"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.

Saturday, October 31, 2015

Carl Mugglin's support of Porter Kirkwood as one of the best attorneys Mugglin knows - a fake

Porter Kirkwood is proud of support he is given by the retired Judge Carl Mugglin who allegedly claimed in Kirkwood's campaign flyers that Porter Kirkwood is allegedly the best attorney Carl Mugglin knows.

Well,  Carl Mugglin's judgment is questionable to begin with, given his sorry record of will-drafting (see Matter of Arthur Kilmer's Estate in Delaware County Surrogate's Court, Kilmer v Moseman in Delaware County Supreme Court where courts and attorneys were battling as to interpretation of the will Carl Mugglin drafted as an attorney); claims that criminal trials and deposition under the threat of criminal prosecution can be held in churches; and that female attorneys dig holes for their female clients if they engage in intellectual efforts.

So, this misogynistic bully who had earlier endorsed Carl Becker as an honest and good judge - which is laughable to all litigants not connected to Carl Becker through family, friends or ties to the County and who has ever crossed his middleschool-bully temper.

Yet, the misogynistic bully Carl Mugglin actually lied to the voters when he claimed that Porter Kirkwood is one of the greatest attorneys he knows.  Here is why.

I analyzed Porter Kirkwood's appellate record, available at the website of the NYS Appellate Division Third Judicial Department.

Here are the results.  I made it initially in a table format, but the table did not fit into the blogger platform.

1/ 26-Dec-02 Matter of Nora M. and others Delaware County Family Court Judge Estes Child neglect petition Delaware County DSS appeal dismissed as moot Mugglin was part of appellate panel Neither won nor lost

2/ 8-May-03 Matter of Jordan E., Juvenile delinquent Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Juvenile delinquency Delaware County Modified on Kirkwood's cross-appeal Mugglin did not participate Won

3/ 12-May-05 Matter of Edward S. v Kelly S. and 2 other proceedings Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Dismissal of petition for modification of custody and visitation based on change of circumstances Client - Delaware County DSS Reversed on the law, petitions reinstated, matter remanded to Family Court Mugglin did not participate won in front of Becker, lost on appeal

4/ 9-Jun-05 Matter of Jessica GG, PINS v Tim Card, juvenile probation officer, Delaware County Delaware County Family court Carl Becker Violation of probation petition for a person in need of supervision (minor) Client - Delaware County probation Department, DSS Reversed, on the law, remanded - the minor was not advised by Becker of her right to remain silent Mugglin participated lost

5/ 7-Jul-05 Matter of Matthew WW. V. John A. Johnson Delaware County Supreme Court, transferred Article 78 proceeding 3rd Department Denial of annulment of an indicated report of child maltreatment Client - William Moon, Delaware County DSS Petition granted, indicated report annulled on insufficient evidence Mugglin did not participate lost

6/ 9-Mar-06 Timothy R. Moon v. Cortland Memorial Hospital Corland County Supreme Court Judge Philip Rumsey The lower court granted summary judgment to the hospital Timothy R. Moon, DSS Commissioner's relative Affirmed, with costs Mugglin did not participate Lost

7/ 22-Feb-07 Jesse L., juvenile delinquent Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Juvenile delinquency Delaware County Affirmed - Mugglin did not participate - won

8/ 29-Nov-07 Matter of Brooke II, alleged to be juvenile delinquent Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Juvenile delinquency Delaware County Modified  Mugglin did not participate won

9/ 1-Apr-10 Matter of Richard S., Michael S. Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Child neglect, having access to own children in violation of order of probation applicable to sex offenders for a non-sex offender Delaware County DSS Affirmed  Mugglin did participate Won

10/ 2-Jun-11 Matter of Skyler R. Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Child abuse proceeding Delaware County DSS appeal dismissed as moot Mugglin did not participate Won before Becker; neither won nor lost on appeal

11/ 2-Jun-11 Matter of Nicole K., permanently neglected child Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Termination of parental rights Delaware County DSS Affirmed Mugglin did not participate won

12/ 14-Jul-11 Matter of Joseph RR. And others Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Child neglect proceeding Delaware County DSS Affirmed  Mugglin did not participate won

13/ 27-Oct-11 Matter of Kimberly Z. Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Child Neglect and abuse proceeding Delaware County DSS affirmed Mugglin did not participate Won

14/ 8-Dec-11 Matter of Riley SS. Delaware County Family Court Carl Becker Child Neglect proceeding Delaware County DSS appeal dismissed as moot Mugglin did not participate Won before Becker; neither won nor lost

15/ 1-Mar-12 Matter of Alexander G. Delaware County Family Court Rita Connerton Dismissal of child neglect petition Delaware County DSS Dismissal affirmed Mugglin did not participate Lost

