Jeff Bowie is reportedly conspiring with Richard Northrup to take down Delaware County Commissioner of Social Services in retaliation for reduction in pay?

A witness recently overheard how investigator in Delaware County District Attorney's office Jeff Bowie was bragging how he is planning with Richard Northrup to indict Delaware County Commissioner Dana Scuderi-Hunter 

for a felony, in retaliation for Commissioner's plan to put Jeff Bowie into a position where he would lose $24,000 in pay, and that he is digging into her past and already found something in 2004 that he is going to use against her, together with Richard Northrup, to indict her for a felony.

Apparently, Barbara O'Sullivan is not the only victim of fabrications of the Bowie family.

And, since Richard Northrup appears to be "helping" in both cases, I wonder, what evidence does Jeff Bowie hold over Richard Northrup's head to have his compliance in Jeff Bowie's schemes of retaliation?

Jeff Bowie, according to my research, was reportedly 

• suspended without pay 15 years ago;
• was involved in an affair with Leslie Eck, wife of Delaware County deputy Sheriff Ken Eck, reportedly, used county resources to facilitate that affair;
• was not properly credentialed, at least as of 2013, as a deputy sheriff or an investigator, and never passed a civil service exam  - at least as of 2013

If lack of credentials is the reason why Jeff Bowie is about to be demoted in pay, then Dana Scuderi-Hunter is doing her job, and should not be taken down by crooks under the guise of doing their official duties.

Moreover, Jeff Bowie can cost Delaware County and its taxpayers dearly in liability, since all of his arrests and investigations, including undercover investigations that he was engaged in (as the Appellate Division 3rd Department found in 2007), may be illegal and the County can be sued for allowing uncredentialed individual to conduct undercover investigations and effect arrests. 

The witness also overheard Jeff Bowie's say "if I have to go, Dana will go with me".

I wonder if Richard Northrup is afraid that the same rule will apply to him, if he steps out of line with Jeff Bowie and starts doing his job honestly.

2nd Circuit, surprisingly, gave people a tool to pursue prosecutors who fabricate evidence in their investigative capacity, for presentation of the grand jury

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, in a surprising move, affirmed a multimillion dollar jury verdict against a New York prosecutor (Special Assistant Attorney General) for omissions in evidence presented to the grand jury and that was used to obtain an indictment (that was dismissed down the road after a BENCH trial).

First of all, that a person was acquitted after a bench (no-jury) trial, simply by a judge, is refreshing.

Second, it shows that those who plea and do not go to trial on the grand jury indictments - or who forego indictments completely, agreeing instead to prosecution by a Superior Court Information - lose out an opportunity to be acquitted because of discrepancies in presentations to the grand jury, because only in a trial portions of grand jury minutes (the so-called Rosario material) become disclosed, otherwise they are concealed by grand jury secrecy.

Third, what is valuable in the Morse v Fusto decision, made on September 11, 2015 by the 2nd Circuit, is that omissions may be charged as fabrications, if such omissions could create a false impression of culpability in the grand jury, and if such omissions or fabrications of evidence happened during investigation by the prosecutor.

Fourth, since the distinction between no immunity and absolute prosecutorial immunity lies in the factual analysis whether the fabrication or omission occurred during the investigative stage (no immunity) or preparation-for-the-grand jury stage (absolute prosecutorial immunity), that distinction may not be made by a judge and must be submitted for fact-finding to a jury in a civil rights case.

Which, after Morse v Fusto, will translate to more settlements.

But, fifth, I wonder whether the taxpayers will have to pay the multi-million dollar jury verdict in the Morse v Fusto case, or whether the defendants who were involved in fabrications that was not part of their duties, will have to pay out of their own pockets, including for their legal defense.

Which would be more fair, don't you think?

