THE EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL TYRANNY IN THE UNITED STATES:

"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.

Thursday, December 3, 2015

Fraudster attorney Mary Gasp-arini cannot stop harassing me - and they say it isn't personal?

I wrote on this blog about misconduct of disciplinary attorney Mary Gasparini:

1) that Gasparini advanced, without an investigation or due diligence, fraudulent charges against me that I neglected my clients and should be disciplined for neglect at the time when I was not even admitted to the bar and could not by law be an attorney;

2) that Gasparini submitted to court fabricated court records, and I provided to the court evidence of fabrication;  Gasparini acknowledged under oath authenticity of what evidence in those audio recordings;

3) that Gasparini, in a personal vendetta against me, fabricated criminal charges against me for violation of my own privacy (one does not have a brain to be a disciplinary attorney in the State of New York), and advanced those criminal charges as a prosecutor AND the sole witness for the prosecution, which disqualified Gasparini as of January of 2015 from the disciplinary proceedings, yet, she proceeded anyway - because you do not have a conscience, integrity or morals to be a disciplinary attorney in New York either when courts will cover and rubber-stamp anything you do anyway.

Today I received yet another shining example showing that:

1) Gasp-arini is on a personal all-out course to harass me and avenge exposure of her stupidity, incompetence and complete lack of integrity on this blog; and

2)  that Gasp-arini is trying to spy on me and continue to investigate what I am doing, where I MIGHT be living and what I might be doing next.

Here is the letter that Gasp-arini sent to - guess - The Supreme Court of the State of South Carolina.





 Gasparini did not care enough to serve me with the Notice of Entry of the order of suspension, but she cared very much to notify the state where I am now residing.

In the letter Gasp-arini asserts that "this office" "has reason to believe" that I moved to Georgetown, South Carolina - even though my mailing address is a P.O. Box in Pawleys Island, SC, so Mary Gasparini did not discern the reasons for "their" "beliefs" as to my location, and that I "may seek admission to the South Carolina bar".

Oh, brother.  Such mind-readers.

This vicious woman cannot stand the thought that I MAY be applying to any bar of any other state,
without any evidence that I actually AM applying to any bar, or have any DESIRE to apply to any bar.

This woman automatically assumes, without any grounds, that I will lie on my potential application to South Carolina bar as to whether I was disciplined in other states (which I have to disclose IF I apply - which I have no intention of doing), so she is acting as a well-wisher and forewarns the court of my tainting presence in South Carolina.  She is definitely judging me by her own example, because it is Gasp-arini and not I who was repeatedly defrauding the court (that was happy to be defrauded) by submitting fraudulent disciplinary and criminal charges and cooked court transcripts.

And this fraudster who escaped disciplinary and criminal liability for her fraud because she blocks any investigation and prosecution of herself for attorney discipline, and because of powerful connections that the Committee has with the local criminal authorities, has the audacity to invoke "professional courtesy" in what is in reality a very personal vendetta.

In fact, she is so stupid that she continues to defraud even the South Carolina court by claiming that she is a "principal counsel" on a letter with a letterhead that says that somebody else is that "principal counsel" and Gasp-arini is simply an "associate counsel".

I am sure Gasp-arini as an "associate counsel" of that office did not have authority to pen such letters, or to use taxpayer-paid time to do that, or to use stationary or postage paid for by taxpayers' money to effect her own personal vendetta.

But, this signature as "principal counsel" on the letter head saying that she is only an "associate counsel" is what Gasp-arini is - she is so stupid that she commits fraud without even caring to look how obvious that fraud is, same as how she was acting throughout the disciplinary proceedings.

Many attorneys move after they are disciplined to pursue other life paths and occupations.

It is definitely an irregular procedure for a disciplinary committee to follow an attorney around and, without any suspicion of any unlawful activity,  trying to forewarn local authorities that a suspended attorney has moved into the state.

It is like Gasp-arini considers me on par with a sex offender whose arrival into the area must be announced to the local authorities.

Boy, if that kind of energy would be used to do what she is paid for by New York taxpayers (myself included)...

By the way, I also intend to visit and possibly reside in Russia.

I wonder if Gasp-arini will learn Russian in order to notify Mr. Putin of my possible arrival and tainting presence.  Out of professional courtesy.  Maybe, learning another language will develop her brain somehow - even though I highly doubt it.


Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)