16/ 13-Dec-12 Barbara O'Sullivan v Mary Bracci Hallock et al Delaware County Supreme Court Carl Becker Wrongful death, elder abuse, fraudulent waste of trust and estate assets Private defendants, including Supervisor of Social Services, sued in individual capacity by his sister Affirmed despite deafult by Kirkwood Mugglin did not participate Won before Becker and on appeal

17/ 17-Oct-13 Delaware County v Leatherstocking Healthcare LLC Delaware County Supreme Court John Lambert breach of contract case Delaware County partially affirmed, partially reversed Mugglin did not participate lost half and won half

Please, note that when Appellate Division affirmed Becker's determinations as a trial judge, it followed its rules of "deferring" to credibility determinations of the trial judge - even if such credibility determinations were based on the judge's representation of witnesses in front of him without the required disclosure of the conflict of interest.

When I raised such conflict of interest, I was immediately charged with child neglect myself, and had to fight frivolous charges - prosecuted by Kirkwood - for two years before they were dismissed.  At the very same time, Porter's son was not charged as a juvenile delinquent for assault on my son on school grounds, an interesting "coincidence".

In his 21 years of experience as an attorney and his claims at the meeting with voters in October of 2015 that he loves appellate work and chose the job in Delaware County because he loves appellate work, he only handled 17 appeal in his lifetime, 2 of them for private clients.  That is less than one appeal per year, a very scanty record for an attorney who claims expertise in appellate work.
Morever, out of those 17 appeals, Kirkwood:

·         Lost outright – 5 appeals, badly, on the law and on insufficient evidence - which spells out his own incompetence in putting a case together;

·         Appeals dismissed as mooted (not a win or loss) – 3 appeals;

·         Won – 8 appeals, all from Carl Becker’s decisions, which is no win at all, but rather evidence of case-fixing by a friend, former boss and the prior attorney for the Department of Social Services of 27 years who engaged in ex parte communications with Porter Kirkwood (I have witness accounts), and intimidated those who raised the issue of impropriety of Carl Becker presiding as a fact-finder over issues of credibility of his clients of 27 years, by sanctions and improper child neglect prosecutions.

·         Lost half and won half – 1 appeal, from Judge Lambert’s decision

As to judges who ruled in the trial court on cases that Porter Kirkwood appealed, it is clear that only local judges favored Kirkwood:




Delaware County Family Court


Won, appeal mooted





Delaware County Supreme Court


Half won and half lost



Cortland County Supreme Court



Appellate Division 3rd Department (transferred Article 78)

Appellate panel


Kirkwood lost to Judge Connerton from Broome County, NY.
Kirkwood half-lost to Judge Lambert from Otsego County, NY.
Kirkwood lost to Judge Rumsey of Cortland County, NY.
Kirkwood lost to the trial panel of the 3rd Department on an Article 78 proceeding.
Yet, Kirkwood was always handed victories by Carl Becker, and he wants to continue this tradition by being elected to the position of a judge who will hear all of the cases of Delaware County Department of Social Services, his current client of 20 years where he hired, checked background, counseled, trained and very likely had social relationships with many social workers that are supposed to appear in front of him as a judge in Family Court - as it happened before Becker as a judge.
As to Mugglin, Mugglin ruled in only three appeals of Kirkwood's - one that was mooted, one that was lost on the law, in a PINS/violation of probation case where Becker violated the minor child's constitutional rights to favor Kirkwood, by failing to advise the child of her right to remain silent, and one where Mugglin engaged in judicial misconduct and failed to point out in his decision the subsection of the criminal statute that the father was convicted out - which was not a sex offense, and thus the father was not subject to sex offender related probation conditions or treatment requirement, thus making Mugglin's decision illegal.
So, based on this appellate history of Porter Kirkwood, Mugglin had absolutely no basis to claim that Kirkwood is a good attorney, or "one of the best attorneys" Mugglin knew.
There are also two suspicious private appeals, both undertaken by Kirkwood for people associated with social services, during his county-paid time.
One was for a relative of Commissioner Moon.
The other was for then-Supervisor of Social Services Peter Bracci sued by his sister for elder abuse, wrongful death of their father and for plundering their father's trust accounts and estate.  There, Becker assigned himself in the Supreme Court to the case and ruled for Kirkwood's client after reported ex parte discussions behind the courthouse, even though Kirkwood failed to raise the issue of standing in the answer on behalf of his clients (I reviewed the case).
Kirkwood's representation of a person sued for elder abuse and wrongful death of an elder was in stark conflict with his obligation as a County Attorney to prosecute elder abuse - no matter who was the perpetrator, even if the perpetrator was Peter Bracci, Supervisor of Social Services.  Yet, instead of prosecuting Peter Bracci on report of Barbara O'Sullivan, Porter Kirkwood instead accepted from him reportedly $17,000 to represent him on appeal alone, not counting how much money was paid to Kirkwood by Peter Bracci and other defendant for representation in the court below.