Now, after Morse v Fusto, is the Delaware County judicial candidate, Delaware County District Attorney Richard Northup exposed to liability for presentation of evidence with "omissions" amounting to falsifications to the grand jury in the case People v Barbara O'Sullivan that Richard Northrup is relentlessly pursuing on behalf of his employee, the alleged victim's uncle who works for Richard Northrup as an investigator?

Barry Cozier cannot be cozier than that

When a judge retires from the bench, he descends from his beyond-the-clowd Olympus and re-enters the crowd of us, the mere mortals.  Right?  Wrong.

The retired judge Carl F. Becker continues to drive around in a vehicle with a "judge" license plates, to claim the parking privileges or a court employee and, likely, to have access to the courthouse from behind, without the necessity of passing through metal detectors.

Two more retired judges Barry Cozier and Peter Skelos (both retired from the New York State Appellate Division, 2nd Judicial Department) were presiding over the New York City "public" hearing of the Statewide Commission for Attorney Discipline.

The transcript reflects that both of these former judges who now work in an active law practice and ARE NOT judges, are called "Honorable" and, throughout the transcript, are called "Judge Cozier" and "Judge Skelos".

Moreover, private attorney Barry Cozier arrogantly and publicly calls himself "Judge Cozier of the Commission", which is a clear misrepresentation to the public of his status as a retired, former judge.

And, private attorney Barry Cozier no less arrogantly calls private attorney Peter Skelos "Judge Skelos", for another misrepresentation, and private attorney Peter Skelos does not object and does not correct Barry Cozier in his misrepresentation.

And, there is no point trying to hold these two private attorneys accountable for their misrepresentations to the public because - guess what - they are insulated by their status of former appellate judges (after all, do you seriously believe that their own former court that they have recently left will discipline them?).

So, these two private attorneys can claim their lifelong status of nobility, of being "Honorable" and publicly calling themselves "Judge" while they are no longer judges - and adding their participation in the Commission to their online advertising as private attorneys, in order to drum up business.

See Cozier's advertising his position on the Commission - and his position as being a member of the "Judicial Screening Committee for the First Department", so when you are talking of corrupt judiciary, he is the one picking them for the bench.

See the bottom of the webpage where Cozier advertised his participation on the Commission where he clearly says that what is on the page is attorney advertising.

By the way, when a disciplinary attorney Mary Gasparini recently tried to present to the 4th Department an argument in my case that "Judge Sirkin" made a report to the court (while referee Sirkin was a retired judge and "made a decision" instead of holding a hearing - which he, not being an appellate judge, had no right to make,  but that's exactly what Mary Gasparini was trying to obscure), the 4th Department actually corrected her (at least, they heard some of what I repeatedly stated in my pleadings - that Sirkin is not a judge and should not be allowed to act like one and make decisions like one):

Yet, there is still no consistency in positioning retired judges.

The 4th Department thinks that "perhaps" "we should be referring to Judge Sirkin as Referee Sirkin since he is no longer a sitting judge", an interesting language twisting for people who know exactly what they are saying - the court is not saying "Referee Sirkin is not a judge, and let's not call him a judge".  No, the court says "we should be referring to JUDGE Srikin as Referee Sirkin", so Sirkin, for the "court" is still a judge.

And so are private attorneys Skelos and Cozier for Chief Judge Lippman, because three official transcripts published on the site of the New York State Court Administration call them judges.

Barry Cozier who called himself "Judge Cozier" in the public hearing in NYC, is not a judge since 2006 when he retired - that is for 9 years - and changed two law firms since then, according to his biography on the site of his law firm right now.

Yet, for 9 years he continues to call himself a judge?  And advertise his position as a judge so that he gets more business?

And frown on people, like he did at anybody who would say anything that he did not like at the public hearing?

And have a bulky male court attendant descend upon a middle-aged petite woman simply because what she was saying was pointing out that Barry Cozier, at the time when he was an appellate judge, contributed to the mess that he is pretending to deal with now?

Only it is not a good way to deal with the mess and do the fact-finding by refusing to look at evidence offered.

