"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, January 20, 2020

To the poor corrupt New York State Senator James Seward who will finally not run for re-election in 2020 - NO SYMPATHY!

It has been just published that the corrupt Senator James Seward, of Oneonta, New York, who has controlled the area, including fixing court cases, for 17 TERMS, for 34 YEARS!!! - is not running for re-election in 2020 - supposedly, because of an illness, cancer.

Now, we are supposed to feel sympathy for a person because of his illness?


But, the only feeling I have is disgust.

Disgust that this corrupt criminal don is getting off the seat from which he wielded so much of his corrupt power and did so much evil to so many people only after 34 years of reigning his corrupt power and only when he is no longer physically and mentally capable to continue to drag his feet to the Capitol, no matter how many people in support personnel he has.


Nobody should "serve" 17 FREAKING TERMS in the legislature, writing laws for relatives, friends and "friendly businesses", appointing his own lawyers as judges, renting his offices from lawyers who then had the reign of court because - who can challenge a Senator's landlord, really?  For any reason.

I am talking about you, corrupt attorney Richard Harlem, of Oneonta, New York, who have been renting a building for "district office" to the no-less corrupt Senator Seward - for decades!

What is Harlem going to do now that his "benefactor" is resigning from power?

Get another criminal don to serve?

And, once again, I will develop sympathy to public servants resigning from "service" only if they:

  1. truly serve, in full compliance with their constitutional oath of office, and
  2. not consider their "public service" post as a title of nobility, and entitlement, and a family business, and
  3. when they have TERM LIMITS, and are not "forced" to "not run for re-election" because they can no longer physically and/or mentally capable to do so.

Here is the "retiring" Sen. Seward's statement:

"I have decided not to seek reelection in 2020 and will retire from the senate when my current term, my 17th, expires at the end of the year.  While I have responded well to cancer treatments, my physicians have advised me that treatments will continue for the foreseeable future limiting my ability to maintain the rigorous schedule needed to campaign for re-election.  This is the right decision for my health, my family, and the people of the 51st Senate District.
“I want to stress that this decision is in no way related to majority or minority standing in the senate.  I have effectively served under both scenarios and have always fought for the best interests of my constituents no matter the party in power - which is exactly what I will continue to do for the remainder of my term.
“I am grateful for the opportunity to serve in the state senate and sincerely thank the voters for their support and confidence.  The sacred trust bestowed in me by those I have had the privilege to represent has always been foremost on my mind. 
“My family and I also want to offer our sincere thanks to the great many well-wishers for the cards, prayers, and positive messages we have received over the past few months during my cancer treatment.  The encouraging sentiments mean a great deal.
Throughout my time in the state senate I have focused on improving the lives of those I represent – advancing legislation, securing state grants for key community needs, and working directly with constituents in need of help.  I have been blessed to work with many great individuals both at the Capitol and at home and will cherish those strong partnerships. 
“There will be plenty of time to reminisce about the accomplishments, but there is still work ahead.  As I wrap up my senate career, I will continue to focus on the issues and concerns people express to me every day and I look forward to a few additional success stories."
My commitment to our region will continue and I look forward to further service in the future.”

Among the usual lies about the "privilege" of "effectively" "serving" the "sacred trust" of the constituents in their "best interests" - an alarming statement at the end, 
My commitment to our region will continue and I look forward to further service in the future.”
He promises his corrupt friends that his influence is not going to end until his death.
The gall!




As to your cancer, Senator Seward, there is a good saying in American English.

Karma is a bitch.

Monday, January 13, 2020

As upstate New York bleeds population, judges invent new ways of feeding their non-profits with business. Judge Brian Burns and his new additional grab-and-treat court.

Here is a full text by the Oneonta "Daily Star"'s staff writer about a yet another "treatment" court opened by the corrupt Judge Brian Burns, the Otsego County court judge .

"Otsego County has launched a specialized court that addresses the unique challenges presented by opioid addiction.

It was created as part of the statewide effort by the state Unified Court System to address these issues, according to a media release from the state Unified Court System.
The new Opioid Court is an outgrowth of the county's already existing Drug Treatment Court, improving the treatment court model by focusing on early intervention and treatment, Otsego County Court Judge Brian Burns said. The new court's first session was Dec. 13, he said. 