I believe, those $17,000 could just as well be deemed to be a financial incentive paid to Porter Kirkwood for non-prosecution of a public official for elder abuse.  

If Porter Kirkwood's honest services as a prosecutor could be bought, his services as a judge can be bought, too.

Kirkwood also represented the Bracci defendants during his taxpayer-paid County time, which he considers completely proper.  

Moreover, according to a witness, Kirkwood boasted at the meeting with voters in August 2015 that he has a private practice that generates $2,000 a month for him - obviously, on County time. 
That's what you are going to get if you vote for Porter Kirkwood - a judge who will engage in egregious conflicts of interest, will be fixing cases for his friends and former clients of a lifetime, engaging in ex parte communications and doing his private business on the job.
If you want such a judge - vote for Porter Kirkwood.

Friday, October 30, 2015

In Otsego County court, ex parte communications with prosecution/former boss is a norm

Criminal defendants have a constitutional right to be present at every significant stage of a criminal proceeding.

Every significant stage of a criminal proceeding must be held on record.

Yet, that's not what is happening in Otsego County Court (State of New York), where Judge John Lambert or Judge Brian Burns are presiding.

The usual "procedure" invented by these judges in felony cases is as follows.

The criminal defendant and his/her attorney are required to appear at endless pretrial conferences, whether they have anything to discuss with the prosecution or not.

Non-appearance is punishable by a bench warrant against the criminal defendant and as a contempt of court against the attorney.

This way these judges make sure that criminal defendant's funds are drained on legal fees before trial, in order to "secure" a plea deal where all factual inconsistencies in criminal charges are waived.

When the attorney and his client arrive for the conference, and many attorneys and clients are scheduled for conferences on the same day, Judge Lambert or Judge Burns (whoever is handling the cases) first ask into their chambers (1) the prosecutor; (2) officers from police and probation.  

Defense attorneys are not called into the chambers immediately, and the DA and his witnesses do not leave the chambers with every criminal defense attorney called into chambers.

Later on, at trial, the same witnesses may be called to testify, yet, instead of being sequestered, they sit in the judge's chambers and have a potential to communicate with the judge behind closed doors before the criminal defense attorney is called in.

After a period of communication behind closed doors between the judge, the district attorney and the DA's witnesses, defense attorneys - without their clients, criminal defendants - are called into the chambers.  

No stenographers are present and conferences are  held off record, in the absence of criminal defendants - which is a reversible error already.

Probation officers are present notwithstanding whether, in accordance with state law, criminal defendants did or did not sign a written waiver to communicate with probation officers as part of a pre-plea investigation.

I know from an attorney who suffered a harsh rebuke from Judge Lambert that judge Lambert verbally lashed out at an attorney who tried to put on record what the attorney discussed in chambers.   The attorney was shaken up since Judge Lambert, who was much younger than the attorney, yelled at the attorney (I won't disclose the gender here, to protect the attorney's identity from retribution).

So, instead of carefully preserving all communications with the court at important stages of criminal proceedings on record, Judge Lambert and Judge Burns hold ex parte communications in chambers with the DA (their former boss), the DA's witnesses, probation officers - without written waivers from criminal defendants agreeing to talk to probation officers - and where criminal defense attorneys are invited while the DA and his witnesses are already sitting there, while criminal defendants are never invited and record of such proceedings is not kept.

These conferences happen, as I mentioned above, often, and it is my belief that such conferences are meant to drain criminal defendants of funds to be able to go to trial, because all of their funds are spent on paying their attorneys to appear at such unnecessary and unlawful conferences.

As I mentioned above, both Judge Lambert and Judge Burns are former employees of Otsego County District Attorney John Muehl, both are former Assistant District Attorneys of Otsego County, Judge Lambert is the former Chief Assistant District Attorney of Otsego County, which makes their "familial" interactions with John Muehl an even more egregious misconduct.

And, despite the fact that unlawful practices of Judge Lambert and Judge Burns are well known in the court system, both of these judges were promoted by the New York State Court Administration.

Judge Lambert was made a supervising judge in upstate New York over DWI cases in the 6th Judicial District, and Judge Burns has been promoted to supervise town and village courts in upstate New York in the 6th Judicial District.

