"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 30, 2015

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.  

No comments:

Post a Comment