"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, December 11, 2018

Voters and the wrongfully convicted in the State of New York, you have been duped - prosecutors' lawsuit challenging the New York State Commission for Prosecutorial Conduct was fixed before it was filed, the Commission was never planned to start its work on January 1, 2019, and many people knew it

Yesterday, I have published the 2nd part of my article series about the lawsuit of the DA's Association challenging, on state and federal constitutional grounds, constitutionality of creation of the New York State Commission for Prosecutorial Conduct, created to address, under huge public pressure, the disturbing numbers of wrongful convictions in the State of New York.

Here is the text of the lawsuit.

The two parts were housekeeping issues before I started my analysis.

Part I dealt with the identities of two lawyers representing the New York State District Attorneys' Association in the lawsuit.

Part II dealt with the problem with the availability of independent, honest and courageous experts on the topics that the lawsuit raises, and reasons for such a lack of availability.

I also mentioned in Part II that the judge assigned to the lawsuit, David A. Weinstein, was reported as "encouraging" a settlement of the lawsuit and delay of creation of the Commission - while a judge can preside over negotiations between two parties and accept their result, but may not urge/encourage a settlement of a lawsuit heading for a jury trial.

Of course, THIS particular judge - who was formerly an attorney for one of the previous Governors of the State of New York, and who was himself a prosecutor, an Assistant Attorney General, was uniquely disqualified from both presiding over the case and presiding - and "encouraging" - a settlement with his former client, the Legislature who he represented as an Assistant Attorney General.

Same as one of the attorneys was uniquely disqualified from representing the DA's Association in the lawsuit while being a member of the Task Force of the State of New York for prevention of wrongful conviction - or, at least, that is what he advertises on his law firm's website.

Before I delve into the issues of the lawsuit, though, circumstances changed somewhat and insisted that I publish Part III of house-keeping issues - because Governor Cuomo threw a wrench into the appointments to the Commission, and a person who 

  • a wrongfully convicted and exonerated individual who has spent 16 years in prison convicted for rape and murder he did not commit, 
  • who is now in his 3rd year of Pace Law School, 
  • who had pushed for creation of the Commission, 
  • was present in the Senate for deliberations and, as I understand, had access to be talking and persuading senators voting for the creation of the Commission, who
  • pushed for the Governor signing the Commission into law, and then 
  • publicly celebrated the creation of the Commission when the Governor signed it (on the last day such a signing could happen by law, after much theatrical suspense) as his personal achievement 

that Jeffrey Deskovic, when tagged yesterday on my comment that people were actually cheated out of the Commission - said in reply this:

Let me quote again what Jeffrey Deskovic said about the Governor stalling creation of the Commission:

"It's not [people were not cheated out of their Commission].  We already knew that as a practical matter that the commission would not be formed till after the lawsuit was finished, and that nothing would happen with the lawsuit till the chapter amendments are passed".


A law student, the future lawyer of American says that it was pre-arranged that:

1.  The Governor will stall creation of the Commission that he has signed into law on the verge of its first day of operation, and that
2.  A lawsuit will be filed by the prosecutors' association to challenge the Commission, AND, most importantly, 
3. that "nothing would happen with the lawsuit till the chapter amendments are passed" - meaning that:
  • parties to the lawsuit had a pre-arrangement to enter into a stipulation; and
  • the judge who WILL be (at the time of signing the Commission into law) assigned to the case, will approve the settlement - so, the identity of the judge assigned to the case was also, likely, pre-arranged.
In other words, the court case was fixed from the very beginning, and those "in the know" knew that the law signed by Cuomo with much fanfare, and celebrated by Deskovic and his team with no less fanfare, as their "big victory",

posing while receiving awards for, among other things, putting the Commission into being:

modestly positioning himself as a "distinguished speaker" - "myself and other distinguished speakers"

- is nothing but a performance, a sham, to mollify and dupe New York voters into voting Cuomo and other clowns into office for a new term.

And, helpfully, one of Deskovic's comrades Pam Booker inadvertently disclosed the list of people who were "in the know" that the Commission was a sham from the very beginning:

Well, you know who was not "in the know" about all that?

Probably, the majority of the "exonerees" and those who hoped to become "exonerees" and have their convictions overturned.

Who relived their horrors in vain, for the political, financial and career expedience of those "in the know".

And - New York voters.

Because this law was passed with "bipartisan support" right before the elections into the Legislature, and before the elections of the Governor.

And, it would have been very bad, indeed, to anger voters if the Legislatures - either the Democrats, or the Republicans - would filibuster such an important thing as creation of a governmental body to deal with rampant prosecutorial misconduct in the state which already resulted in the record number of wrongful convictions, judging at least by those that were reversed, and people exonerated - and God and prosecutors only know how many more are out there, where they were so cleverly crafted that their victims have no way of undoing them.