It appears that for New York State Court Administration judicial misconduct such as Judge Lambert's and Judge Burns' in criminal proceedings must be not prosecuted, but instead must be rewarded.

Judicial candidates Richard Northrup and Porter Kirkwood, the would-be DA John Hubbard and the corrupt Chairman of the Board of Election whom Richard Northrup refused to prosecute

Here is today's scan of the home page of the Delaware County Board of Elections in the State of New York.

It clearly shows William Campbell as the "Republican Commissioner" for the Board.

I encourage the voters to go to the Delaware County Clerk's office and check out the Certificate of Election filed by the now retired judge Carl Becker in 2011, 9 years after his alleged election in 2002.

I brought a motion to vacate all decisions of Carl Becker in March of 2011 because there was no proof in the Clerk's office in the form of a certificate of election required by County Law that Becker was ever elected.

By that time, as of August of 2010, I had a response from the Delaware County Board of Elections that all original petitions and ballots from the 2002 election is "no longer available" at the Board of Election, because the required retention period is only 2 years, so the original petitions and ballots were disposed of (destroyed) in 2004.

Yet, in 2011 William Campbell who was not a Commissioner of the Election board in 2002, certified Becker's 2002 election, 9 years down the road, with no original documents available - which was clear fraud, and filing such a document was fraud, too.

I reported that fraud to the Delaware County District Attorney's office.

I spoke to John Hubbard, Chief Assistant District Attorney.

The response of Mr. Hubbard to my report of a crime committed in his jurisdiction - involving a Republican Commissioner of the Delaware County Board of Election and the County Judge who both committed fraud, was - "why are you doing this, why do you need to do this?"

That was an interesting question to hear from a prosecutor whose duty was to investigate and prosecute crimes committed in his jurisdiction.  Why would anybody report a crime? Especially, a crime proven by documentary evidence before the investigation started?  Really, why?

And, John Hubbard did nothing to investigate or prosecute that crime.

Because his boss Richard Northrup, a Republican, eyed the bench in Delaware County forever, and did not want to jeopardize his chances at being nominated by the Republican Committee by prosecuting the Republican Commissioner of the Board of Election for fraud and filing a false document.

Of course, Becker sanctioned me for bringing the motion - even though he reacted to the motion by having Mr. Campbell file a falsified public record.  Becker thought it possible for himself to decide a motion about his own legitimacy as a judge - and sent the sanctions to the disciplinary committee which is currently prosecuting me for being sanctioned for bringing up usurpation of public office and corruption of a judge and an Election Commissioner in a court motion.

After Campbell filed a false certificate of election in 2011, Becker "eked" out a victory in 2012.

I wonder whether, with the help of Campbell, Republicans will eke out a victory in this judicial election, too.  After all, Campbell must pay back the favor to the Republican DA - running on a joint ticket with the Republican County Attorney -

 for not prosecuting Campbell for a crime, mustn't he?

And John Hubbard will become the next DA, right?

Because, while asking me the question why do I need to report a crime that I saw committed by two public officials, Hubbard and his boss Northrup definitely had a definite financial self-interest not to do their jobs and not to prosecute those two public officials.

A career advancement and additional pay meant more for Northrup and Hubbard than doing their duty.

And they will continue to stick to that principle in any new positions they take.

Expect a victory for Northrup and Kirkwood in this coming judicial election, no matter what your votes say.

Campbell forged one election-related document, he can do that another time.

Not to mention that Porter Kirkwood, as County Attorney, has had Campbell's salary raised - as recently as in January of 2015.  So, Campbell owes both Kirkwood and Northrup - and that is a real incentive to make sure they win.  At all costs.  

Delaware County continues to stall my FOIL requests for copies of no-bid public contracts

In September 8, 2015, I made a FOIL request for copies of all procurement contracts made by Delaware County, NY over the period of 2013, 2014, and 2015.

Most of these contracts were audited by NYS Comptroller, and, according to a report by his office issued in May of 2015, Delaware County failed to submit $129 million worth of contracts to public bidding in 2013-2014 alone.  All of that was under the guidance of the current judicial candidate and Delaware County Attorney Porter Kirkwood.

The county gave me a run-around answer on October 7, 2015 claiming that my requests for copies of contracts are "too vague".

In fact, the County knows exactly which contracts are meant, and stalls release of those contracts to prevent me from using such documents in opposition to Porter Kirkwood's judicial election campaign.

It is obvious that Porter Kirkwood, as legal advisor of Delaware County, is behind the stalling, and thus that he perpetrates fraud upon voters by preventing public information about his misconduct from reaching an active opponent to his election, in order to dupe the voters and get elected.

I filed an administrative appeal of denial of my FOIL request, and will post response of the County to it.

