Judge Gary Rosa and his law clerk Nancy Deming issue decisions based on personal grudges, not the record

For some time when Judge Gary Rosa was running for the Delaware County Family Court bench, I supported him against his opponent Porter Kirkwood.

Shortly before the elections in November of 2015, on October 29, 2015, I publicly withdrew my support.

I withdrew my support for two reasons:

1) because of Gary Rosa's choice of law clerk - Nancy Deming, a member of judicial qualification commission, which indicated an appearance of corruption, and the wife of Delhi attorney James Hartmann who appeared as a trial counsel for several plaintiffs against my husband Frederick J. Neroni in 2015 in a case that in 2011 caused the loss of my husband's law license;

2) because of Gary Rosa's support by a family court "expert" Eileen Treacy who has caused a highly publicized wrongful conviction of a young woman for mass sexual molestation of daycare children in another state - the famous case of Kelly Michaels.

While support by Treacy does not mean that Gary Rosa endorses her, I was on the alert whether there is an agreement between Rosa to appoint Treacy in his cases as a court-appointed expert, and I alerted potential litigants and their attorneys of the problem with Treacy and with such potential appointments, since Family Court cases are sealed and the public will have no way of knowing whether Rosa "reimbursed" Treacy for her support of his judicial campaign by such lucrative appointments.

In early November of 2015 my husband and I received an affidavit from one of the plaintiffs in the Mokay v Mokay case where Gary Rosa's law clerk's husband was a trial counsel in the ex parte trial.

The affidavit was from the alleged named plaintiff (the litigation lasted 8 years and travelled through several courts).

The affidavit indicated that the alleged plaintiff never hired Richard Harlem (and thus James Hartmann who was hired by Richard Harlem on the plaintiff's alleged behalf) and never sued my husband (once again, the litigation lasted 8 years!!!).

The affidavit indicated that the whole Mokay litigation on behalf of the alleged plaintiff is based on a forged retainer agreement, where Richard Harlem knew of the forgery of the alleged plaintiff's signature and continued to defraud the court by sworn statements that Harlem represents the alleged plaintiff in question, thus committing multiple crimes of perjury and fraud upon the court.

My husband promptly turned Richard Harlem, his partner Eric Jervis, their law firms and attorney James Hartmann into the disciplinary authorities for disbarment.

After Gary Rosa's law clerk's husband James Hartmann was turned in for disbarment by my husband who was defrauded by James Hartmann (and that was done before Judge Rosa even took office, in December of 2015), Judge Gary Rosa sprang into action to retaliate - and stupidly so.  

Judge Rosa (or James Hartmann's wife Nancy Deming on Judge Rosa's behalf) sent me a letter (I will scan and post it shortly) in which he informed me that he will not disqualify "special prosecutor" John Muehl from investigating and prosecuting the so-far botched up case of burglary and attempted arson in our home in Delhi, NY, within walking distance of the Delaware County District Attorney's office that Delaware County DA's office would not investigate and prosecute for over 2 years, and likely colluded with the police in tampering and spoliation of evidence in that case.

Judge Rosa's (or Nancy Deming's) reasoning for the denial of disqualification was because, as a victim, I allegedly have no right to ask for such disqualification.

Of course, it does not make any sense, because the previous prosecutor Richard Northrup recused specifically because of such disqualification from the same case and did not raise the issue that as a victim, I have no right to ask for the disqualification.

Of course, it does not make any sense, because a prosecutor has a dual role in a criminal case - to vigorously prosecute crimes and do justice to the accused.

A prosecutor cannot vigorously prosecute crimes where he is criticized by one of the victims (myself) of his own corruption and misconduct in multiple blogs before he was assigned, and where his Chief Assistant District Attorney Michael Getman has been sued by the other victim (my husband) since about 2009 for fraud and fraud upon the court.

Michael Getman also declared on record that he is "aligned" with Richard Harlem and James Hartmann in the Mokay case, and, thus, may be a party in Richard Harlem's scheme to defraud that was discovered after the Mokay case was closed.

If a prosecutor has a motive to hurt the People's own witness instead of vigorously prosecuting a crime, it surely IS a good point of disqualification of the prosecutor, as a matter of public interest in not wasting taxpayer money into advancing the prosecutor's personal grudges under the guise of criminal prosecution.

A prosecutor can actually orchestrate and indictment of THE WITNESS instead of the perpetrator of a crime - for something like "lying to the grand jury", a D felony with up to 7 years in state prison, and a prosecutor who is the legal advisor of the grand jury, and while grand jury proceedings are secret, can always contrive such a retaliatory indictment and conviction.  A person with John Muehl's abysmal record of corruption and misconduct can surely do that. 

