"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, March 19, 2016

Private pets working as public K-9 officers while supported by private donations. #TheOzzieSaga

A reader tipped me off as to the description of a fundraiser for Ozzie the alleged police dog in Delaware County, New York.

The following information so far emerged about the new celebrity of Delaware County, NY, the Ozzie dog, through media articles, press releases and other reputable sources:

1)  A German shepherd by the name of Ozzie is allegedly "employed" by Delaware County  (New York) Sheriff's Department and regularly participates in drug-related arrests;

2) The Delaware County does not have provisions for Ozzie in its budget, and instead

3) Delhi Animal Hospital (an institution that handles controlled substances that Ozzie is trained to sniff out) allegedly provides free vet care for Ozzie; I am not saying Delhi Animal Hospital is involved in drug-smuggling, I am just saying that it is theoretically possible, thus making financial support from Officer Ozzie of "Officer Ozzie" inappropriate.  Free vet service of "Officer Ozzie" also prevents verification through FOIL requests of any injuries incurred by "Officer Ozzie" if "Officer Ozzie" would attack or kill somebody's pet or even a person.  Very convenient. 

4) a Delhi store "Tractor Supply", a store handling large amounts of cash that can easily be turned into a drug money laundering operation allegedly provides food for Ozzie;  I am not saying "Tractor Supply" is involved in drug-smuggling, I am just saying that it is theoretically possible, thus making financial support from "Tractor Supply" of "Officer Ozzie" inappropriate;

5) Ozzie's "handler" (and owner?) police officer John Demeo provides for the board of Ozzie and will have Ozzie "after retirment"  (Ozzie's or Demeo's - is not clear, but whichever retires first, I guess); 

6) Ozzie's "handler" John Demeo is being compensated by Delaware County for training Ozzie and for Demeo's own training of how to handle and train Ozzie.

7) a local Walton, NY restaurant, another entity that handles large amounts of cash runs fundraisers to further provide for the "care" of Ozzie;  and a "spaghetti dinner" fundraiser gathers $28,000 in ONE DAY in Walton, NY, a ghost town known only for - guess what - its drug dealers?  An interesting coincidence.  And a very clear possibility that drug dealers invented a new way of bribe-giving to local police officers - through fundraisers.  Not too smart though.  A private fundraiser to finance a public police drug enforcement program stinks to high heaven to any reasonable person outside of the "realm" of Delaware County;

8) reportedly, a recent state grant of $40,000 given to Delaware County was returned to the state, but instead a private donation fundraiser is run to provide for Ozzie.  That is easily understandable, since there is no requirement to account for funds from a private donation, while there is to account for the use of funds from a state grant.  And numbers are close... 

This whole Ozzie saga is so bizarre that more information is needed, and I will sure try to get information from tight clutches of Delaware County records clerk Christa Schafer.

Right now it clearly appears that Delaware County, without any appropriate authority, pays Demeo for using his own pet in criminal drug stings, and that businesses that have a direct interest for non-investigation on behalf of local drug authorities, are privately financing police operations in Delaware County.  The implications of such a sweet deal is obvious.  

If private donors stop donations, Ozzie does not eat.

Thus, Ozzie's handler Demeo is well advised not to investigate donors - ever, no matter what they do.

That's the whole reason to NOT allow police operations to be financed by private donors.  

I will verify through FOIL requests the particulars of "Officer Ozzie's" employment with Delaware County and will publish Delaware County's responses, whatever they are going to be.

Stay tuned.

No comments:

Post a Comment