"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, January 29, 2016

Delaware County Acting District Attorney John Hubbard and the importance of not being a child of incest

I remember Acting District Attorney John Hubbard mocking me for raising the issue of constitutionality of charging two consenting adults with the FELONY crime of incest (that was an uncle and a niece, about the same age, whose love union produced a child), New York Penal Law 255.25.

  § 255.25 Incest in the third degree.
    A  person  is  guilty  of  incest  in  the third degree when he or she
  marries or engages in sexual intercourse, oral sexual  conduct  or  anal
  sexual  conduct  with a person whom he or she knows to be related to him
  or her, whether through marriage or not,  as  an  ancestor,  descendant,
  brother  or  sister  of either the whole or the half blood, uncle, aunt,
  nephew or niece.
    Incest in the third degree is a class E felony.

Hubbard claimed that babies born of incest have to be born unhealthy.

I asked - "did you check if the baby is actually unhealthy?" (The baby was healthy).

Hubbard answered - "no, I don't have to check that, the crime is on the books, all I have to prove is that they are uncle and niece and that they had a biological child together".

I asked - "how about couples who marry and conceive a baby in full knowledge that the baby will inherit a dreadful genetic disorder, will suffer throughout his short life and die a horrible death, is the couple's decision to have sex and conceive a baby under these circumstances prosecutable?"

"No", John Hubbard said, "we have a right to marry".

We do.  We also have a right to privacy and for the government not to sit in the pants of consenting adults.

Yet, questions remained, and I asked - what if they conceived NOT "through sexual intercourse" (a "baby out of a tube", "in vitro"?).  
Will it be a crime, too? And, if that would not be a crime, then why conceiving through sexual intercourse would be?  And, when a woman gets sperm for in vitro conception of a baby from a sperm bank, where donors' identity is shielded by privacy laws other than their health, there is a probability that she may be getting the sperm of a close blood relative, same as what is prohibited by Penal Law 255.25.

Isn't the law anachronistic, shouldn't it be taken off the books or at least not prosecuted?

Shouldn't the charges (that should never have been brought in the first place) be withdrawn?

Hubbard just laughed and refused to withdraw the charge of incest against the mother of a healthy baby.

To have a crime of incest, an E felony on the books of NY state, by which two adults who engaged in consensual sex and produced a healthy baby, two parents of a healthy baby, are sent to state prison for up to 4 years each, because of the crime of conceiving that healthy child - is not only grossly unfair, especially to the baby who is deprived of his parents for no other reason than that they are his parents, but is INSANE in any civilized society.

And prosecuting parents for conceiving a healthy child and not prosecuting parents for knowingly conceiving a child with genetic disorders is definite equal protection problem - don't you think?

You can think all you want as a moral point about PROPRIETY of sex between close relatives.  But, as a point of CRIMINAL LAW, as long as those two engaged in sex are two consenting competent adults, the criminal law should be out of their pants.

You know what ELSE is "on the books" in New York State.

And that is the crime of adultery.

That's the same crime that Virginia just refused to take off the books, a crime that legal scholars call an anachronistic attempt "to criminalize what the majority deems immoral choices by consenting adults". 

So, adultery is a crime in Virginia.

Believe it or not, it is a crime in New York, too.

I represented people in divorce actions.  Before the divorce is complete and registered, the couple is still legally married.

Usually, at the time of divorce, both parties had other partners - thus committing the crime of adultery, New York Penal Law 255.17, a Class B misdemeanor.

 § 255.17 Adultery.
    A  person  is guilty of adultery when he engages in sexual intercourse
  with another person at a time when he has a living spouse, or the  other
  person has a living spouse.
    Adultery is a class B misdemeanor.

You know how many crimes of adultery did John Hubbard prosecute in his prosecutorial career?  I can bet anything - NONE.

So "the crime is on the books" argument is no argument at all.

Of course, as to that particular case, the threat of being sent away for up to 4 years in prison and being separated from her baby coerced my client to plea to a misdemeanor, and the charge of constitutionality was never pursued by her any further, as far as I know.

John Hubbard obviously thought that it is a good idea to dedicate the limited resources of his office to prosecute a mother for giving birth to a healthy child.

For him, it was a prank, it was plain visible in his eyes, he was laughing the entire time I was trying to talk to him.

That is the very same John Hubbard whose office allowed Delaware County to run rampant for years and years with a corrupt scheme of no-bid multimillion contracts, some undoubtedly with relatives and friends of high-ranking figures in the local government - without any attempt of prosecuting those crimes.

Enterprise corruption is also a crime on the books in New York, a whole Article of the Penal Law, Article 460, is dedicated to it.

Delaware County is teeming and breathing with enterprise corruption, but when John Hubbard is asked to prosecute it, he asks you a question - "WHY do you need ALL THAT?"

That is the very same John Hubbard who failed to disclose that he was a partner in the law practice of a judge before him the DA's office employing him appeared, and thus tainted multiple, possibly, thousands of criminal convictions and child abuse adjudications, and that is a crime of fraud and official misconduct that is on the books in New York.

When I reported to John Hubbard personally (without knowledge that Judge Becker was previously his law partner), that Judge Becker's oath of office filed in 2011 was based on falsified certification, and asked to prosecute the case against those who:

(1) provided a certification of 2002 election in 2011 when they no longer had authentic original documents to do such a certification since 2004;

(2) directed such a certification - that was, undoubtedly, Becker himself, and 

(3) filed such a false certification (a false public document) in the clerk's office -

the merry prankster John Hubbard, now the Acting Delaware County District Attorney, asked me "WHY do you need ALL THAT?"