Of course, we are not idiots to "comply" with "investigation" by John Muehl, which means, assignment of John Muehl to the case where we are victims of a crime would have meant that the case will not be prosecuted, and we will be accused of not cooperating with the investigation as the reason for that non-prosecution (Muehl already accused me in an e-mail for that).

Even if Muehl would be assigned to my case, Judge Gary Rosa who employs James Hartmann's wife, under the circumstances where James Hartmann is involved in a scheme to defraud the court in the same case that is a basis of a lawsuit for fraud and fraud upon the court against Muehl's Chief Assistant District Attorney Michael Getman, and where my husband turned James Hartmann in for disbarment in connection with that case, Judge Gary Rosa should not have touched any cases involving my husband in any capacity, including that a victim.

That is, if Judge Gary Rosa had any shred of integrity.  Obviously, he doesn't.

My husband's complaint against Gary Rosa's law clerk's husband was filed in December of 2015, before Gary Rosa even took office, so he might have been seeking assignment to any case of my husband to hurt him in any way.

But, if Gary Rosa thought he hurt myself and my husband, he fell flat on his face in a mud puddle by denying me disqualification of John Muehl as a special prosecution.

Had he read the order of assignment and the record, he would have known that he cannot deny me a disqualification of John Muehl, for the simple reason that John Muehl misrepresented to me that he was even assigned to our case - he wasn't.  

As it turned, out

• Northrup did not read the record when applying for the order of assignment, 
• Judge Mulvey did not read the record while signing the order of assignment, 
• Muehl did not read the record while asserting to me that he is the special prosecutor in the case where my husband and I are victims, and
• Gary Rosa and Nancy Deming, following the tradition of not reading the record before issuing court orders, did not read the record of the case when denying me disqualification of Muehl.

As I wrote before on this blog,  Muehl, as it turned out in January of 2016, WAS NOT assigned to the case of burglary and attempted arson in our house, he was assigned to the case investigating a burglary in our neighbor's house.

I applied to Delaware County Court for Muehl's disqualification based on verbal representation of Muehl, his letter and his emails claiming to me that he is handling the case of burglary into our home.

When I, as a point of double-checking, asked Muehl to send me his order of assignment, he has sent me an order of assignment to a case that has nothing to do with us.

So - if Gary Rosa denied disqualification of John Muehl in connection with an investigation into the burglary to 205 Main Street, Delhi, NY - good for him, we are not involved in that case, not as victims, not as witnesses, even though the perpetrator is likely the same as burglarized our house.

But, apparently for Gary Rosa and Nancy Deming it was not necessary to read the record - as long as my name was on the request, it had to be denied, according to a tradition established in New York.  

That's what happens when you and your law clerk are lazy and bent on revenge no matter what.

So much for the alleged integrity of the newly-elected Judge Gary Rosa.

So much for diligence in reviewing the record of the newly-elected Judge Gary Rosa.

And, of course, Gary Rosa, now that he is a judge, is immune from lawsuits for doing anything malicious, fraudulent and downright stupid that he - or his law clerk on his behalf - does, even if it is done in retaliation.

In retaliation on his own behalf for publicly criticizing him for the suspicious declaration that he chose a member of judicial qualification commission for his law clerk before his election.

In retaliation on that law clerk's behalf for a complaint requesting disbarment of her husband, based on an affidavit of a witness.

Judge Rosa was promising his voters to base his determination on the facts of the case.

Judge Rosa based his determination on anything but the facts of the case, he did not even care to see whether it is the same case - as long as there was a potential to use his newly-acquired judicial position as a tool of revenge, against his critics, and against critics of his law clerk's husband.

What can I say.

It appears it took Gary Rosa less than a month to cast to the winds all his promises of integrity and fairness he made to his voters.

If his judgeship starts this way, imagine what awaits people in Judge Rosa's courtroom during 10 years of his term...

The Oklahoma conviction of the former Judge Key - publicity as a catalyst of criminal prosecutions against judges and former judges?

Nobody can sue on behalf of little Kelsey who an Oklahoma Judge Craig Key sent back into the custody of her abusers and who died 4 months after that from blunt force trauma.

Why?

According to the current unconstitutional self-serving judge-created "law" in the United States, Judge Key has absolute judicial immunity, even for malicious and corrupt acts on the bench, and his act to send little Kelsey to her death was not even malicious or corrupt - simply heartless and stupid.

You can see the third quote on top of this blog about how the concept of judicial immunity worked for a convicted felon, former judge Mark Ciavarella of Pennsylvania, who sold kids into for-profit juvie prisons in return for kickbacks.  

But, Judge Key was criminally convicted after Kelsey's death - for stealing cattle and a trailer and for embezzling thousands of dollars from people at the time Judge Key was an attorney, not a judge.

