I have a friend. He is an African American. He really wanted to become a court security guard. But, first, he is an African American, and, second, he is not related to any judges, or their current employees, relatives or friends by blood or marriage.
And he did not get that job.
Which, to me, is not surprising, because I did not see one court guard in Delaware, Otsego, Chenango or Schoharie Counties who would not be white.
And the same with the police force, State police stationed here and local police, with one exception in Delaware County Sheriff's Department (one officer who is not Caucasian). And the same with corrections officers.
So, my friend (whose name for apparent reasons I will withhold) who served this country in the military and should be respected instead of being put down and discriminated against, told me this about coming to one of the local courts on a civil case "the courts here are not used to see somebody like me in court and not in shackles".
Also, people call me, whether to seek my advice as an attorney or simply to chat, believe it or not, about my blogs, and give me information from a variety of dependable sources about relatives working in the court system and in the local governments.
I am not even talking about, for example, Delaware County, where I don't know whether there is an employee of the County who DOES NOT have a relative working in the same county. It is a pure land of kissing cousins. And, according to the County's answer to my FOIL request, the County does not have an anti-nepotism policy.
These blood connections are difficult to trace because women change names in marriage, have children outside of marriage, sometimes, on the opposite, women do not change names when they marry and you might never guess certain people are a husband and wife or are related in any other way, but within the "6th degree of consanguinity or affinity", requiring them to be disqualified from certain cases as a matter of law.
I keep hearing from my clients that a certain person who is allegedly a blood relative of a certain judge is doing something wrong to them in court, and that the victim cannot complain because information about blood ties is kept like intelligence secret and disclosed in whisper behind closed doors, usually by an attorney who is pissed by a judge - but not pissed to the point that the attorney would care to make this information public.
Because, as I've written many times in this blog, attorneys are afraid of retribution from the most honorable people in the world - judges.
Recently, I've got some more information about alleged blood ties of judges to certain people in the local court system which may present certain disqualification or even misconduct issues. And, I am investigating these issues through FOIL requests - I will see how successful those FOIL requests will be.
But here is a suggestion to the public - since it is a public court system funded by taxpayers money, to put it bluntly, you and me pay for this mess - shouldn't there be simply enacted a law REQUIRING judges to publish their family tree, down to the 6th degree of consanguinity and affinity (same as rules of disqualification for juror fact-finders), with names of all people in that family tree, places of work, names of spouses, etc.
So that a litigant entering a case may consult that family tree and at least see whether the judge has blood or marriage ties to witnesses, parties or attorneys in a certain proceeding.
Oh, and, of course, I would include into that law not only consanguinity and affinity, but close friends, law school buddies, campaign contributors, and non-formalized romantic relationships, like dating, boyfriends and girlfriends.
Too much invasion of privacy? If that is too much for a judge to give the public who elected him or her information to decide for themselves whether the judge in a certain case is or is not disqualified, he or she should choose another profession.
And, of course, I would couple that requirement with mandatory online publishing of judge's semi-annual financial reports instead of hiding them and not providing them even on FOIL requests, which is what happens now.
And, of course, I would require judges to disclose their memberships and memberships of all members of the judge's family tree, up to the 6th degree of consanguinity and affinity, in ALL, and I mean, ALL "charitable", social, social networking organizations, with a schedule of events in those organizations and a disclosure of membership in those organizations and what kind of perks a judge - or his family - might be receiving from them.
And it goes without saying, especially given the current culture of cruel persecution of attorneys and pro se parties criticizing judicial misconduct, that it is equally important to not only be able to learn about judicial disqualification, but also be able to do something without it without a risk of sanctions.
Allowing peremptory challenges to judges, as many states already allowed, would be a good start.
Such a system will not eliminate all issues of judicial disqualification, but it would at least provide a first step toward a real and effective access to court, guaranteed by the Constitution - instead of the pure white land of kissing cousins that we have, at least here, in the neck of woods of upstate New York.
And, personally, hypothetically, I would feel much better if I know that the mother (sister, brother-in-law, or the mother of the sister of the brother-in-law) of a recused judge does not have access to my own or my client's private file, simply because she is a court employee.
Of course, who cares about my feelings or feelings of other litigants if one needs to give a job to one's loved one in a tight job market?
No comments:
Post a Comment