The difference between pocketing criminal fines and not exonerating bail - it is "judicial discretion", baby

On April 11, 2016 it has been reported that a North Texas judge is sentenced to two years in federal prison for pocketing fines paid by several criminal defendants.

Nice.

In New York, judges, if caught in such a thing, are never criminally prosecuted, because - ask John Hubbard who is currently running for the position of Delaware County District Attorney and who did not disclose, in 15 years of prosecuting cases in front of a judge, Carl Becker, that he is Carl Becker's former associate, and then law partner.

Hubbard and his boss Northrup refused to prosecute Becker for the commission, with two accomplices, of an apparent E-felony and grand larceny from the State of New York taxpayers.

Because his boss wanted to become a judge.

And Hubbard wanted to take his boss's place.

And one of the accomplices was the Republican Commissioner of the Board of Elections.

You know.  

One does not bite a hand that may at some point in the future feed you and promote you.

Ok, so that was about a North Texas judge pocketing fines.

What about a New York judge who does not exonerate bail?

Out of a felony case that was dismissed - and sealed - nearly 2 months ago?

A $10,000 bail?

That's Judge John F. Lambert who is, according to the court clerks, as I am told, is extremely busy and cannot get his hands on issuing such an order.

I guess, that is not theft.

That is - what do they call it - "judicial discretion"?

Or, rather a not-so-subtle attempt to continue to punish Barbara, and the extended family who bailed her out of jail where she was put on an illegal warrant of Judge Gumo who, Judge Lambert himself said, was "either confused or disingenious" in his testimony - in other words, he lied under oath, and that's a crime of perjury.

And John Hubbard - remember - does not prosecute judges.

For public good.

So Hubbard does not prosecute Gumo for public corruption.

And he will never prosecute Lambert for public corruption - because he appears in front of him and hopes to get favorable dispositions from that judge.

"#PublicServants", all of them.

Becomes a swear word, doesn't it?

And another question - since the charges were illegal, and incarceration was illegal, maybe, the bail was illegal, too - and maybe, the Delaware County Treasurer should not charge a percentage on that bail, but release it whole, with accrued interest that the State of New York requires for money judgments - 9% a year?

It would be what - $10,000 put in by Barbara's family, $10,900 to be returned - and $900 to be obtained from Gumo, as compensation for his criminal conduct?

Yes?

No?

What will be the input of the ardent public servant John Hubbard on this one?

The "Alabama thing" - kind of.

John Oliver ran a hilarious - as always - piece on the situation where all three top government officials - legislative, executive and judicial are all involved in ethical violations, specifically, where 

• the ethically challenged top legislative officer must present the Articles of Impeachment 
• against the ethically challenged (involved in sex scandal) Governor, 
• the proceedings to be presided by the ethically challenged (once suspended from office) Chief State Judge.

John Oliver asks if this is "the most Alabama thing".

No, it is not.

My readers from all over the United States, plus people on social media from all over the country, affirmatively indicate that rampant corruption in the government, from top to bottom, in all three branches, legislative, executive and judicial, is the rule rather than the exception in all states and at the federal level.

I regularly write about corruption in New York where one corrupt official helps out the other to get promoted, elected, appointed, re-elected, to promote his or her friends and family members, get "awards for service" etc. - and where corrupt public officials unite to eliminate critics of themselves and of other corrupt public officials.

The scheme is universal and acts in New York as well as in Alabama, and other states.

And, when people, finally fed up with the crap, and hit the streets to protest corruption in politics, like they did in Washington, D.C. a couple of days ago, people get massively arrested - for a peaceful protest - and there not many reports in the media, and not in the mainstream media anyway, about such arrests.

Yet, it is for the public to clean up the corrupt government - possibly, through 

• public referendums in all states on the issue of public corruption and 
• by abolishing, at State Constitutional levels, of all kinds of immunities from lawsuits for public officials involved in public corruption, and 
• by providing for some kind of mechanism allowing ordinary citizens to bring criminal charges against corrupt public officials.