Here are the scans of what I requested in my FOIL:

and of the response by Delaware County:

It is obvious that there is nothing vague in questions Nos. 1, 2 and 3, and the County, guided by judicial candidate Porter Kirkwood as the County's legal advisor, is unlawfully stalling release of public documents to prevent their use in opposition to Porter Kirkwood's judicial campaign.

Yet, even if elected, Porter Kirkwood may still be taken off the bench and prosecuted for corruption if misconduct is verified through such contract after he is elected.

Moreover, please, note answers to questions Nos. 5, 6 and 7 of the FOIL request.

The self-dealing mechanic was not punished.

A policy prohibiting self-dealing of Delaware County employees in properties foreclosed upon by the county (on the footsteps of the recently caught former Commission Moon who did exactly that when he still was a Commissioner) was not introduced.

No new policies were introduced 5 months after the State audit while a promise was made to the State Comptroller to introduce policies preventing self-dealing and improper use of vehicles by County employees.

That is all under the "guidance" of County Attorney Porter Kirkwood who is chest-pounding about his allegedly stellar reputation in his judicial campaign, but is at the same time hiding evidence of his misconduct from public exposure.

Corruption in Delaware County is business as usual, and Porter Kirkwood is trying to happily carry that torch, as his predecessor Carl Becker did, to the judicial bench.

Crowd control in ghost towns

In my previous blog I wrote about the "crowd control" measure invented by the Delaware County police in order to:

1) provide a no-public-bidding "training" contract to the county undersheriff Craig DuMond and his wife Cathleen Dumond;

2) provide public relations/promotion/advanced pay opportunities to members of the families of police management - Craig Dumond and wife, daughter of former police chief Tellian and reported girlfriend of Delaware County jail chief Lt. Stanton.

The article about "resurrection" of "mount patrol" in Delaware County points out two necessities for such a new unit:

  1. public relations;
  2. crowd control

Public relations of the police is, first, not a necessity, and, second, should be done not by posing on horseback, but by doing their jobs properly.

As to crowd control - population of Delaware County is dwindling, so I wonder where the mounted patrol unit will find crowds in order to control them other than a one-time weeklong County Fair event.

When I first came to Delaware County in 1999, there were 4 kindergarten classes in Delaware Academy in Delhi and more kindergarten classes in Treadwell.

Now the Treadwell school is closed and building sold, for lack of children to fill it, and the Delaware Academy, reportedly has one or two kindergarten classes.

Delaware County clerk's office workers recently expressed surprise when I finalized a divorce for a client, saying they did not do such a thing for a long time, so cases are dwindling in court, too.

People are fleeing New York state because of high taxes, no jobs and high and all-permeating corruption.

People stopped coming to Delaware County from NYC for vacations and are selling their second residences.

Delhi, NY looks like a ghost town.

That downstaters and out-of-staters stop coming to the Delaware County's neck of woods must have an impact on the number of criminal cases, at least, on DWI cases.

You can only arrest the drinking locals so many times, they are all numbered, and their driver's licenses, once revoked, are revoked and they can no longer be charged for DWIs - unless they get behind the wheel despite a license revocation, which will happen not so often.

Moreover, when a person's driver's license is revoked in Delaware County, he or she tends to leave the are, because he or she cannot maintain employment where there is no public transportation, and there is no public transportation in Delaware County.

To boost fines Delaware County already tried to create a new prosecutor's position - not filled yet, specifically to deal with DWIs, in order to have that prosecutor drum up conviction fines, and with an incentive to do that, the prosecutor will be paid (unlawfully and unconstitutionally) out of those conviction fines, according to the County plan.

Not many violent crimes are reported in Delaware County either, and those violent crimes that are committed, are often committed by people close to the local government, and, if that happens, such crimes are swept under the rug and not prosecuted.  Drugs in Delaware County are also not prosecuted as vigorously as they should be, where certain well known locations of drug exchanges and sales are deliberately not patrolled, which begs the question whether the local police and prosecution has a cut in the drug sales.

So, with the dwindling population and the nearly-stopped traffic from out of state or downstate to Delaware County for vacation, tourism and 2nd home purposes, the number of all court cases, including criminal cases, has necessarily gone down, making a new judgeship unnecessary.

Yet, a second judgeship was created to handle the allegedly "increased caseload" which a single judge handled just fine when the caseload and population was larger.

To handle expanding caseload in Family and County/Criminal Court.

In the ghost town of Delhi, NY.

In the ghost Delaware County, New York where there are more bears than people.

At taxpayers' expense.

Clans associated with he local government need to get salary increases somehow, right?  And, when honest business opportunities go down, government grows - as well as corruption.