And it is not a good way to deal with that mess when Cozier's wore his heart on his sleeve expressing on his face displeasure with any criticism toward the legal profession and the judiciary that was pronounced at the hearing (I've seen videos that people made on their phones and posted on Youtube).

And it is not a good way to deal with a public hearing when Cozier shut up the last witness, Elena Sassower, did not allow her to speak, quickly wrapped up the hearing and fled.

Because, after all, Barry Cozier was not at the hearing to help the legal consumers.  He does not identify with low-income people whose rights are screwed by the courts and by legal elite.

His clients are not whose rights are violated.

He himself belongs to the legal elite and belonged earlier to the judiciary who ARE the problem. 

So, he put his participation in the Commission into his advertising, came to the public hearings, shut down all criticism and fled.

I will hold my breath to see his recommendations to Lippman.  But I am sure Cozier will try to make sure no changes in his own status quo and status quo of people like him will occur.

Porter Kirkwood's financial supporters are not the same people who are going to appear in front of him in Family Court

Bruce Maxson is one of the Otsego County Public Defenders.

Deputy Delaware County Clerk Debra Goodrich donated to Porter Kirkwood's campaign 3 times so far.

James Eisel is the Chairman of Delaware County Board of Supervisors.  He is much obliged to Porter Kirkwood as Delaware County Attorney to protect Mr. Eisel, and may be expecting benefits from Porter Kirkwood when Porter Kirkwood gets on the bench.

Sharon O'Dell is the Delaware County Clerk.

Richard Ucci is the Delaware County Coroner.

Cheryl Barr is a Corrections Officer in Delaware County Sheriff's Department.

Maria Kelso is the Chairwoman of the Delaware County Republican Committee.

John Hubbard is Chief Assistant Delaware County District Attorney.

Christa Schafer is the Secretary of Delaware County Board of Supervisors.

Arnold Weiss was a member of SUNY Delhi College Council together with Porter Kirkwood.

Sylvia Armanno is Delaware County Deputy Commissioner of Social Services.

Bruce Dolph is the Town Supervisor of the Town of Walton and member of Delaware County Board of Supervisors.

Mark Tuthill is the Town Supervisor of the Town of Delhi and a member of Delaware County Board of Supervisors.

John Vickers is or recently was, as the scan above shows, a Division Chief of Western Operations of the NYC DEP.

Kurt Holcherr is a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Middletown.

Carl J. Mugglin is a retired appellate judge and a supporter of Carl Becker, the former County judge.

Liz Arehart is the wife of Dave Arehart, SUNY Delhi golf course manager.

Linda Blocker is a visiting instructor in SUNY Delhi.

Seth Blocker is a chiropractor who testified as a source of information for Delaware County Department of Social Services against his own former patient who stopped using Dr. Blocker's services and gave evidence to investigation against Dr. Blocker for certain authorities.

I will next provide information about contributions to Porter Kirkwood's campaign finance from wealthy professionals, business people and landowners.

Yet, I can say already now that people who are financially supporting Porter Kirkwood in his judicial election campaign are not the same people who are going to appear in front of him in Family Court, but people who may look for future benefits from Porter Kirkwood in some commercial or negligence litigation in the Supreme Court, since County/Family Court judges are always appointed as Acting Supreme Court justices.

And the fact that mostly rich people support Porter Kirkwood is a matter of concern.

Judicial candidate Porter Kirkwood did not file his 10-day post-primary campaign finance report

Today I checked the site of New York State Board of Elections today for Porter Kirkwood's filings.

The last filing was made before primaries.

Post-primary filings were required to be made by September 21, 2015.

Porter Kirkwood did not make those filings.

I will keep my readers informed when post-primary campaign finance reports are posted.

Stay tuned.

In the memory of Marine Lance Cpl. Gregory T. Buckley

It is not easy to get tears out of me.  I am in tears now.  I know words are inadequate to translate feelings.  But here it is.