Yet, somehow I highly doubt that former Judge Key would have been investigated or prosecuted if not for the scandal of the toddler's death after Key placed her with her abusers.

Because, unless something really drastic and really highly publicized happens, judges in this country are gods allowed to do anything without any accountability.

It is good that a person guilty of embezzlement and cattle theft was convicted of a crime - IF he committed that crime and was not framed because of people's hatred against him after Kelsey's death.

But, prosecution for crimes should not depend on person's identity, status or publicity against him.






 

On gifts to judges

The easy way to do it is just give him tickets to a game.

He will accept, "with no bad motive", like Florida judge John Lakin did.

After all, there is a presumption of judicial integrity.

And some puny game tickets cannot overcome it.

Right?

I wonder how many of such "gifts", big and small, are given to judges by law firms and lawyers across the country.

Unless such a thing leaks to the press - and usually it doesn't, if judges are "good boys and girls" and do what is expected of them in exchange for the "gifts" - nothing will happen to the judge.

I wonder what went wrong in the ticket-giving scheme that it got revealed in Judge Lakin's case.

It is obviously safer for a judge in this country to be bribed and do as he was told to do, for a gift.

Because otherwise he will have to explain about accepting gifts with "no bad motives".

Thousands of years ago, wise people said "Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - "be afraid of Greeks bearing gifts".

But greed never learns.

The epidemic of mental illness, alcoholism and substance abuse in lawyers, the Dorian Grays of our times

So, lawyers are more predisposed to mental illness, alcoholism and substance abuse than other professions in the U.S.

It is the statistics, see here, too.

And why should anybody be surprised?

Imagine that you poured time, effort, thousands of dollars in savings (yours or your parents'), incurred nearly or over a hundred thousand dollars in debt - and voila - you got your law license.

And that to keep your law license intact and keep it producing income for you and your family, you need not to speak up when you see judges, prosecutors, influential attorneys, friends-family-colleagues of judges, prosecutors, influential attorneys and other government officials commit misconduct in front of your very eyes.

Because if you do, you will lose our law license, investment into it, reputation, possibility to work in any decently paid profession, and with that you may lose your savings, home, car, you will divorce, be ordered to pay child support, put in jail for non-payment of child support and what not else.

So - you know that your conscience (if you have any such intangible substance left) tells you to do one thing.

But your sense of self-preservation tells you to just shut up and suck up.

But - your conscience, the stubborn sucker, continues to eat at you.

What is the ultimate solution?

Booze and drugs, of course.  The imaginary escape from the dreadful reality.

It can get to you though.

Suicide rates among lawyers is also among the highest in American professions...

The Dorian Gray's Picture is calling to American lawyers, who are increasingly becoming the "honorable" drunk and high nuts...

That is the price the profession pays for dishonesty as the basis of its operation.

Judge C. Becker and Judge C. Becker and an epidemic of judicial misconduct in Georgia

Over 60 judges reportedly resigned in the State of Georgia after the state started to aggressively apply rules of judicial ethics.

And some of these judges are criminally prosecuted - even though they are criminally prosecuted not by state prosecutors (who would prosecute the judiciary that "regulates" your own law license?).  Usually, it is the feds who prosecute state judges for anything, and then judges do not usually get prison time, or much prison time (with the exception of the major scandal in Pennsylvania in Kids for Cash and in Chicago in the Greylord cases).

Let's count.

Judge Bryant Cochran - convicted and sentenced to 5 years in federal prison for offering to exchange leniency for sexual favors.

Judge Cochran is not a member of Georgia State bar, even though I found no record of his disbarment.

No such charges were brought by the feds against Judge Wade H. McCree in Michigan.  He was taken off the bench, yes, but not disbarred and not criminally prosecuted.

"In June, a one-time influential chief judge from Brunswick was indicted by a Fulton County grand jury."

That was former Chief Judge Amanda Williams from Brunswick Judicial Circuit.

Former Judge Williams was charged with "lying about a drug court sentence during a 2011 investigation by the state Judicial Qualifications Commission."

Former Judge Williams remains a member of Georgia State Bar in good standing with no record of public discipline.

 

The specific lying was about the indefinite sentences Judge Williams gave to a woman who was prohibited to see her family, put in indefinite solitary confinement and tried to commit suicide.

New Yorkers, think how many judges can be indicted for lying about contents of public records - I can name quite a few from memory, I am sure you can, too, judging from my feedback to my blogs about "intellectual dishonesty" of judges.

But now we see that such lying is actually criminally prosecutable - but is usually not prosecuted, when it should be. 

Reportedly, a specially appointed district attorney is now considering similar charges against a former DeKalb judge."