Meet the crooked Acting DA John Hubbard who is running for DA on the platform of "doing public good" - Part I

Here is Delaware County (NY) Acting DA John Hubbard (I believe, the picture is old and Mr. Hubbard looked a lot worse even when I last saw him about a year ago, but still - that's what he provided to newspapers as part of his election campaign):

Please, note that John Hubbard has an interesting feature - his steel-gray eyes turn blue when he is mad.  I know Mr. Hubbard for 17 years, saw it many times.  When he was talking to me, his eyes were mostly blue, by the way :).  Beautiful color :).

I wrote on this blog about John Hubbard's peculiar views on certain criminal laws.

I also wrote on this blog about John Hubbard's corruptness and lack of integrity in prosecuting criminal cases brought not against a nephew of the DA's investigator Jeff Bowie, but against the victim of that nephew, on falsified evidence - charges were, one acquitted by jury, one dismissed after revelation that Judge Gumo, of Delhi Town Court, lied under oath and issued an invalid warrant which invalidated a whole criminal case that Hubbard/Northrup stubbornly litigated for 1.5 years, at taxpayers' expense.

I also wrote on this blog earlier about the conflict of interest that John Hubbard or Delaware County then-District Attorney employing John Hubbard never disclosed while prosecuting criminal cases and appearing as a necessary party in child abuse cases in front of now-retired Judge Carl F. Becker - that John Hubbard was Becker's law partner.

It was reported first by Walton Reporter in January of 2016, without mentioning that John Hubbard, Richard Northrup, or Carl Becker never disclosed such conflicts of interest in child abuse or criminal proceedings, as required by ethical rules.

Now that John Hubbard officially started his election campaign at the beginning of April, 2016, Hubbard pushes his job for Becker as evidence of his alleged experience in private practice, see here and here.

As to Hubbard's pledge to make life safer for Delaware County residents - it is clear that the pledge is a sham.

I wrote in September of 2014, and then up to this time, about an attempted murderer Derek Bowie who Northrup and Hubbard refused to prosecute because he was the nephew of the DA's investigator Jeff Bowie.

I wrote in August of 2015 about a U.S. Marine, a favorite of Judge Becker, who made a death threat against Becker's enemy Barbara O'Sullivan, and John Hubbard bent over backwards to notify Ryan Adams before the arrest of the pending arrest so that he could escape if he wanted to, and then to have his charges dismissed, by use of fraud and by violating his own policy that he announced to me personally, even in cases involving violations, not violent crimes, the "policy" being that Hubbard allegedly never agrees to ACDs (adjournments in contemplation of dismissal) without agreement from the alleged victim.

That is baloney.  When the alleged victim is a government critic, especially a critic of Hubbard's beloved former law partner and benefactor Becker - all policies and all laws are off for Hubbard, and that's not what you want to see in your District Attorney.

I also wrote that John Hubbard and his boss Richard Northrup refused to investigate a burglary/arson in our home, and Northrup recused from that case when I confronted him before his elections.

I wrote here about Hubbard openly refusing to investigate and prosecute Judge Becker and public officials from Delaware County Board of Elections for an E-felony, let's say, filing a false public document, PL 175.35, among other possible criminal charges, for filing a false certification of Becker's alleged victory in elections of 2002, in 2011, 9 years after the elections, and 7 years after all original documents from those elections to be used for such a certifications, were gone.

Hubbard did not tell me at the time I asked him personally to investigate and prosecute Becker and the two public officials who filed a false certificate of Becker's elections, that Hubbard had a conflict of interest, having been Becker's law partner as per Walton Reporter (or associate, as per press releases in Hubbard's election campaign, makes no difference for purposes of conflict of interest).

Hubbard, a public prosecutor, simply asked me - "WHY DO YOU NEED TO DO THAT?"

Do what? Ask a prosecutor to prosecute crimes?  An odd request, I admit, when it concerns prosecution of public corruption in Delaware County.

Hubbard also dragged on a criminal case I handled for a client when he knew for a fact that his star witness disappeared in New York City (actually, Social Services obliged Hubbard by putting that witness on the bus to NYC) and will not be available for trial.

Hubbard stubbornly refused to agree to dismissal of charges, and instead colluded with Delhi Town Judge Gumo, so Gumo adjourned the jury trial because Gumo, a practicing attorney as well as a part-time judge, allegedly had a child neglect case that trumped his obligation to preside over a jury trial.

