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.
Friday, April 22, 2016
Richard Harlem's "Senator Seward connection" moved to the Appellate Division in March of 2016 - to fix the Mokay appeal?
Since March of 2016 he is the justice of Appellate Division 3rd Judicial Department.
Here is his official biography on the site of New York State Appellate Division 3rd Judicial Department:
Judge Mulvey as author of opinions on judicial ethics - one of the most unethical judges that I know - that's great.
It is not unusual that Cuomo promoted Mulvey higher - Cuomo needs to surround himself with unethical judges who owe him, just in case he needs to call in a favor.
As Becker called in a favor on Chief Judge Cardona of the same court - in several cases, and proudly told us so on the record.
I wonder how many more cases he talked to Cardona about.
But - most prominently for the coming Mokay appeal of my husband, involving issues of gross fraud on behalf of attorney Richard Harlem - comes the "Senator Seward" connection of Robert Mulvey.
I did not know that Robert Mulvey was "legislative counsel" to Senator Seward.
Richard Harlem actually is Senator Seward's landlord of many years.
Here is the connection.
Since Mulvey worked as a "legislative counsel" for Senator Seward in 1994-2000, and Senator Seward's district office is in Oneonta, NY, where Richard Harlem has been his landlord for decades (I checked through a FOIL request to NY State Senate), Mulvey inevitably knew Richard Harlem and his father Robert Harlem personally.
After all, the connection between Seward and Robert Harlem is unmistakable - given at least the number of Bills that Senator Seward put through the Senate "honoring" or "commemorating" Robert Harlem, without mentioning that he is the father of his longtime landlord Richard Harlem.
So, did Mulvey rush to the Appellate Division to fix the Mokay case, at the request of the cancer-stricken Senator Seward?
To help his recovery by rescuing his longtime friend - or his friend's (late judge Robert Harlem's) child?
Let's wait and see.