 

And the reaction of a chief judge of the Georgia Supreme Court to these criminal prosecution is reportedly like this:

“I don’t remember seeing anything like this — so many judges facing criminal prosecution,” said Norman Fletcher, former chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court. “I do think it puts a black cloud over the judiciary.”

It is unclear what is the "it" that puts a black cloud over the judiciary - that they committed crimes they are charged with or that somebody dared to charge judges with crimes.

It is interesting how this surge of judicial discipline - and even criminal prosecutions - can be used to eliminate judges who actually do their jobs, and specifically do their jobs presiding over criminal cases of public corruption.

For example, a criminal FELONY investigation was dropped against a former judge in exchange for her agreement not to seek judicial office again.  Huh?

Do you know of any other such "agreements" where a defendant can go free by simply agreeing to be a good boy/girl and not do something again?  And absolved of a prosecution for a potential past felony?   

I tend to side with Judge Cynthia Becker (imagine me supporting a Judge Becker - surreal) in this case - not about her alleged "lying" to the judicial qualification commission, but about her right as a judge, not to "honor" (accept" an agreement of probation for a corrupt public official.  

When a criminal defendant pleas guilty, the sentencing authority still remains with the judge, and if the judge does not agree to the sentencing that prosecution "agreed upon" with the defendant, the case simply has to go to trial.

Since the case in question that Judge Cynthia Becker was burned for involved public corruption, Judge Cynthia Becker was in her own right to not accept the plea deal.

Judge Cynthia Becker sentenced the corrupt public official to a year in jail and refused him bond pending motions.

Of course, a criminal defendant was entitled to make a motion to withdraw the plea of guilty if he entered it based on promised probation while he got jail time.  Yet, the judge does not have to "honor" agreements as to sentencing between the criminal defendant and prosecution, and does not have to agree to bonds pending such motions to vacate a plea.

It was wrong for Judge Cynthia Becker to misstate that the defendant never asked for bond, but whether the defendant did or did not ask for bond, it was Judge Cynthia Becker's authority to deny it.

For sticking to her authority and principles, Judge Cynthia Becker was forced to resign from her judicial position, and, through intimidation by prosecutors (clearly in retaliation for her not "honoring" the prosecution's deal with a corrupt public official) she now agreed not to seek judicial office.  So, as part of the sweep against bad judges, a good judge was thrown out, too.

Another Georgian judge, Paschal English, resigned amid revelations that he had an affair, involving intimate relations in a parked car, with a public defender who had cases in front of him.

The scandal forced retrial of old cases, the judge's misconduct caused at least 5 re-trials.

Judge Johnie Caldwell Jr. resigned in 2010 after accusations "he made rude, sexually suggestive comments to a female attorney".

As bad as making rude and sexually suggestive comments to a female attorney is, judges usually are not forced to resign over such conduct.

And, there are issues in my mind as to this judge though, whether Judge Caldwell's was forced to resign in connection with his sentencing of a county employee for sexual battery that happened two days prior to his resignation.

Two years after his resignation, that particular judge won a seat in the State House and is now a legislator in the State of Georgia.

Judge Frank R. Cox resigned in 2015 "citing undisclosed health issues".  


Yet, according to a transcript "widely circulated in legal circles", Judge Cox "aggressively questioned an alleged victim of domestic abuse about her heritage and why she wasn’t married to a man with whom she has four children", which prompted two attorneys to file complaint against him with disciplinary authorities, shortly before his resignation.

The blessed State of Georgia!

When now retired Judge Carl F. Becker in New York brought a teenager to tears in the courtroom claiming that she was unlikely to be college material, NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct did nothing but send a copy of the complaint to Becker who retaliated against the complainant (myself). 

Becker made that outrageous statement in protection of his own former client of 27 years, the Delaware County Department of Social Services when it was clear that the Department that held the female teenager in foster care did not comply with the requirements of federal law to put her on track towards high school diploma and college education, as she and her father wanted, and instead put her on the IEP (individual education plan) track for an IEP diploma which is not accepted by NY colleges for admission.

So, when I brought the argument that IEP diplomas are not considered full high school diplomas for purposes of college admission - and provided documentary proof of that - Becker bluntly said in front of the girl that "she is unlikely to be college material", and then had the transcript of that hearing fabricated so that it does not show the girl's appearance at the proceedings.

None of that was considered judicial misconduct by the NYS Commission for Judicial conduct, and the Commission refused to take Becker off the bench when I asked for it in December of 2010.

Instead, Judge Becker was immediately elevated in January of 2011 to the position of Acting Supreme Court justice, was allowed to get himself assigned to all cases of the complainant (myself), to sanction me in those cases, to turn me into the disciplinary authorities based on those sanctions, and the disciplinary authorities, as good boys and girls, suspended my law license without a hearing based exclusively on those retaliative sanctions.  This is how it works in the State of New York.   