I did not buy the adjournment and demanded to assign another judge - any judge - but allow the jury trial to proceed.  And, I notified the County Court of Hubbard's misconduct, that he proceeds with a jury trial, and now manipulates adjournments, because his witness is not available.

Instead of a new judge assigned, Hubbard then agreed to the dismissal of the case.

He bluffed until the end - same as John Muehl, of Otsego County, did when his witness went missing - he tried to intimidate my client, charged with a B felony, into a guilty plea until he could bluff no more.  He acknowledged the lack of the main witness just before trial.

I understand, bluffing is the signature behavior of prosecutors in such circumstances, but it is a wasteful behavior as to taxpayer money (jury pools are convened, jury summonses are issued, people have to make arrangements), and it is fraudulent behavior for a public prosecutor, and prosecutorial misconduct to proceed on charges you know you cannot maintain.

Here are two documents upon which Hubbard refused to prosecute his former law partner Carl Becker and Becker's two accomplices in commission of an E-felony under PL 175.35, filing a falsified document with intent to defraud a public agency.

Here is a little timeline.

August 17, 2010.

The Delaware County Board of Elections answers my Freedom of Information Request regarding documents proving legitimacy of Becker's elections in 2002.

The Board says that they did not have, as of August 17, 2010, information about documents proving legitimacy of Becker's 2002 election at that time - and no certificate of election was filed by Becker immediately after his election, as was required by law to legitimately enter his service as a judge.

In March of 2011, I make a motion on behalf of a pro bono client in Family Court, to vacate all decision of Carl Becker because he is not a legitimate judge.

After I made the motion, on March 21, 2011 (see time stamp on document below)  Becker's accomplices, 

• Paula Shermernhorn, and
• William J. Campbell

file a certificate of elections below.

Of course, the certificate is false because, see above response of the Delaware County Board of Elections, the Board of Elections did not have documents any more upon which to base their certification.

A certification cannot be based on copies or on memories.

So, the document that has been filed on behalf of Becker by Paula Shermerhorn and William Campbell, constituted a commission of an E-felony under PL 175.35, because, using that certification, Becker has proven his legitimacy, received salary based on that falsified certification over 10 years, from 2002 to 2012, 

then won second election in 2012 claiming, also fraudulently, how good a judge he was in 2002-2012, and is now receiving retirement benefits.

And - non-prosecution of Becker and his accomplices was a gift from Hubbard and Northrup.

After all, when Becker "retired", he supported Northrup in his election and even swore him into office - while being a private attorney and having no authority to do that - demonstrating a close personal relationship to Northrup, too.

And, when Becker "retired" and Northrup was elected judge in his place, Hubbard succeeded Northrup in his position as a DA - at least temporarily, as an Acting DA, and is now using that position to advance himself in elections for the DA's office.

And, one does not prosecute the Republican Commissioner of Elections for a felony when both the DA and the Chief ADA want to run for public office on a Republican ticket.

So, Becker owes Hubbard and Northrup.

And Campbell, the Commissioner of Delaware County Board of Elections, owes Northrup and Hubbard.

Which puts up a big question - how legitimate are elections where the Commissioner is a person who has likely committed a felony, but whom the prosecutor refused to prosecute in the hopes of future elections.

As a bottom line of this story, when you hear and read about Hubbard's pledges to "make community safe" and that he "cares about public service", you will know that all Hubbard is seeking to do is - get into office that increases his salary from $79,716 per year

to $151,659 per year, a $71,943 increase, or, a 90% increase:

In other words, with election to the position of DA, John Hubbard's salary nearly doubles, and he gets the ultimate power to either charge or not charge local people with crimes, including felonies, and thus keep his friends happy and himself in power and well-supported.

Hubbard's run for office has NOTHING to do with his desire to serve people.

Had he had such a desire, he wouldn't be involved in fraudulent schemes and non-disclosures of conflicts of interests, as described above.

Had he had such a desire, he would have prosecuted corrupt public officials of Delaware County for their shenanigans with giving away the County money without public bidding, millions of dollars of those.

Or, does he have a cut that makes him focusing suddenly on heroin traffic and not public corruption?  Never public corruption?

Delaware County?  Public corruption? Cannot be.

Voters, beware.

You don't need another of Becker's dishonest hatchlings on your neck.

