"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.

Friday, October 23, 2015

Delaware County Family Court blocks voters' from verifying Porter Kirkwood's alleged "3000 cases"

I was requested by a group of voters from Delaware County to represent them in verification of the record of the judicial candidate Porter Kirkwood in Delaware County Family Court.

Following my duty as the attorney for my clients, I made a phone call this morning to the Delaware County Family Court.

Representative of the court clerk denied me access to Porter Kirkwood's alleged cases claiming confidentiality.

The clerk refused to answer my question whether she is blocking me from verifying the claimed credentials of Porter Kirkwood, but confirmed that she will not allow me to see an of Porter Kirkwood's case files.  Here is the recording of my conversation with Delaware County Family Court Clerk's office.

Given that access to any of Porter Kirkwood's case files is blocked by Family Court, there is no way for the voters to verify Porter Kirkwood's and his supporters' claim that:

  1. Porter Kirkwood has a vast Family Court experience that makes him eminently eligible for the seat of Family Court judge;
  2. That Porter Kirkwood's experience surpasses that of Judge Gary Rosa;
  3. That Porter Kirkwood handled 3000 Family Court cases;
  4. That Porter Kirkwood's performance in those alleged 3000 Family Court cases was good and did not constitute negligence, incompetence and misconduct.
In view of the fact that Delaware County Family Court blocked access of voters to verify Porter Kirkwood's claims in his judicial campaign regarding his allegedly pre-eminent experience and performance in Family Court, Porter Kirkwood and anybody who repeats that claim, obviously without personal knowledge of whether what they are claiming is true or not and without any ability to verify the truth or falsity of the claim, are blatantly committing fraud upon voters. 

No comments:

Post a Comment