But let's return to the blessed state of Georgia.

Judge Shirley Wise was taken off the bench and prosecuted in 2012 for theft of vital records and a kickback scheme "involving a county services contract".

Such prosecution is not possible in New York against Judge Carl Becker.

Since the Delaware County in New York does not keep records of contracts and refuses to disclose contents of public contracts on FOIL requests (even of those contracts that were recently audited by the NYS Comptroller), it blocks investigation of whether Judge Becker was involved in public corruption, and the local prosecutors will never prosecute him because the Acting District Attorney is his former law partner John Hubbard and already refused to prosecute him for filing a fraudulent certificate of 2002 elections in 2011, and the county judge is the newly elected Richard Northrup who was elected based on Becker's political and financial support and is willing to violate the law to the point of allowing retired Judge Becker to impersonate a sitting judge and accept Northrup's oath of office.

Judge Shirley Wise, on the other hand, "was sentenced under the First Offender Act to seven years probation, fined $1,000 and ordered to pay $5,500 in restitution. She also agreed not to seek or accept appointment to public office".

How about Judge William F. Lee Jr., who was reportedly "one of Georgia’s longest-serving Superior Court judges when he stepped down in 2012. Lee, who served 37 years, said at the time he was leaving office on his own terms. But he was facing an ethics investigation for cutting a deal for a convicted sex offender without notifying the victim or the prosecution".

Tell that to Barbara O'Sullivan and Alecia Bracci of Delhi, New York.

In 2010, Judge Richard Gumo (later censured for misconduct) allowed a perpetrator of a death threat against Barbara O'Sullivan, a then-U.S. Marine Ryan Adams, now, upon information and belief, of Columbus, Ohio, to escape with an Adjournment in Contemplation of Dismissal, not only without seeking the victim's consent to such a disposition, but after the prosecutor John Hubbard specifically deceived Barbara O'Sullivan as to the time of such a hearing where she announced to John Hubbard she wanted to come and testify against such a disposition.

As a result, Barbara O'Sullivan came to court after the disposition was already granted, and prosecutor John Hubbard defied her accusations of misconduct against him by irrelevant claims that Barbara O'Sullivan should not have hired me to represent her daughter Alecia Bracci in a custody proceeding against Ryan Adams.

Needless to say, the same judge Richard Gumo bent over backwards to instead help Ryan Adams and John Hubbard to instead have both Barbara O'Sullivan and Alecia Bracci prosecuted on contrived criminal charges, and failed to recuse from either of the cases, instead engaged in falsely pretending to sign false arrest warrants, refusing to dismiss legally insufficient cases and repeatedly assigning ineffective counsel.

Back in Georgia, in 2012, judge David Barrett resigned after he offered his pistol in a "rhetorical jesture", offering an "uncooperative witness" to kill her lawyer.

And, to crown it all, Judge Douglas Pullen of Georgia, a former district attorney, resigned and agreed not to seek judicial office again - but was not prosecuted, even though he was investigated for a potential crime - for tipping off targets of an undercover FBI operation.  Pullen had the gall to seek judicial office again and to invalidate he agreement, a bid that was reportedly denied by Georgia Supreme Court.

And, of course, Pullen was not forced to resign.  The only person who asked him to resign, according to Pullen, was Mrs. Pullen.

Right.

"Judges did not just start misbehaving, court watchers say".

No, they don't.

It is us who are too timid to complain loudly enough and publicly enough who allow this kind of misbehavior to continue happening for years and decades.

Californa to Nevada - we are happy if the lift on sovereign immunity works our way, but not your way

In 1979, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision, Nevada v Hall, by which it declared that the concept of the so-called "sovereign immunity" does not apply when a state is sued in the courts of another state.

The case was when Californians, victims of a motor vehicle accident that happened on a road in California, in a collision with a vehicle belonging to the State of Nevada, sued and obtained over a million dollars in damages against the State of Nevada.

The State of California was happy with the outcome and did not budge at that time.

The State of California started to budge when a citizen of Nevada (and a former citizen of California) sued California in the state court of Nevada and applied the same principle of Nevada v Hall - that California does not have sovereign immunity from suit in a tort action.

And NOW California is not happy.

Now California is filing briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Franchise Board of the State of California v Hyatt asking to overrule Nevada v Hal.  By the way, Franchise Board case already was in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003 before trial (the litigation spans decades) and was decided against the State of California. 

California advances arguments like these:

Remember, Nevada v Hall was decided in favor of citizens of the state of California to sue the State of Nevada in California State court.

California was happy at that time, and did not think that a million-dollar verdict against the State of Nevada was unfair.

