"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.

Monday, October 9, 2017

The #JudgeBrendaWeaver saga, Part VI - The Weaver-Ralston pact: Brenda Weaver learnt how to fix judicial appointments (including her own) from the best

This is my 6th blog in the new series of articles following the dismissal of disciplinary charges against the Georgia State Judge Brenda Weaver, a licensed attorney "in good standing" - in a very good standing, indeed -

for organizing persecution if a journalist and his attorney (complete with harassment, intimidation, illegal arrest and detention in two jails without proper clothes, food, hydration, medical attention or accommodation required by the Americans with Disabilities Act for the disabled attorney and veteran, complete with illegal grand jury indictment).

See Parts 1 through V on the right in the list of blogs for this month.

When you review stories, witness accounts, public records CLEARLY pointing at public corruption of a high-ranking public official, and especially a judge, a person who has been chosen by her people to actually ENSURE justice instead of corrupting it - I always have a question to corrupt judges, even after years of reporting on the issue of judicial corruption - WHY?

Why are you doing it?

What drives you?

You do not have enough money?  But you do.

You do not have enough power? But you do, too.

Why do you want, into the bargain, to break your constitutional oath of loyalty to the law and steal, break the law and abuse your power to destroy the law and people's trust in integrity of our court system?

Why, Judge Brenda Weaver?

Of course, part of the answer lies in the fact that judges gave themselves an absolute immunity for malicious and CORRUPT acts on the bench - and expanded that illegal court decision to cover everything and anything, in and out of court, including actions of non-judicial personnel of courts.

And, of course, another part of the answer lies in the fact that judges regulate attorneys, and, thus, block any hope for independent advocacy and challenge of judicial corruption in court.  Try being brave and raising judicial corruption when the very person you are challenging have your own livelihood in his hands.

There are such kamikazes still, and things do not end well for them, believe me, I am collecting statistics of judicial retaliation from across the country for several years now.

But, another BIG part of the problem is that - despite all declarations that judges are sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and that in that U.S. Constitution there is a clause prohibiting establishment by the government of titles of nobility - the judiciary IS that nobility.

A self-appointed one, and in more senses than one.

First, judges wear robes, sit on the high bench, demand to call them "Honorable" as part of their job title (even if they are clearly dishonorable, like Brenda Weaver), and, even though they give THEMSELVES the gift of immunity for MALICIOUS and CORRUPT acts, they also demand that their INTEGRITY is PRESUMED - and devise disciplinary rules for attorneys gagging attorneys from criticizing judges or even candidates for judicial offices - and that means blocking information to voters about judges from the most informed source on the subject of judicial misconduct, integrity and qualifications.

Second, judicial candidates usually do not come "from nowhere".  They are usually sons and daughters, or friends, or spouses or partners, or significant others of other influential public officials.

Read biographies of our public officials, and especially of judges - you will most likely find a familial link to some high-ranking personnel.

And, any reasonable person knows that running for a judicial position in elections costs A LOT of money - even comedians picked that up.

So, it was not by chance that Brenda Weaver was "suddenly appointed" to the position of a Superior Court Judge in 1996, and then promoted to the position of the Chief Judge of the Appalachian Circuit, the Chairwoman of the Judicial Qualifications Commission (from which position she did not immediately resign even when she was exposed for her corrupt bribery scheme and illegal prosecution of a journalist and an attorney, and when complaints were filed to that same Commission to impose discipline on her for that).

Because Brenda Weaver's initial appointment, quick and high promotion and blatantly arrogant behavior speaks of entitlement, I started to look, who in Brenda Weaver's pedigree could propel her to judgeship, promote her and keep her afloat no matter what crimes she would commit.

But, as a first question - who promoted her appointment to the Superior Court judgeship? Who was that kind person who saddled the people of the Appalachian Judicial Circuit with this ... good woman?

And, believe it or not, I found that person.

That was the father of her former boyfriend David Ralston (now the Speaker of the Georgia Legislature), the now-deceased David Willard Ralston, the former Court Clerk of Gilmer County Court from 1969 to 1996.

David Willard Ralston was - SUPRISE! - also A WEAVER!!!

According to the Speaker's father's obituary:

Speaker David Ralston's grandmother's name was, according to the obituary, Donzie WEAVER Ralston.

According to my information from local sources, Brenda Weaver, before her marriage to George Weaver, dated David Ralston. 

She then, apparently, chose for marriage another member of the family, but, you know, blood is thicker than water and once sweethearts - always sweethearts, right?

Or, it may be my bad, and it is a mere coincidence that Brenda Weaver - and David Ralston, grandson of Donzie Weaver, ended up in high-ranking public jobs and are helping each other.

Brenda Weaver, as a judge, has a say in regulating David Ralston's law license and may be the reason why he was not disbarred when he was subjected recently to a disciplinary prosecution.

David Ralston, not to be outdone, has a say in appointment of members to the Judicial Qualifications Commission which controls whether Brenda Weaver will keep her sorry corrupt butt on her lucrative judicial seat or not.

It is a big happy family, right?

Well, according to my information, David Ralston's father, the clerk of the court, was a close friend to the Governor Zell Miller at the time of Brenda Weaver's nomination.

And, coincidentally, at about the same time as Brenda Weaver was appointed by the Georgia State Governor Zell Miller for the position of a Superior Court Judge in 1996, Speaker Ralston's late father David Willard Ralston resigned/"retired" from his position as Gilmer County Court Clerk - also in 1996.

Actually, some people indicate that the coincidence was not, as they call it, "incidental".

And that, in fact, nomination of Brenda Weaver in 1996 by Governor Zell Miller to the position of a Superior Court Judge is reportedly the result of a backroom family agreement and resolution of a very private family feud between the fathers of Speaker Ralston and of Brenda Weaver's husband George Weaver.

