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.
Thursday, May 12, 2016
The Town of Colchester (NY) votes to get a Pagillo dog a month after the Pagillo dog was picked up from Texas. The K-9 business appears profitable in Delaware County
I remind my readers that Delaware County, NY recently acquired an imported untrained German Shepherd pup (1 year old) by the name of Neron for $7,000 (!) and is claiming that the dog exists on donations from the public, but refuses to release records of donations on FOIL requests.
Lo and behold, the local newspaper, Walton Reporter reported on yesterday, on May 11, 2016, that the Town Colchester approved the dog for Rich Pagillo (after much debates) only now, while he reportedly picked up the dog a month ago?
Was the Town of Colchester aware that the dog was already a done deal before it went to voting?
And, same as in Delhi, NY, it was claimed by Pagillo that the dog will exist on donations only, and that Pagillo HIMSELF (a police officer!) will be running fundraisers to support the dog.
In other words, the Town of Colchester purchased a perfect excuse for drug corruption within its jurisdiction - whoever supports the dog, is free from investigation and prosecution.
So, since the Tractor Supply in Delhi, NY is now supporting TWO police dogs - from Delaware County and from the Town of Colchester, it can run drugs run through its cash system, nobody will investigate it, and the same for SUNY Delhi with vet care. Vet care routinely involves a narcotic inventory as painkillers. So, there will be no investigation or prosecution of improper storage of handling of drugs by the SUNY Delhi vet care unit.
The interesting part is that, at the very least, it was disclosed that the donations for the dog's care will be channeled through a non-profit.
Of course, I will FOIL the Town of Colchester for the name of the non-profit and then the non-profit for the donations and handling the donations.
It may be an interesting discovery, so - stay tuned.