Yet, it is not happy when the same rule was applied to the State of California as a defendant and the verdict is now payable to the citizen of the State of Nevada by the State of California.

So, now California is asking to overturn Nevada v Hall where Californians were the winners over the State of Nevada, to prohibit a citizen of Nevada to do in Nevada state courts exactly the same things as Californian citizens did to the State of Nevada in California state courts in Nevada v Hall.

If the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to uphold California's frivolous argument and overturn Nevada v Hall, what will be the next step in the circus - another lawsuit for a motor-vehicle accident in California against Nevada where Californians will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn "Franchise Tax"?

Regulation of attorney speech with a stun gun and the farce of judicial discipline in Maryland - fascism in the courtroom enabled by the system

I just wrote a blog about the state of Nevada that only disciplines judges after a judge resigned, is disbarred and is convicted of a federal felony investment fraud.

The state of Maryland is even worse.

In the State of Maryland, Judge Robert C Nalley, a WHITE man

 who ordered a court officer to apply electric shock to a BLACK criminal defendant Delvon King

for advancing legal arguments on his own behalf, is

1) being prosecuted for a federal crime - civil rights violations (there is such a crime, people, and SOMETIMES it gets prosecuted, imagine!);

2) pled guilty at the very first appearance, apparently to get a lenient sentence and no jail time, as it usually goes for judges and lawyers;

BUT

not taken off the bench permanently, AS A MATTER OF DISCIPLINE, was allowed to "retire" and, there is no indication that Nalley was disciplined as an attorney and disbarred.

Since Devlon King was outfitted with a "Stun Cuff" for appearance in a trial where he was HIS OWN ATTORNEY, and was shocked because of LEGAL ARGUMENTS, the electric shock can very well be considered as a new form of ATTORNEY SPEECH REGULATION in Maryland courts.

Here are the history of accomplishments of Judge Robert C Nalley as reported by the Maryland Court system:

 

I will put it in bigger font:

"ROBERT C. NALLEY,  

Associate Judge, Charles County Circuit Court, 7th Judicial Circuit, 1980, September 30, 1988 to 1995, and September 14, 2009 to September 17, 2013. 

Retired September 17, 2013. 

County Administrative Judge, 1995 to September 14, 2009 (resigned as County Administrative Judge, Sept. 14, 2009). 

Chief Judge, 7th Judicial Circuit, September 4, 2010 to September 17, 2013. 

Chair, District Advisory Board, District 4, Public Defender System, 1983-96. 

Member, Task Force on Sentencing and Intermediate Sanctions, Cabinet Council on Criminal and Juvenile Justice, 1995-96. 

Member, Family Law Committee, 2002-05, Maryland Judicial Conference. Member, Maryland State Drug and Alcohol Abuse Council, 2004-07; 

Drug and Alcohol Abuse Council, Charles County, 2004-09. 

Administrative Judge, District Court of Maryland, District 4, Charles County, 1983 to September 29, 1988 (Associate Judge, February 2, 1981 to 1983). 

Assistant State's Attorney, Deputy State's Attorney, Charles County, 1971-75. State's Attorney, Charles County, 1975-80. 

Born in Washington, DC, September 18, 1943. 

Attended parochial schools in Charles and St. Mary's Counties; Gonzaga College High School, Washington, DC; 

Spring Hill College, Mobile, Alabama, B.S., 1965; 

 Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., 1969. 

Admitted to Maryland Bar, 1969; District of Columbia Bar, 1970. 

Served in U.S. Army, 1969-71. 

Member, American Bar Association; Maryland State Bar Association (judicial administration section council, 2006-); Charles County Bar Association.

---

The Court of Appeals removed Judge Nalley as a recalled judge, effective September 5, 2014. 

==

JUST LOOK at the history of this creep.

He was educated in a religious school.

He was a Chair of the "District Advisory Board" for the PUBLIC DEFENDER SYSTEM!

He was a member of the Task Force in Sentencing and the mysterious "intermediate sanctions".

Of course, there is no such thing in criminal law as "intermediate sanctions", because a person can only be punished when he is convicted.

Yet, Judge Nalley devised quite an effective "intermediate sanction" for criminal defendants making legal arguments (as reported by Baltimore Post-Examiner):
 
"The incident occurred July 23 during jury selection, but apparently before any potential jurors were brought into the courtroom.

In the moments before Nalley ordered King to be shocked, the defendant did not threaten Nalley or anyone else, according to the court transcript. 

King did not make any threatening physical moves toward Nalley or anyone else, and did not attempt to flee, according to the defendant and his parents, Alexander and Doris King who were in the courtroom and witnessed the attack.

Nalley did not warn King in the moments before he ordered the officer to shock King, the transcript obtained by Baltimore Post-Examiner shows. The defendant was trying to cite a court case, and Nalley cut him off.