You don't need to give 4-year power to prosecute you to an already corrupt public officer who assures him he - what did he say in his press release? - "Giving back to our community has always been important to me" - giving to CERTAIN MEMBERS of the local community is certainly important to Hubbard.

Like to Becker.

Like to Campbell.

Like to Delaware County government happily immersed in giving friends and relatives and their businesses multi-million contracts, raising property taxes, taking people's homes in foreclosures, and "serving, serving, serving".  Themselves only.

Do not power in the hands of an already corrupt man.

He will not get cleaner from more power.

The un-retire-able Carl Becker and his hatchlings - Richard Northrup, Porter Kirkwood and John Hubbard

Delaware County Judge Carl F. Becker who retired at the end of July, 2015, seems to have a difficulty accepting his retirement - as does the Delaware County court system.

Despite announcing his "official" cause for early and abrupt retirement as needing more time with his pregnant daughter - who lived in Seattle, as far as I know, and, according to reports, was going to go to Australia, Becker, according to my information, hovers around the courthouse in Delhi, NY all the time.

Moreover, Becker is engaged in affirmative conduct of judge impersonation - long after retirement, which is public fraud.

In September of 2015, two months after retirement, Becker was caught parking in "court employees-only" parking lot, and driving a car with judicial license plates still on - a violation of the state law allowing only sitting judges to have license plates on their vehicles designating them as judges.

In January of 2016, Becker was portrayed by local press wearing his judicial robe and swearing in - into his own position that he left in July of 2015, Richard Northrup, the former Delaware County District Attorney.




The system also has a problem letting Becker retire.

As of today, the website of the Delaware County Drug Treatment court, lists Becker as its judge.

Judge Becker already has one of his close friends - Richard Northrup take his place (he wanted TWO - Porter Kirkwood was not elected, you can word-search Porter Kirkwood on this blog in the search window on the left, I have a lot of information about that guy and his relationship with Becker, his misconduct is as legendary, as is Becker's).

Becker is about to get another of his buddies - and his employee, which was not disclosed by anyone until 2016 - John Hubbard, run for elections for the position of Delaware County District Attorney.

I will dedicate a separate series of blogs to this "worthy" individual.

And, with two hatchlings following in his footsteps, who learnt at the knee of the Master of Misconduct - Becker still cannot sink into oblivion.

Even though on his attorney registration website he says - exactly NOTHING.

Becker does not work anywhere, not in Drug Court, as the Drug Court site indicates, not anywhere.

Nobody wants to employ him?

I wonder why.

And, as his recent picture that a reader sent to me as of Easter time, shows, he has lost a LOT of weight and looks extremely unhappy.

I also wonder why.

Wife does not allow to drink lunch away from home? (there were such witness reports when Becker was a judge).

No more opportunities - or power - to command "very good relationships" with female employees - of the court and of Delaware County?

I was a personal witness of attentions of one female employee to Becker, in a public setting - my acquaintance who was with me and was not aware of the relationship, asked if it was his wife, because of the nature of attention the employee was lavishing upon Becker, and Becker accepted it as if he is used to it.

In any event, the Beast is gone, and only the ghost of his name lingers on the Drug Court website.

People of Delaware County should be alert not to allow Becker's one hatchling, Northrup, to develop the same King mentality as his mentor, and should definitely not saddle themselves with Becker's second hatchling, Hubbard.

As I said above, I will run a separate series of blogs about John Hubbard and his complete lack of integrity making him ineligible to run for any public office, especially as important as a District Attorney's position.

Stay tuned.

#MaleChauvinisticPigsGalore continues - in North Carolina, a male judge rules it is "inappropriate" to breastfeed a child in a courtroom

Today, Judge Peter Knight, 60, of North Carolina Henderson County court, kicked a breastfeeding woman out of court, because, he said, breastfeeding a baby in the courtroom is inappropriate.

Here is some history about Judge Knight - all benign, posted about him as part of his re-election campaign.

Seems like a garden variety ordinary guy - not as a crazy puritan fundamentalist on the bench.

And yet he is.

I just wrote a blog about two other judges with interesting last names committing misconduct in Louisiana - Judge Free and Judge Best.

Judge Free was suspended for corruption.

Judge Best was investigated for cutting probation, ex parte, to a sex offender whom the judge personally knew through the judge's church choir.