It is shameful for the "Democratic" New York to be the runner-up to the death-row-happy Texas in the number of wrongful convictions:

17 convictions overturned in New York just in 2015.

So, voters were angry, justifiably so, and voters had to be appeased.

And, the Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation helped appease them by drumming up the "victory" of a Commission for Prosecutorial Conduct (modeled on the Commission for Judicial Conduct - a useless complaint shredder against judges), but even that useless model was fake, which Deskovic knew "as a practical matter", but was in no hurry to stress to the public at the time he celebrated his personal input into creation of the Commission, that it will not come into being on January 1, 2019.

He did not mention it to me personally when he blasted me for criticism of the makeup of the Commission, and when I suggested to wait until my criticism will be substantiated with the Commission's performance starting on January 1, 2019.  Not a peep came from Deskovic that he does not expect the Commission to start working on January 1, 2019 - "after the lawsuit was finished" and that "nothing will happen with the lawsuit" (a fixed court case, imagine, before it was filed) "till chapter amendments were passed".

Talking about frivolous lawsuits and taking up and wasting precious court time at the expense of taxpayers.  And soliciting corruption of a judge - David A. Weinstein, the former Assistant Attorney General and the former attorney for a Governor - who had to be in the loop to make happen what Deskovic said: that

"as a practical matter, … nothing would happen with the lawsuit til chapter amendments are passed".

So, a law student knew about such an arrangement, a plan to file a frivolous lawsuit while how the lawsuit will proceed was prearranged before it was filed - and, instead of publicly reporting misconduct of the parties, especially, attorneys involved - because it is professional misconduct, stayed mum until December 10, 2018, when he complacently dropped to me that, as a person "in the know", he knew this was going to happen all along.

Because his career was likely based on and depended on his timed silence.

His connections with powerful government officials in the State of New York (who were responsible, by the way, for wrongful convictions, so Deskovic had to know that the culprits could not be the solution to the problem they themselves created) - those connections likely depended on his silence.

His future jobs after law school likely depended on his timed silence.   

His speaking engagements across the country that he boasts of on the Internet likely depended on it.  

And, of course, the main button on the main page of his foundation - the DONATE button - likely depended on his timed silence.

So, he casually told me on December 10, 2018 what he knew on August 20, 2018, when, again, with much fanfare,

Governor Cuomo Signs Legislation to Establish Nation's First Commission on Prosecutorial Conduct

Announces Three-Way Agreement on Chapter Amendment

Independent, Publicly Accountable Commission Will Investigate Prosecutorial Misconduct to Address Claims of Malicious Prosecutions, Prevent Wrongful Convictions, and Address Allegations of Wrongdoing
Addresses Complaints of Prosecutorial Misconduct Which Can Lead to Wrongful Convictions, Frequently Impacting People of Color

While the Governor's release mentions a "three-way agreement on chapter amendment" - what Deskovic hinted in his yesterday's statement - the text of the law does not contain this agreement.

Nor does it include the text of the "three-way agreement on a chapter amendment to build on New York's comprehensive criminal justice reform efforts" that Cuomo signed at the same time.

Nor is this "three-way agreement" published anywhere else, by the Senate, or by the Governor - or by Deskovic.

And, whichever amendments Deskovic is talking about, the challenge of the DA Associations' lawsuit was definitely not urging to wait for the amendment "to build on New York's comprehensive criminal justice reform efforts".  They wanted to stall creation of the Commission for the Legislature, at their leisure, after the elections, to gut the Commission into even a worse joke than it is now - the way prosecutors wanted it to be, according to their frivolous and pre-fixed lawsuit.

So, what do we have now, dear New Yorkers.

You've been duped.


Big time.

You've re-elected a lot of people into the Legislature - and re-elected the Governor - possibly, BECAUSE these blokes were so good as passing for you into law, with trumpets, the "first-in-the-nation" toothless tiger modeled on another toothless tiger, but giving you at least some hope that wrongful convictions in New York State will be stemmed, and those who are responsible for them - made accountable.

And you voted.

Boy - you voted.

And, you put Cuomo into that office for a new term, likely because of this sham.

While all along - the Commission for Prosecutorial Conduct that many of you were waiting to start its work on January 1, 2019 - was never planned to start its work on that day.

It was just a voter fraud.

And a successful one.

Where people who solicited you trust because "it happened to them" actually got in bed with the devil for their future - and while disregarding "what will happen to you".

Are you surprised?

But - even though the Commission for Prosecutorial Conduct is not going to materialize on January 1, 2019, as many people hoped and were duped to believe - it is still well worth it to analyze issues in the lawsuit, prosecutor's blueprint as to how the Commission is going to be gutted.

So - stay tuned, ladies and gentlemen, the analysis is coming.

No comments:

Post a Comment