“Stop,” Nalley said, according to the transcript.

“… principles of common right and common reason are …” King said.

“Mr. Sheriff … ” Nalley said

“… null and void,” King continued.

“…do it,” Nalley ordered. “Use it.”

“(DEFENDANT SCREAMS).”

Moreover, according to the report, Nalley gave the command to shock THREE TIMES, making it more and more emphatic, and the officer obeyed the THIRD, emphatic, command.  

The electroshock of Devlon King was not the first time when Judge Nalley had a brush with the law because of his anger issues.

In 2009, a year BEFORE he was appointed Chief Judge of the 7th Circuit, he pled guilty to a misdemeanor for deflating tires of a vehicle belonging to a "part-time maintenance employee who works in the Charles County Circuit Courthouse".

More specifically, Judge Nalley let the air out of the tire of a cleaner lady's car in retaliation for taking his "reserved for judge" place in the parking lot.

Moreover, Judge Nalley told the criminal court that he had deflated people's tires on previous occasions, too, because they were taking "his" reserved spot in the parking lot, and he was not either charged or prosecuted for those admitted crimes.

What did the Maryland disciplinary system do to the judge for committing (admittedly) several violent misdemeanor offenses?  

He was temporarily taken off his criminal docket, and in 2010 reportedly was reportedly suspended without pay for the whopping 5 days, while keeping his law license and his judgeship.

And, at sentencing for deflating the tires, Judge Nalley was judged by his former subordinate, given "probation before judgment" which reportedly resulted in conviction not appearing on Judge Nalley's record, and directed him to:

"write a 'heartfelt letter of apology' (because forced apologies always are heartfelt; ask Michael Vick) to his victim, Jean Washington, and to pay a $500 fine.   The visiting judge, who once served under Nalley, also gave him probation before judgment, which means the conviction won't appear on his record."

By the way - the fine is paid TO THE COURT.   It is incredible that the judge ordered no restitution to the victim for the property damage that the judge caused her.




But - that is the kind of disdain that "lower class" people get from judges.  Jean Washington is not entitled to anything than a "heartfelt apology" for a tire-slashing judge - who actually said that he believed what he did to her "was not a big deal".

When the scandal blew up in the press, Judge Nalley pretended to "resign" - not from the bench, but from his duties as "chief court administrator". 


When he deflated the tire, he deflated the tire of his employee actually - discharging this way his duties of the "chief court administrator".

Here is what Nalley reportedly wrote in his letter of resignation as court administrator:

"I am at a stage of my career where I feel that I can be of more use to the judiciary as a judge in the trenches than as someone with budget, planning, personnel and other management responsibilities," Circuit Court Judge Robert C. Nalley wrote to Robert M. Bell, chief judge of the Maryland Court of Appeals. 

Nalley made no reference in the letter to this week's controversy over the tire deflation.

Doesn't mention the controversy and has the gall to portray himself as "a judge in the trenches?" Sounds like a real bag o' fun, Judge Robert Nalley does."

And, let us be clear as to how Nalley "let air out" of Jean Washington's tires - he slashed them.
 
Moreover, the court system immediately on conviction and after imposing this laughable token "discipline" imposed only to quash public scandal in the press, gave Nalley a consolation prize of elevating him to the position of the Chief Judge of the 7th Circuit in September of 2010.

I do not know what the "legal minds" of the "honorables" in the State of Maryland were thinking - if they were thinking at all - when they were putting a man with real anger issues directed to people of lower status, but it was a matter of time before the "Nalley Bomb" was going to go off.


 The peculiar fact is that Judge Nalley RETIRED in 2013, while was still allowed to continue hearing cases  - and the episode of electro-shocking Devlon King occurred in July of 2014, when he heard a case while being retired, so the question exists whether judicial immunity even covers him, whether it was lawful to allow a retired judge to continue to sit and hear criminal cases.


 

I am glad Nalley was charged.

I will reserve my opinion as to how good is the plea bargain until I research the information more in the federal court docket and see what was the offered sentencing - that information will be avaialble after March 31, 2016.

And, I hope, Judge Nalley's prior conviction for inflating the tires of Jean Washington's car, is used as aggravating evidence at the judge's sentencing in federal court - even though Nalley's friend Judge Wilcox made sure that he was given "probation before judgment" that would cause the conviction for slashing tires on Jean Washington's vehicle to not be a conviction.

But what bothers me - even though the press heralded that Nalley was "taken off the bench", I am not sure about that.  I found no court orders of removal for discipline.

The Maryland court system mentions that Nalley was "recalled", not disciplined.

The Maryland court system does not count Nalley among licensed attorneys, but there is no indication whether he was disbarred or allowed to quietly "resign" or "retire" without discipline.