All the more reasons to leave Delaware County.

A new acquisition of the Delaware County police - hooves instead of brains

I wrote on this blog about the spectacular case decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit where the court upheld the so-called state interest to hire dumb brutes for the police force - specifically, that the government had a legitimate interest to secure that the hired police officers stay on the job and not go anywhere else - and to secure that interest, the government has a right not to admit applications for the police force from applicants with an IQ higher than a certain level.

So, in the 2nd Circuit jurisdiction (which covers New York State), police has a right to be dumb.

Bearing that in mind, let's look at the recent announcement of the new acquisition of the Delaware County police - the "mounted" patrol.

1/ the training and certification contract for the police force was not bid out for public bidding - as required by law, and that was the obligation of county attorney and judicial candidate Porter Kirkwood to oversee.  

Instead, the "training" was done by Delaware County undersheriff Craig DuMont and his wife, on their private farm, without offering that training contract to the public for bidding.  

I am going to FOIL the county as to the cost of that training, as well as any documents as to how the training contract was awarded.

The self-dealing no-public-bidding contract was happily announced right after the NYS Comptroller's audit found $129 million worth of public contracts awarded, under Porter Kirkwood's guidance as a County Attorney, without public bidding.  Since nobody was (yet) charged with corruption, Delaware County clans presume that corruption may proceed.

The happy picture of the group of "mounted" police included present and former sheriffs and their relatives.

2/ I am also going to check with a FOIL request the claim that the "equine officers" come with no cost to Delaware County.  My question - who is handling the liability (any horse owner knows how high insurance is for having horses around people, and horses are going to be used for "crowd control", in the midst of people.  Who is going to handle the vet and feeding bills, the boarding bills for the horses etc.

3/ Given that Delaware County police officers are taser-happy, baton-happy and use police vehicles as assault tools upon residents of Delaware County, I expected some "resident constitutional rights" training, yet, instead, Delaware County preferred horseback training for their officers.

4/ I am also going to FOIL the County as to pay increases to the "mounted" police officers for their skills - and as to appointment of police officers to such positions, where most of the "mounted patrol" people are related to sheriffs or undersheriffs.

As a Delaware County taxpayer, I have a right to know what exactly I am paying for - as do you, my readers from Delaware County.

So, now the Delaware County police has tasers, pistols, batons/sticks, wheels (vehicles), dogs - and hooves.  Brains do not have to be added to that equation.

The dwindling Delaware County taxpayer population can expect lawsuits, defended at their expense, for excessive use of horse force now, in addition to excessive use of dog force, vehicle force, baton and taser force.

Because dumb brutes on the police force come at a price not only to their victims, but also to taxpayers.

Thursday, October 29, 2015

The 2nd Circuit ruling undermined the earlier heightened pleading standard in federal civil rights cases

In 2007 and 2009 the U.S. Supreme Court decided two cases that, as legal commentators said, shook the foundations of civil rights litigation, compromised legitimate claims.

Commentators also pointed out that the Aschroft v Iqbal and Bell Atlantic v Twombly cases gave too much discretion to federal judges to rely upon their own (unknown to the parties) experience and "common sense" in dismissing the cases, and that the number of dismissals of civil rights cases based on the new "plausibility" standard for pleadings actually grew after these two cases were decided.

It is easy to see that invocation of "experience" and "common sense" of the judge awards to the judge fact-finding functions of a jury - at the pleading stage, and overriding, without a legal basis, the parties choice of juries as factfinders in civil rights cases. 

While the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 requires a short pleading describing the essence of the case, not a factual pleading, the U.S. Supreme Court, by the two decisions described in the above link, reverted the pleadings to its ancient form of factual pleadings, putting an insurmountable burden upon civil rights plaintiffs who are supposed to plead out facts before discovery, even if such facts are in the exclusive possession of powerful governmental defendants.

For 8 years after 2007, federal courts merrily tossed civil rights cases for failure to satisfy the heightened pleading standard - even though heightening the pleading standard amounted to amending Rule 8 and Rule 9 (not requiring special pleading of a state of mind in a conspiracy to violated civil rights0, which courts had no right whatsoever to do.

On October 22, 2015, the tide may have started to turn, at least in the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit.

In the case Shamir v New York City Police, the 2nd Circuit has ruled that, even if a certain claim (use of excessive force) was not properly pled, it could be inferred by the court from the general pleading under the 4th Amendment.

Arguably, Shamir overturns the Bell Atlantic and the Iqbal v Twombly cases that required specific pleadings.

It is interesting to see how the reasoning in Shamir will be met by district courts.

 I will report on the issue.

