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.


Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Reporting on Barbara O'Sullivan's house fire: Tim Buckley confirms there was no police investigation of the circumstances of the fire

The case of Barbara O'Sullivan's house fire gets more and more interesting.

Tim Buckley of Delaware County Sheriff's Department 



finally wrote back to Barbara O'Sullivan (after she was told on Monday, April 25, 2016, by the Delaware County Sheriff's Department that he is preparing the report about investigation of her house fire and will call her back that same day).

Tim Buckley reportedly claimed to Barbara that "he was unable to locate a police agency who was at the scene", so the report cannot be made.

So, nearly a week after the fire - not only no reports, but the Delaware County Sheriff's Department pretends it does not know who even was on the site and who even was investigating that fire - if at all.

That is the department that 



Instead, according to deposition of Officer Bowie, the Department "backs him up 100%" in both cases of assault on women, one of them was a vehicular assault on Barbara O'Sullivan, and even gives him free legal defense against Barbara's lawsuit.

Now, that very same particular Sheriff's Department pretends it does not know what police agency and who - if at all - investigated a house fire that suddenly consumed the entire house of a person who is suing that police officer.

As if there is a myriad hard-to-find police agencies in the area.

A perfect "sergeant Schultz" defense - "I did not see anything, I do not know anything".

Not good enough.

There were eyewitnesses claiming that they saw various police officers from various police agencies hovering around the site of the fire - and now nobody claims they were there?

Was the lack of investigation due to the fact that the Sheriff's Department was afraid to look, fearing what or rather who they might find as a result of that investigation?

There are only two suspects that I know who had the motive, opportunity, training, skill, rage and lack of integrity to commit the arson-by-explosion at Barbara's house.

Delaware County Sheriff's Department knows those names, too.

And knows who and how would have benefited by the deaths of Barbara O'Sullivan and/or Alecia Bracci.

And doesn't investigate.

As I said before, the case stinks, and it stinks more and more by the minute.

I will continue reporting on this case.

Stay tuned.

No comments:

Post a Comment