Here is the reason why:

Hubbard could have his pick in investigating and prosecuting public corruption in his own county - in addition to Article 460 of the Penal Law dealing with organized crime, there is a whole Title L incorporating FIVE more Articles of Penal Law, Hubbard needed only to take his pick of the crimes against public officials available "on the books" in New York Penal Code - you name it, we have it in Delaware County.

Yet, Hubbard posed a philosophical question to me, a reporter of a specific crime by specific people, Carl Becker (then a judge and Hubbard's former law partner) and the individual from the Delaware County Board of Election, Republican Commissioner William Campbell who signed the false certification of Becker's 2002 election in 2011, while original documents from which he could make such a certification were destroyed in 2004, 7 years prior to the certification.

Filing a certification out of thin air was fraud and filing a false public document, as well as official misconduct of two high-standing public officials.

Yet, Hubbard asks me a question - why would I be "doing all that?"  

Really, WHY would anybody ask a prosecutor to prosecute a crime?

Of course, it is easier to use your practically unlimited power, in your taxpayer-paid position, to threaten an uneducated and poor young mother of a - once again - HEALTHY child - to plea to a crime of misdemeanor, where her only "crime" was consensual sex with a closely related blood relative of an age close to hers, where both her and the baby's father were competent adults over the age of consent.

And to laugh about it.

On the other hand, it requires integrity and courage to stand up to a corrupt public official.

It is easier to NOT do that - that is better for your career, especially a prosecutorial career.  

Hubbard is still young, he can still grow out of his short pants as a prosecutor and into the black robe of a judge, like Northrup did with Becker's help

And, William Campbell is still going to handle John Hubbard's election for the seat of Delaware County District Attorney this year (he is only an "Acting Delaware County District Attorney" at this time).

It pays off not to prosecute people when you need them, right?

Northrup did not prosecute Becker - and now see?  Above?  

John Hubbard similarly refused to prosecute Becker and Campbell for filing a false public document, Becker's certificate of election, in 2011, so he is a good boy.  He will make a wonderful career in the "honorable" legal profession.  He is already called "The Honorable John Hubbard", isn't he?  Even though the only "honor" he has is in the title.

By the way, the false certificate of Becker's 2002 election is still, I presume, on file in the Delaware County Clerk's office.

And, naturally (for the State of New York and Delaware County), I was suspended from the practice of law for asserting the obvious - that Becker did not have on file a valid certificate of his 2002 alleged election victory when I made a motion to recuse him and vacate all of his decisions in March of 2011.

Had Hubbard prosecuted Becker and his cronies, Becker would have been off the bench, disbarred, possibly incarcerated (where he belongs, after all crimes he committed on the bench).

Hubbard is wonderfully selective as to the Penal Code. 

While pursuing young mothers of healthy children, Hubbard and Northrup refused to prosecute TWO burglaries committed in two consecutive years in two neighboring houses - one belonging to us at 203 Main Street and one where our neighbor lived with his family at 205 Main Street.

Burglary is a violent crime which is very much on the books in New York, yet, the burglaries were not prosecuted by John Hubbard.

The suspect was the same, and John Hubbard (who has a history of forewarning criminal suspects favored by Judge Becker, so that they could escape or not show up to be arrested in New York) let him disappear to, first, another town, and then another state, and the evidence collected on the crime scenes is most likely lost or destroyed.

And, Hubbard is now continuing to prosecute Barbara O'Sullivan whose crime is that she was the VICTIM of an attempt to kill HER by Delaware County Deputy Sheriff Derek Bowie who happens to be a nephew of John Hubbard's long-time investigator Jeff Bowie.

For that reason, it is Barbara O'Sullivan, the victim of Hubbard's employee's nephew Derek Bowie, who is prosecuted by John Hubbard for a fabricated charge, and not Derek Bowie who is prosecuted for a vehicular assault and attempted murder against Barbara O'Sullivan. 

Attempted murder and assault are crimes that are very much on the books in New York, but Hubbard seems to be blissfully unaware - like a baby - of existence of such crimes "on the books" whenever a public official commits them.  

So, to the Acting Delaware County District Attorney John Hubbard,  being a mother of a healthy baby is a crime.

And, to the same Acting Delaware County District Attorney John Hubbard, vehicular assault and murder attempt by a nephew of John Hubbard's long-time employee is not a crime.

And, a burglary and attempted arson in the residence of an attorney who criticized misconduct of Carl Becker, John Hubbard, his boss and his office - is not a crime.

And, falsifying public documents to justify legitimacy of Hubbard's own law partner Carl Becker on the bench - is also not a crime, especially when one of the perpetrators involved is the Republican Commissioner of the Board of Election whose favors Hubbard craves in his own future election bid for a District Attorney or a judge.

Welcome to Delaware County, New York.

I am sure that John Hubbard and those fraudsters in public office whom Hubbard helped and continues to help escape accountability and justice, are not children of incest.

That adds absolutely nothing to their lack of integrity and running rough-shod over any possibility of the rule of law in Delaware County.

After all, WHAT rule of law, WHY would you even want it?  That's what Hubbard asked me when I reported the crimes of Carl Becker and William Campbell to him, remember? 

No comments:

Post a Comment