Stay tuned.

I am no longer supporting Gary Rosa in Delaware County judicial race

I wrote a lot of posts on this blog criticizing judicial candidate Porter Kirkwood currently running for Delaware County Family Court in opposition to Gary Rosa, a judge of Middletown Town Court.

I stand by every word I wrote about Porter Kirkwood.  My posts are based on my personal experience, reports from credible witnesses and verifiable and verified documentary evidence.

Yet, at the end of some posts, I put in, as a conclusion for my criticism of Porter Kirkwood - "vote for Gary Rosa".

Those words I withdraw.  I no longer support Gary Rosa, mainly because of his recent shady pick of a law clerk.

Here is a support letter for Gary Rosa from a Delhi attorney Nancy Deming:

She seems to say all the right words.  Yet, she omits important information, which, to me amounts to a misrepresentation and she misrepresents her experience and specialization to the public, which Gary Rosa and his campaign endorses.  Not a good sign for Gary Rosa.  While Kirkwood is a known crook, Gary Rosa starts to show potential in the same direction, and I do not know which case is worse for a judge.

First of all, Nancy Deming's main practice was matrimonial, for years, and that is Supreme Court.  She started to do Family Court only when divorces became far between in Delaware County.  As I wrote recently on this blog, when I brought a judgment roll in a divorce case (finalizing documents) to the Delaware County Clerk's office several months ago, they were extremely surprised that divorces are still happening in Delaware County and told me that they did not finalize a divorce for a long time.

I wrote about Nancy Deming's role in the current judicial elections back in February of 2015.

In that blog I pointed out, among other things, that Nancy Deming is a member of the Judicial Qualifications Committee for New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division 3rd Judicial Department, and her approval of all judicial candidates for purposes of elections gives her favored position in front of all the judges if elected.

After my blog, Becker retired and Northrup ran for his place.

Nancy Deming had to approve Northrup, too, as qualified to run for a judge.

So, Nancy Deming had and continues to have her finger in three pies at the same time.

Even if Gary Rosa who "chose" her as his future law clerk, is not elected, Nancy Deming and her attorney husband James Hartmann, also of Delhi, will have favored positions in front of judges Kirkwood and Northrup - because Nancy Deming approved judicial qualifications for judicial elections of both of them.  Sweet deal.

I wrote in my February 2015 blog that it is not the first time when Nancy Deming timely enters public offices with resulting personal return on such an investment.  That several years ago Nancy Deming was a member of Delaware Academy School Board - when her son was in school, and stopped offering her candidacy for the board when her son graduated.

The return was very clear - that board never disciplined a child of a member, no matter what that child did, I know about it as an attorney representing students before that Board.

So, the return on being the school board member for Nancy Deming was hedging against the risks that her son would do something stupid (as all youths may do), be disciplined and mar his reputation and record for college.  So, Nancy Deming added a record of "public service" for herself while the true reason was protecting her son and continuing with the board's corrupt practice of not disciplining board members' children.

It was questionable from the very beginning for Nancy Deming to join the judicial qualifications committee to approve of judicial candidates in the very courts where she and her attorney husband practice.

It was to allow Nancy Deming to plant dragon seeds of corruption and see them grow into favoritism in court cases.

Yet, Nancy Deming went farther than simply having favoritism in court cases now.

See, court cases in Delaware County have become few and far between, actually making it questionable why two judicial seats are needed

 Very possibly, the current caseload that Nancy Deming has cannot sustain her well-being as an attorney.

So, Nancy Deming now has an even better return on investment than it initially appeared, not simply favoritism in court cases that may come or not come, but a stable state job, with pension and medical benefits for herself and her attorney husband James Hartmann, as well as a favored position for her attorney husband James Hartmann as being related to a judge's court attorney, which instantly grants him a favored position in any court.

Courts are notoriously reluctant to impose sanctions upon attorneys who are related to court personnel, especially to a judge's law clerk.  At this very time, an appeal is pending asking for costs and attorney fees in an 8-year litigation, against Nancy Deming's husband James Hartmann, attorney fees that can bankrupt the Deming/Hartmann family.  So, getting a cloak of employment with a judge is a way to insulate Deming's husband Hartmann from any possibility of ever getting sanctioned by any court and giving him a carte blanche in committing any misconduct with impunity.

And the medical coverage of Nancy Deming's family for Delaware County and state taxpayers will be staggering.

According to court records, James Hartmann had a major surgery in 2013 and a major surgery in 2014.

His medical care must be extremely expensive.

So, the Deming/Hartmann family caught the opportunity where three judicial candidates are obligated to Deming for approving them as a judicial candidate, and got an offer from one of the three candidates for a law clerk, a position that pays well over $100,000 and fully covers medical benefits of Deming and her spouse.