It is all under the rug.

I hope Nalley NOW should go to jail, even if he pled guilty immediately and pled for leniency.

A person who insistently ordered to electro-shock a person for making legal argument SHOULD GO TO JAIL.  He should not be given a slap on the wrist.  There are no plausible grounds to allow him to remain free.

 *   *   *

Three additional afterthoughts.

 1) After Nalley was criminally charged BY THE FEDS and pled guilty - the report of the Sheriff's office (whose deputy actually shocked the criminal defendant at the judge's command) that found "no wrongdoing" in what Judge Nalley did - sounds as it should sound, as a cover-up of judicial misconduct.

2) "Prosecutors last month charged Nalley with deprivation of rights under color of law, a misdemeanor.  The charge came through a criminal information rather than a grand jury indictment. Such a move often signals that the defendant has agreed to plead guilty", and he did, at the very first appearance.

I wonder if this whole federal charge is yet another show to appease public anger, including anger at racial discrimination in the criminal justice system - remember, Nalley is white and King is black.

If the pre-agreement for such a charge is no jail time, it is simply not justice.  Not for this: "the deputy pressed a button that sent a 50,000-volt electrical charge to the Stun-Cuff attached to the ankle of the defendant, Delvon L. King, 25.   King screamed and immediately dropped to the floor, according to witnesses and a court transcript".

AND not for this:

"Authorities summoned paramedics, who examined King and determined he was not seriously injured, according to Garino’s report. Nalley then proceeded with the case and a jury convicted King of the gun charges."

Of course, King himself did not consider that he recovered enough to REPRESENT HIMSELF in a CRIMINAL TRIAL - after BEING ELECTRO-SHOCKED, and doing it in front of the very same judge who JUST had him electro-shocked.

But, Nalley ordered him proceed to trial just the same.  And he did.

And he was convicted.

After the conviction, "King then agreed to let Michael Beach, the chief public defender in Charles County, represent him.   Beach filed a motion for a new trial, asserting that King’s rights to a fair trial were violated because the sheriff’s office outfitted him with a Stun-Cuff without a judicial hearing, and that the use of the Stun-Cuff limited his ability to represent himself because he was in fear of being electrocuted again".

Let's remember, King was HIS OWN ATTORNEY in that criminal trial.

Imagine YOUR ATTORNEY "outfitted with a Stun-Cuff" so that he or she can be electro-shocked for the contents of her legal arguments.

That is one "CONTENT-BASED SPEECH REGULATION".

And - this is the outcome of Devlon King's case.

"In November 2014, prosecutors and Beach resolved King’s gun charges with a probation before judgment agreement (REMEMBER probation before judgment agreement with Judge Nalley, also for a misdemeanor - only in King's case it was not violent (possession), while in Nalley's case it was violent (slashing the tires)),  in which the defendant avoids a criminal conviction if he abides by conditions imposed by the court. The agreement called for King to spend two years in jail, most of which he had already served, and Beach withdrew the motion for a new trial."

Apparently, the "time served" "agreement" was to absolve the judicial system of the embarrassment of keeping a black criminal defendant in jail FOR TWO YEARS BEFORE TRIAL  and then for electro-shocking him FOR MAKING LEGAL ARGUMENTS DURING THE TRIAL AS HIS OWN ATTORNEY and then FOR ORDERING HIM TO PROCEED AS HIS OWN ATTORNEY AFTER THE ELECTRO-SHOCK, no adjournments, before the same judge.

And - did I mention that the trial started before a DIFFERENT judge,  Circuit Court Judge Amy J. Bragunier, the chief administrative judge in Charles County Circuit Court.

Judge Bragunier was pissed with King's "sovereign citizen" arguments - whether they are good or not, is another question, but those were legal arguments advanced by a pro se defendant acting as his own attorney in a criminal trial in his own defense.

Chief Administrative Judge Amy Barguiner, knowing that Judge Nalley's "service" as a judge may be of questionable validity because he retired in 2013, knowing that Judge Nalley has a propensity to violence, knowing that King was "outfitted" illegally, without a judicial hearing, with a "Stun Cuff" by the Sheriff's Department, referred the case in the middle of jury selection to the racist Nalley who had a nickname "Guantanamo Bob".

I wonder if Judge Barguiner had an AGREEMENT with Judge Nalley as to what needed to be done with Devlon King.

And I wonder whether the feds will ever focus their roving eyes on Judge Barguiner.  After all, she appeared to have clean hands, dumping the dirty work on a judge with a known short fuse.

Yet, the after-taste of what Judge Barguiner, and not only Judge Nalley, did, still remains.

Dirty.

Racist.

Fascist.

Disgusting.

Disgraceful.