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.
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Deposition of Derek Bowie: the issue of the patrol vehicle - and of other, more necessary, police equipment
In this blog, I am going to show portions where Derek Bowie is questioned about where he parks his patrol car - he claimed he parks it at the address that is on his driver's license and employee forms (W2's), in Delaware County - while he resides in Broome County, and while he may not be employed in Delaware County Sheriff's Department as a Deputy Sheriff if he does not live in Delaware County.
Look how cynically this public servant lies under oath.
He claims that some mysterious "former undersheriff" gave him an "oral permission" to park the car a mile from where he lived - but that is also an admission that the undersheriff knew that he lived in Broome and not where he parked the car and not where the mail came.
And, if Bowie was allowed to park the car some place away from home, how could that car be covered for liability for theft for that overnight parking?
It is clear that Bowie was neglecting his duties to protect people and to come as fast as he could - that's why he was given the right to have his government-issued vehicle with him overnight - in order to be able to falsely claim he lives in Delaware County and not where he lived in reality with his girlfriend - the yet unbeaten one, Jessica Valentino, his aider and abettor in the false arrest of Kylie Smith.
And there is an interesting detail.
Officer Derek Bowie kept his patrol vehicle that he needed, when called as a police officer, to get to places where he is needed at his earliest convenience - parked overnight at his mother's place, a mile or so away from his home.
But you know what he held right at home, as a necessary instrument that he needed to always have by his side?
Right by his and his girlfriend's bed.
Post a Comment