Just know that when you are voting for Rosa now, you must be voting to approve the expenses of medical treatment for James Hartmann, Rosa's court attorney's husband, even if you yourself do not have money for your own medical treatment and medical treatment of your spouse and children - but money for Hartmann's expensive medical treatment will be squeezed out of your pocket through taxes anyway.

I also noticed recently one more shady supporter of Gary Rosa, a "court expert" Eileen Treacy, and I am wondering whether her support is a result of another sweet deal in the making - her support in return for her appointment as a court expert in child sexual abuse cases if Gary Rosa is elected as Family Court judge.

Here is Eileen Treacy's support of Gary Rosa.

As part of her support of Gary Rosa, Eileen Treacy writes the following:

"I have been qualified as an expert witness in family and criminal courts throughout New York state about 450 times in the areas of developmental psychology and child sexual abuse over the past 31 years. I have had ample opportunity to observe many judges’ temperament and intellect. There is no question in my mind that the person who is unquestionably qualified and capable of being our Family Court judge is Judge Gary Rosa."

Eileen Treacy's name, in fact, is well known in civil rights litigation, because Eileen Treacy has orchestrated one of the worst wrongful conviction for alleged "ritual sexual abuse" of children - which was all a lie, and where Eileen Treacy, in my opinion, should have been criminally prosecuted for her role in the case.

It is interesting that Eileen Treacy does not mention in her support of Gary Rosa that she testified as an expert outside of New York State.

The case of People v Kelly Michaels was in New Jersey.  I had that case as part of my civil rights litigation curriculum in law school.

Here is one description of the case, with a quote from that description:

"The state's main expert witness, Eileen Treacy, testified for eight days. Yet, she had no real academic qualifications. She was eight years away from obtaining her PhD in psychology. She was not licensed as a therapist in New York where she worked at a clinic for sexually abused children, nor in New Jersey, where she testified. In a gross conflict of interest, Treacy both helped to choose which of the children would testify, and also functioned as the "independent" expert vouching for their credibility. Meanwhile, Kelly's defense attorneys were not permitted to bring in their own expert witnesses who would have testified that their client did not exhibit the normal signs for a child molester."
Please, note what happened to the person against whom Eileen Treacy so creatively testified for 8 hours in New Jersey:

"After a nine month trial and 13 days jury deliberation Michaels was convicted on all 115 counts and given a 47 year sentence."

The 21-year-old female, a pianist who worked in the daycare when she was charged with alleged sexual abuse, to the point of smearing feces upon her piano chair and putting daggers up children's anuses - after which children (according to their interviews) smiled and said "thank you" - that is just a fraction of what Eileen Treacy elicited out of children in her interviews which were later branded inappropriate by the New Jersey Supreme Court and described in a book "No Crueller Tyrannies":



So, Eileen Treacy "explained away" even the children's statements that Kelly Michaels DID NOT touch them - to mean the very opposite.

Her "indicators" of child abuse were later ruled as not based on any scientific evidence by the reversing court, and the author of those "indicators" later made a statement in the press pointing out that the "indicators" that he published were never meant for diagnosing sexual child abuse, and were never scientifically proven to be able to make a differentiated diagnosis.  Yet, Eileen Treacy used those unproven theories to put a young woman in prison for 47 years, and it is not Eileen Treacy's effort at all that got Kelly Michaels out of prison in "JUST" 5 years.  Imagine 5 years of a young woman's life wrongfully spent in prison on horrible charges of child sexual molestation.

Eileen Treacy sent an innocent woman to prison for 47 years while damaging children with interview suggesting sexual abuse which did not and could not happen.  Think about a child who suffers an injury where a dagger is being put up his anus.  Will he smile and say thank you?  How about no damage to his anus?  That did not deter Eileen Treacy one bit.

Eileen Treacy should have been cast out of her profession after the Kelly Michaels case, prohibited to practice therapy, psychology and definitely prohibited to testify as a court expert in sexual abuse cases.

That she continued to do that, as she says, for decades, after the Kelly Michaels case, shows very well that courts in sexual abuse cases (which Family Court handles as a civil matter) are not interested in the truth, and are not interested in protecting children from "child protectors" who put ideas into children's heads which were not there to begin with - as Eileen Treacy did in the Kelly Michaels case.

Here is yet another report about the Kelly Michaels case.

If Eileen Treacy moved to Margaretville (as her letter suggests) and is now expecting a handout from Gary Rosa in court appointments as an expert in return for support of his candidacy in judicial elections - I am against Gary Rosa.