Please, look at this face.

This boy's name was Marine Lance Cpl. Gregory T. Buckley, of Oceanside, New York.

He was 21 years old.  

Three years ago, at the time of his death, he was 21.  His death was made a secret, and investigation of those on the side of the U.S. military was made a secret, too. 

But, because he died 3 years ago, it does not make his death remote and insignificant.  I've learnt about his death only today.  And I am crying for him today.

He wanted to protect his country, that's why he went into the Marines.

He was honorable.  He did what was right.  He reported to his superiors the rapes of young boys brought to his military base by Afghan officers, while his superiors told him to "look the other way", because that was a "cultural practice" that he was supposed to respect.

Well, it was rape, and Officer Buckley reported it to his superiors instead of "respecting" it, as they did.  In writing.

And he was killed after his report, reportedly by a civilian hired by an Afghani police officer - who could not possibly know about Gregory's report to his U.S. superiors unless those superiors tipped the Afghanis off about the report and identify the reporter.

He was the same age as my middle child is now.  He should be 24 today.  He never will be a day older than when he died at the age of 21, 3 years back.

I remember from when I was a teenager the words of an old friend of the family, an old Jewish woman who said that her daughter told her that she really understood what fascism is when she gave birth to her own child.  It is not so much about fascism, as it is about responsibility that we must feel when we are becoming "the older generation", to those we leave behind.

Well, Gregory left us behind instead, and that's not right.  We should not outlive our children.

Your skin is ripped off when you become a mother and when you see children suffer, especially when those children suffer because they did an honorable thing, something that they are told by their teachers, by us, the older generation, that it is the right thing to do.

The 21-year-old Marine Lance Cpl. Gregory T. Buckley did that honorable thing.

Since he reported his concerns to his superiors, it must be his superiors who tipped off the Afghanis who then killed him.

And the family of this boy, reportedly, has been blocked by the U.S. military officials from getting answers as to who, among his superiors, is responsible for their boy's death.

Let's remember this boy.

Let's remember that corruption kills real people, real young people, real honorable people, people who should have lived and enjoyed the sun and the beauty of this world, as Gregory should have.

And let's push for investigation and prosecution for murder and conspiracy to commit murder of those bastards in the U.S. military who tipped off Gregory's killers about Gregory's report to superiors of the rapes of Afghan boys he did not know, but wanted to protect, because that was the right thing to do.

They are more dangerous than those who pulled the trigger.  And, since they are undetected and unpunished, they can do it again.

Marine Lance Cpl. Gregory T. Buckley, 21, went to the Marine Corps to protect us.  

He protected not only our safety.

He protected our good name.  With his life.

The least we can do is stand up for him after his death.

Write to military officials and to federal authorities, to push investigation and prosecution for murder and conspiracy to commit murder of those among Gregory's superiors who may have tipped off the Afghanis who were raping boys on the territory of the U.S. military base and caused Gregory's death.

There is no statute of limitation for murder.

A big question about attorney integrity and about integrity of NYS Statewide Commission for Attorney Discipline

Ok, so in February of 2015 NYS Chief Judge Lippman established Statewide Commission for Attorney Discipline to allegedly review issues of lack of uniformity and fairness in attorney disciplinary proceedings in New York.

At the same time, Judge Lippman did not notify the federal court where he was making arguments that lack of uniformity is not a constitutional issue, in Neroni v Zayas case, and continues to aggressively oppose Mr. Neroni's appeal, which opposition has become frivolous because of Judge Lippman's changed position and appointment of the Commission.

The same refers to NYS Senate that is reviewing a bill S24 to end selective non enforcement of attorney discipline in New York against criminal prosecutors involved in misconduct and wrongful convictions by trying to establish a separate Commission addressing, specifically, prosecutorial misconduct, while the existing attorney disciplinary committees do nothing to prosecute prosecutors (including themselves, for their own misconduct).  NYS Senate did not notify the court in Neroni v Zayas of its changed position and continues to oppose the same statements from Mr. Neroni that they use to support Bill S24.

