Thursday, May 28, 2015
What is the difference between Sirkin and Hedges? It is a difference between pissing off Tormey and pleasing Tormey in going after Tormey's critics
I wrote in this blog about the disciplinary proceeding in the New York State Commission for judicial conduct against former judge Bryan Hedges, brought against him AFTER he resigned from the bench.
I also wrote in this blog about a retired judge Stephen Sirkin, a referee in my disciplinary case who refused to conduct a court-ordered evidentiary hearing, instead illegally decided a motion in my case (of course, against me), even though the NY State Constitution, Article VI paragraph 4 subsection (b) clearly allows decisions in appellate courts to be made ONLY by a concurrence of three appellate justices, with a quorum of four.
Obviously, Sirkin is not and has never been an appellate judge, cannot single-handedly replace a panel of four appellate justices required for a quorum, and cannot replace a concurrence of three appellate justices in making a decision.
Yet, the same NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct that disciplined Hedges, refused to discipline Sirkin, because, as it was explained to me, Sirkin is no longer a judge, he has retired.
It did not prevent the Commission to go after retired judge Hedges though, on a tip from William Fitzpatrick, a law school roommate and buddy of Judge Tormey, the Chief Administrative Judge of the 5th Judicial District.
William Fitzpatrick appeared to have a personal grudge against Hedges of monetary nature. According to the papers submitted to the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct, William Fitzpatrick was likely upset that Hedges did not give in to the blackmail by the alleged victim who wanted to get some money from Hedges and split the money with the prosecutor (statements as to that arrangement were submitted as evidence to the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct and is /or at least was, at the time I retrieved it/ publicly available online).
The bottom line is that the difference between non-prosecution of Sirkin and prosecution of Hedges was that Hedges pissed off the Chief Administrative Judge for the 5th Judicial District James Tormey by indicating to a court employee that Tormey was tormenting for refusal to engage in political espionage against a judge and Democratic judicial candidate that she was the target of Tormey's efforts "to get" her.
Of course, a zillion reasons may be brought up as to why Sirkin was not prosecuted and Hedges was.
And, of course, NYS Commission of Judicial Conduct has absolute "discretion" to bring or not to bring disciplinary proceedings against judges - and complainants, according to decisions by courts (self-serving decisions
So, when Sirkin bent over backwards, to the point of disobeying a clear court order, refused to hold a court-ordered evidentiary hearing for me and issued an unconstitutional "decision" against me - that was pleasing Tormey who was pissed off by my criticism of him in pleadings and bringing out in pleadings and in this blog Tormey's ongoing misconduct that was the subject of at least two lawsuits, one that has cost NY state taxpayers $600,000.00 to settle, not to count legal fees (Tormey got free representation from NY State for 4.5 years defending against charges of misconduct that had nothing to do with his judicial duties).
When Hedges disclosed to the plaintiff against Tormey that she was the target of Tormey's ire, which helped the plaintiff's lawsuit - that pissed of Tormey.
And, by the way, two employees on the disciplinary committee currently prosecuting me are direct subordinates of Tormey who can expect his full ire if they would dare to through out the frivolous petition transferred to them from the 3rd Department.
So, to sum it up, the difference between retired judges Sirkin and Hedges is this:
Sirkin - pleased Tormey by his misconduct against a critic of Tormey - is not prosecuted for misconduct because he is a retired judge, and the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct does not have (allegedly) jurisdiction over him. Nobody else will discipline Sirkin because his misconduct was on behalf of and at the request of the disciplinary prosecutors, representing a committee with two employees of Tormey.
Hedges - upset Tormey by giving valuable information for the lawsuit of a court employee against Tormey.
And this "distinction" is the sum and substance of the integrity of the judicial disciplinary system in New York.
No comments:
Post a Comment