According to the release, the court will accept both felony and misdemeanor cases from the Otsego County Court and any town or village court in the county. The court will also accept referrals from local attorneys, police agencies, first responders, probation officers and any other agencies working with at-risk opioid users, according to the release.
Traditional treatment court typically involves someone pleading guilty and being sentenced in treatment court, a process that can take weeks, Burns said.
"For someone with an opioid substance use disorder, they may not have weeks," Burns said. "We put the prosecution on hold and do everything we can to intervene and provide access to treatment immediately."
Burns said while he doesn't believe anyone has died waiting to get into treatment court, several drug court participants have died of overdoses while they're in the program. With the new court, treatment isn't conditional on the legal process happening first, he said.
"We don't want someone to overdose and die because of a slow legal process," Burns said.
Participants are immediately assessed for their needs, which includes a level of care determination, transportation to a treatment facility, housing assistance when they're discharged, employment assistance and help addressing mental health issues. Participants are subject to drug testing, a curfew and they also do community service, Burns said.
While overall, fewer people are dying of overdoses, it doesn't mean the crisis is over, he said.

"We still have people dying from opioid overdoses both in this county and across the state every day," Burns said. "The advantage of the opioid intervention court is it allows us to focus immediately on getting people into treatment."
The court is focused on opioids because of the highly lethal nature of heroin and fentanyl, Burns said. The court is modeled after others around the state, typically in more urban areas, Burns said. It could potentially expand and address other substance abuse issues. For now, things are being taken one step at a time, he said.
"Substance abuse disorders in general are more effectively addressed through a public health system, not the criminal justice system," Burns said. "This opioid intervention court is much closer to a public health response than a criminal justice response, so I think it would be effective if applied for people who suffer from any substance abuse disorder."
Shweta Karikehalli, staff writer, can be reached at or 607-441-7221. Follow her @DS_ShwetaK on Twitter."
Nice, nice, nice.
Very kind words said by the judge.
Now, why is it that I do not believe a single one of them?

Not even looking at this crook's very honest looking face?

Here are some comments under the article posted on Facebook:

And, the input of the former Treatment court co-ordinator Leo Giovagnoli who was finally pushed out of that court because of politics, does not add anything positive to my already dismal opinion of the proponent of this "court", judge Brian Burns.
Judge Burns has the dubious notoriety of having sent a teenager to jail because his father dared to demonstrate in front of his house.

Who has hired a federal judge's own law firm to defend himself - instead of the New York Attorney General, who usually defends judges in such federal cases at taxpayers' expense - in order to have the judge (David Peebles) give Burns a break and stretch judicial immunity beyond the breaking point.

As a result of hiring the judge's own former law partner, Burns WAS actually given immunity in a criminal proceeding where there was ANOTHER judge, and where Burns was very clearly the complaining witness and not a judge.

I have written a whole chapter in my 2018 book 

about Judge Burns' ties to the "service provider" industry, about making "treatment courts" - and Family Court - his own private business, for himself and members of "providers' association", a business funded by us, the taxpayers.

You are welcome to read it.

But, also consider the demographics of the Otsego County.

It already did not boast a boost of population, and now it is, as other upstate New York counties, is heavily bleeding population.

Less population - more taxpayer money paid for new "undertakings", like this new "court".

If, as the judge says, one person has died "while in the program" - in their treatment court, maybe, you need to fix the old one, not create a brand new one.

And, Judge Burns, as a member of the Board of Directors of association providing services court-ordered by such a "court" (by judge Burns himself) is uniquely Disqualified from presiding over the old one (treatment court) and from creating an additional one.

My question, too, is, will Judge Burns now be creating a separate court - with taxpayer money - for every different drug to which people are addicted?

An alcohol court?
An opioid court?
A pot court?

When will it end?

Note, too, how the judge is using the failure of his own court - a person died of an overdose while in the "program" - to his own advantage and to push for stripping people Burns wants "to help", or, rather, to make them into captive patients for members of his "providers' association" of more constitutional rights:

"With the new court, treatment isn't conditional on the legal process happening first, he said."

What the f**k, excuse my exquisite French, does THAT mean?

In a new COURT, treatment is not conditional on "the legal process happening first"?

Meaning, Burns can now court-order and put under the criminal contempt of court powers, anybody WITHOUT first determining whether he has JURISDICTION over the person? Whether the person has committed any WRONGDOING (courts do not adjudicate anything but wrongdoing - as Judge Burns must know).

