"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, May 10, 2016

Barbara O'Sullivan's house fire: Delaware County tries to finish the job, seize and kill the third victim of the house fire, Barbara's newborn grandbaby

I did not blog about it, protecting the third victim of Barbara O'Sullivan's house fire.

I will have to do it now.

When somebody threw the explosive burning projectile into Barbara O'Sullivan's daughter's bed the night of Friday April 22, 2016 to Saturday, April 23, 2016, Barbara O'Sullivan's daughter Alecia Bracci was over 8 months pregnant.

Whoever did that wanted to kill Alecia and wanted to kill the baby.

Prior to that, Alecia visited her other child in Ohio, and her other child's father Ryan Adams, who had a history of violence and death threats against Alecia and Barbara, saw that Alecia was very pregnant.

Delaware County authorities ALSO knew that Alecia was very pregnant - after all, Delaware County District Attorney's office subjected Alecia to the stress of the jury trial in February of 2016, when she was very much showing, and based on fabricated charges.

The crazy irony of this was that the newly-hired ADA who prosecuted Alecia - and lost after the jury trial - was her other daughter's former law guardian in the custody case, Sean Becker, former associate of the Cowen Law Firm.

But, no disclosures were made and no disqualification was sought.

Now that the child was born, Delaware County tries to seize the child, without any grounds for it - while it refused to investigate the arson attempted MURDER of that child likely committed by either Alecia Bracci's former boyfriend and father of her older child Ryan Adams or by the County's former Deputy Sheriff Derek Bowie.

Right as we speak, likely based on the call of Ryan Adams to the Delaware County Social Services is causing the Basset Hospital in Cooperstown, NY, to refuse to release the newborn child until and unless Alecia Bracci answers questions of social services.

This is happening while both Ryan Adams and Delaware County and its Social Services may be very much involved in the house fire - especially with the Delaware County Social Services' worker Sharon Reickert-Morgan placing hate comments regarding the house fire on my blog.

Of course, the Delaware County AND the hospital know very well that they may not force a mother to answer questions of anybody claiming that otherwise they will not release the child.

Of course, their claim WHY they are not releasing the child - that Alecia allegedly "lost" another child's custody - is bogus, and Delaware County Social Services know that VERY WELL.

The loss of custody was by a biased and conflicted judge Becker, who relied upon an indicated report that was since VACATED.

Therefore, there is NO basis to seize the child.

And especially there is no basis for Delaware County Department of Social Services to seize the child - because that particular department can finish the job and KILL the child, something that they did not do when the explosive meant for Alecia and the child landed on an empty bed the fateful night of April 22, 2016 to April 23, 2016.

Stay tuned, as I will publish details of this gross constitutional violation.

No comments:

Post a Comment