor and now Magistrate Miroslav Lovric.


Now, Delaware County voters, please, consider - how many votes on how many Delaware County's local laws and financial resolutions are now suspect because of Thomas Axtell's undisclosed dementia?


How many more demented supervisors are on the Delaware County's Board of supervisors?


 If you thought the Biden autopen scandal is bad and hidden away in Washington, DC, think again.  It is right in your face. 


Voters, pay attention already in the election year!!!!

Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)