At the same time, Monica Duffy, the Commission member, Chief Counsel of the NYS Appellate Division 3rd Department's Professional Conduct Committee (Attorney Grievance Committee), member of the Statewide Commission for Attorney Discipline and defendant/appellee in Neroni v Zayas case failed to notify the court of her changed position in participation in the Commission while continuing to oppose the same issues that Mr. Neroni raises that the Commission must explore and resolve.

The same applies to the Third Department court whose deputy clerk is on the Statewide Commission, similarly without any disclosures of the change of position to the Neroni v Zayas courts - district court or appellate court.

Says a lot about integrity of these folks, doesn't it?

But, member of the Commission Peter Skelos outdid them all.

In March Peter Skelos was appointed by Lippman to the Statewide Commission.

In May Peter Skelos' brother Dean Skelos, former New York State Senate Majority leader was arrested by the feds on charges of corruption and using his public position for personal gain, for himself and his son.

After his arrest and resignation from NYS Senate, on May 11, 2015, John Flanagan became NYS Senate Majority leader, while also having similar issues of using his public position as a senator for public gains were raised in the press based on Flanagan's activities as an attorney parallel to his position as a Senator.

On June 3, 2015, Peter Skelos, as part of a panel of 5 judges of the NYS Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 2nd Judicial Department, makes a decision denying reinstatement to disbarred attorney Joel R. Brandes, based on Mr. Brandes' provision of paralegal and law expert services to attorneys and expanding, by judicial interpretation, the scope of two criminal statutes, which Peter Skelos had no authority to do.

The decision makes all attorneys, not only attorneys facing suspension or disbarment (which is very easy to arrange in retaliation for criticism of any governmental misconduct because of loose and arbitrary rules and even more arbitrary enforcement of those rules) think twice before criticizing the judiciary, because in case of license revocation, they are now stripped by Skelos's decision of any possibility of earning a livelihood, even where it does not constitute the practice of law (as two judges said in other cases, Kevin Dowd in Delaware County Supreme Court, Mokay v Mokay and Lawrence Kahn in Neroni v Zayas in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York).

After arranging for this intimidation of the legal profession, Peter Skelos announced that he is retiring early (at 59, 11 years before mandatory retirement) to make use of a "wonderful opportunity" to return to legal practice.

The "wonderful opportunity" came, and I am not making this up, in joining the law firm of John Flanagan, the successor of Peter Skelos's brother Dean Skelos on the post of NYS Senate Majority leader in his law firm.  John Flanagan, reportedly, for years derived income as a lawyer from decisions of senate where he was a senator.

Before joining Flanagan's "former" firm (Flanagan quickly retired before taking the majority leader seat, even though worked for that firm while he was a "mere" Senator), Peter Skelos made sure that attorneys are even more intimidated, through his decision in Matter of Brandes, against speaking about judicial corruption.

After the intimidating order was properly in place, the Commission where Peter Skelos is a member issued invitations for oral testimony to predominantly attorneys (11 out of 16 witnesses in the NYC public hearing were attorneys and only 1 out of 16 not related to the legal profession in any way - not an attorney, not a wife/daughter of an attorney, not a suspended attorney etc.), who as witnesses were by that time useless.

Licensed attorneys were also called to testify first-in-order in the three public hearings before the Commission in Albany, Buffalo and New York City.

None of them raised the issue that were the practice of law is not defined, there is nothing to regulate or prosecute for UPL, and that the issue of attorney discipline is a non-issue where what constitutes the practice of law is not defined by the law.  NONE of them raised this issue.

The Matter of Brandes worked well.  All the attorney witnesses said to the Commission, among some luke warm criticism of some minor issues, was that they are very happy to be invited to testify before such a distinguished panel.

No surprises as to integrity of the people calling themselves "the Honorables".