Now Judge Burns can just grab-and-treat?

Or, rather, give lucrative business to his provider friends/members of his nonprofit who are suffering from bleeding population?

But, the grab-and-treat approach has nothing to do with law, does it, Judge Burns?

Will Judge Gary Rosa (NY, Delaware County) be taken off the bench after his profound fiasco in a juvenile case?

I have patiently followed the scandal (one of many) in Delaware County, New York concerning a fight between the County Commissioner of Social Services and the County attorney who represented the Commissioner in court, as a petitioner in a juvenile delinquency (criminal proceedings for teens in Family Court) case.

As always, the bold and courageous local press, thumping on Trump lately all the time as allegedly acting against the U.S. Constitution (while regularly turning a blind eye to corruption in the local government, and especially the judiciary), have missed the main point in the squabble.

The incompetence of Judge Gary Rosa who could have ended the conflict in one decision - saving 
  • much heartache and physical injury for the teen, 
  • the position for Commissioner Dana Scudderi-Hunter and 
  • tens of thousands of dollars for Delaware County taxpayers, including my husband and myself.
But - no.

Being a coward that he is, he did not do what he was supposed to, as a judge.

The point is that BOTH the Commissioner of Social Services (Dana Scudderi-Hunter) and the County Attorney (Amy Merklen) had IRRECONCILABLE conflicts of interest in that juvenile case and could not possibly be part of that (sealed, by the way) proceeding.


Well, that much was out in the open.

The teen in question was in foster care of the Commissioner.

So, the Commissioner could not possibly - as a person in the position of a parent of the teen, his legal guardian - PROSECUTE that same teen in a juvenile quasi-criminal proceeding.

It was, of course, County Attorney Amy Merklen's job to so advise the Commissioner - but she did not.  Which is malpractice and incompetence in itself, and it is Merklen who should have been booted along with Dana Scuderi-Hunter.

Instead, Merklen came into conflict with her own client, took in litigation the position of the County Supervisors who pays her salary but had no right to know anything that is going on in a juvenile proceeding.

The position of the County was to save money - which may not be an issue in litigation at all, and, which resulted in the opposite, in grossly wasting tens of thousands of our hard-earned dollars.

Merklen also took the position the County's probation office against the position of her own client.

When the client, the Commissioner, did not cave in, Merklen complained about the position of her own client in litigation (in a SEALED juvenile case) to the County Board, which is a violation of the teen's privacy, and made sure that her own client has lost a job.

Mind that Amy Merklen MUST be disbarred for what she did - but she never will be.


Because remember Porter Kirkwood, Merklen's predecessor as County Attorney?  

The crook who constantly engaged in ex parte communications with his predecessor as Deputy County Attorney - Judge Carl Becker?

The crook who boasted in his own judicial election campaign that he allowed illegal mental health experimentation on teenagers in his foster care?

Porter Kirkwood is now a law clerk for a judge in the attorney licensing court, the 3rd Department (unless "his" judge Molly Fitzgerald has left him behind - his registration still shows that he is in Binghamton, in the court assigning judges to cases across the judicial district -

while she has been transferred to the 3rd Department long time ago), 

and he will never allow disbarment of "his own", of another local loyal crook.

But, my question remains - WHY didn't Judge Rosa end this whole thing with one decision, a SUA SPONTE (on the court's own motion) decision, seeing very plainly in front of him a legal guardian of a child prosecuting, in a quasi-criminal proceeding, her own ward?

Why didn't he disqualify the Delaware County Commissioner Dana Scudderi-Hunter because of her irreconcilable conflict of interest?

Why didn't he dismiss the proceeding as being void since it has been filed by a person with an irreconcilable conflict of interest, and thus, disqualified from filing such petitions?

And, why NOBODY, not one of the multiple attorneys handling this case from all sides - has pointed that out, in any of the multiple court and administrative hearings relevant to the case?

And why NO JOURNALIST covering this whole story raised this issue?

So, why did Judge Rosa continue to adjudicate a void proceeding?

Costing the actual physical and mental harm to the teenager in question, a job to the Commissioner and tens of thousands of dollars WASTED of taxpayers' (including my husband's and my own) money?

Will you re-elect this incompetent twit to the bench again?

Will you keep him rule over your lives for the remainder of his term?

Or will you do something to get him off the bench?