According to some people, the deal between the fathers was that:

  • David Willard Ralston resigns from the position of the Gilmer County Court Clerk - I do not know what kind of dirt the Weaver father had on him to force that;
  • the litigation or threatened litigation about property between the families (or, rather, within the family) is dropped; and
  • David Willard Ralston uses his connections to have Brenda Weaver appointed as a Superior Court Judge.
And, reportedly, the family feud was so-settled "amicably", and Brenda Weaver - TADA! - was launched into the position of a Superior Court judge, and now has access to multiple "operating account", and serves, and serves, and serves - in so many roles, committees, on boards and other little cliques striving for "excellency of the judicial and legal profession".

I do not know whether Brenda Weaver consciously participated in the corrupt scheme, or just accepted the benefit given to her by the two relatives of her husband - the father of her former boyfriend and the father of her present husband.

I would tend to disbelieve that Brenda Weaver would NOT know about such deals though.  It was a family affair, after all.

And, having learnt from the very best at the very early steps of her judicial career, what is what in judicial appointments and nominations, Judge Brenda Weaver continued to "serve" the same way she was reportedly appointed - corruptly.

Only over the time of Mark Thomason and Russell Stookey's ordeal, Brenda Weaver corrupted:

  • public officials in three counties regularly sending her bribes, for years;
  • a District Attorney;
  • the Chairman of the new-and-improved Judicial Qualifications Commission who Weaver hired to represent her in the related FBI investigation;
  • Commission members who, despite OBVIOUS evidence of a criminal scheme to bribe a judge and quash those who revealed improper financial transactions of the judge, decided that that evidence is worth nothing and that the good sitting judge is the victim of a vendetta, based on personal dislike, by two people - an attorney who allegedly is intentionally spreading false claims about the judge, and a "so-called journalist";
  • attorney Mary Beth Priest - with $17,000 out of her bribery account and by a judicial nomination, TOGETHER with the $17,000, right then and there, during the court proceedings during which Mary Beth Priest WAS paid off by Brenda Weaver;
  • judge Joseph Worcester who was appointed on the same day as Mary Beth Priest - and, in return for the kind nomination by Weaver, "served" as a judge who signed the illegal arrest warrant of Thomason and Stookey AND as a witness for the prosecution;
  • The judge who handled the secret arraignment of Thomason and Stookey in jail and, knowing that proceedings against Thomason and Stookey were illegal, coerced people who were not given proper food, clothes, sleeping arrangements, into a "choice" - sign pre-trial "bond conditions", agreeing to warrantless searches and drug pee tests and an order of protection blocking them from further investigating public corruption, or continue to stay in jail where they will be further denied food, water, clean underwear - or any underwear for that matter, or medical attention, and where they will be CRIPPLED sleeping in freezing cells upon metal benches without mattresses, pillows, blankets, any bed sheets, or on a cement floor, in the company of convicted criminals.  
And, that is not to mention that Brenda Weaver obviously corrupted the Judge's own husband George Weaver who, reportedly, was PRESENT in court when the "racial slur" (which Weaver reportedly ordered erased from the transcript and the audio file) was uttered, and repeated, and who TRIGGERED the whole controversy by advising the African American witness in a criminal proceeding, Allen DeRay Green, who was called, laughingly, "Nigger Ray" by the Sheriff, the Sheriff's investigator, and by the presiding judge - to sue the county.

All that George Weaver's wife was doing was justify bribes the county was paying her and trying, on her own side to ERASE THE EVIDENCE against the county that could be used in a lawsuit that Brenda Weaver's own husband George Weaver advised Allen DeRay Green to file.

And, victims of Brenda Weaver's corruption reported to me that they received calls from people in town telling them that George Weaver was taking bets, $1000 a pop, that Thomason and Stookey will be arrested by a certain deadline, a week ahead of the deadline, because, reportedly, George Weaver was pissed that Thomason and Stookey made his wife look like a fool.

It is interesting to mention that the timing of Thomason's and Stookey's arrests reportedly fit the timing of the deadline George Weaver reportedly set for his bets.  

I disagree with George Weaver's assessment of the situation - Thomason and Stookey did not have to MAKE Brenda Weaver LOOK like a fool.  She did it for them, together with her husband.

But, what also boggles my mind - why George Weaver, a licensed attorney sworn to protect the U.S. Constitution, who was a MATERIAL WITNESS from the very beginning, because:

  • he was present in court, as an attorney of record for a party, at he time the slurs was mentioned;
  • he HIMSELF made statements, according to witnesses, objecting to the slur;
  • he HIMSELF then gave the African American witness legal advice to sue the county - 
why then George Weaver refused to be deposed about that, and

why then George Weaver was present in the courtroom when Judge Christian heard, and dismissed, the motion against Thomason and Stookey for attorney fees (that his wife already paid off from her bribery account) - while the whole proceedings was to seek access to the audio from which George Weaver's wife ordered to erase her own husband's statements, as well as statements of the judge and the police officers?

Why be so blatant?

Why not even to hide that he was upset that Thomason and Stookey were NOT slapped with attorney fees?

Why, as I was told, slam his briefcase on the table and then leave and slam the door in anger?

Who is the fool in this situation?

But - you know the new local rumor?

A new judgeship is being prepared for the much-enduring residents of the Appalachian circuit.

Alison Sosebee would be offered in the place of Brenda Weaver who, as I was told, is contemplating to not try to stay on the bench any more.

I guess, the Weaver-Ralston-WhoKnowsWhoElse pact approved Sosebee for a judgeship.

She earned it.

No comments:

Post a Comment