This is Judge Knight.

You cannot make it up.

A Knight in shining armor kicked out a breastfeeding mother out of a public building because it is inappropriate to feed your child when that child wants to be fed.

Judge Knight was quoted as saying in 2012:  ""When you practice law, you typically don't get to do much study of the law".

Well, he should.

At least, not to come across as a caveman and an embarrassment, in our day and age.

Unfortunately, Judge Knight is not alone in his cavemen mentality and actions.

I wrote on this blog about male chauvinistic pigs like Judge Knight in Nevada and in Michigan.

Now it is happening in North Carolina.

Louisiana does not have money for indigent criminal defense - only for corrupt judges and disciplinary boards

I just put in a blog article about institutional politics of allowing corrupt judges to sit on the bench in the State of Louisiana - at taxpayers' expense - while canning attorneys who expose judicial misconduct.

But, Louisiana is famous not only by THAT.

If you remember, Louisiana is also famous by the fact that government went after monks who tried to provide cheap coffins to increasingly indigent population after Hurricane Katrina - to help the monks' competitors in the coffin business, the local funeral directors.

That was not too corrupt, I guess.

The State of Louisiana has a lot of money to pay:

• to corrupt judges, so that they would continue in their corrupt ways and corrupt more people around them;
• to disciplinary boards going after whistleblower attorneys who expose corrupt judges (or, the state of Louisiana makes those attorneys, victims of unconstitutional persecution, to pay for being prosecuted, as they did with Christine Mire).  Reminds me of reported bills for bullets that Nazis sent to the families of those executed by firing squads.
• to corrupt disciplinary boards who prevent cheap services from being provided to the state residents even at the time  and aftermath of epically catastrophic events;

What the state of Louisiana does not have money is, predictably, money for indigent criminal defense.

After all, criminal defendants are poor, predominantly non-white, they cannot wine-and-dine judges, or fly them to hunting ranches.

So, indigent criminal defendants get stuck with Louisiana public defenders who, according tot themselves, now that they are sued for TURNING DOWN CLIENTS, actually want to be sued.

Because they want to show in court that it is equally, if not more unconstitutional to pretend to represent a client when you know you have no resources or time to do it diligently and effectively, than to decline such representation entirely.

So, will Louisiana find money for indigent criminal defense?

Maybe, it should cut judicial salaries?

Just a little bit?

They have all expense trips anyway, they are wined and dined at the expense of litigants and attorneys anyway, they will survive.

Favors by a corrupt judge to a sex offender from the judge's church choir - and sanctions against an attorney who exposed a corrupt judge: cleaning the courts the Louisiana way

It is worth reading this article in its entirety.

It is written by a law professor emeritus from Louisiana.

It was published on May 13, 2015.

It describes a 30-day suspension of a judge who accepted a - guess what? - all-expenses-paid trip to a HUNTING RANCH in - guess where? - Texas - by a party who just won a settlement in his court of $1.2 mln.

Sounds familiar?

#AntoninScalia? #ASSLaw? Hunting trips? Judicial corruption?

Again, it was written long before the Scalia final "hunting" trip.

30 days' suspension for judicial corruption.

And, as I wrote in my previous blogs, a year's suspension with subsequent "probation" for an attorney in the same blessed state of Louisiana - FOR TELLING THE TRUTH about judicial corruption.

Suspended on the complaint of the corrupt judge, no less, a criminal who involved court personnel in fabricating court records to cover up her misconduct.

The criminal was elevated to the appellate level, the attorney who exposed the criminal got suspended.   For telling the truth on behalf of a client.

Any logic?  No logic is needed.

The only part of the article I VIGOROUSLY disagree with is this:

"The great majority of Louisiana’s judges, I assume, are honest. "

In cases of judicial corruption one may not ASSUME. 

Especially when that one is a law professor who knows better and who writes about institutional rules of cover up and unwarranted leniency to admittedly corrupt judges, while the same system punishes whistleblower attorneys who have the courage to expose judicial corruption to do their duty and protect their clients.

What is the BASIS to "assume" that "the great majority of Lousiana's judges" (or judges of any other state, or the federal judiciary) are honest?

• Judges invented absolute immunity for malicious and corrupt acts in office for themselves, and apply that illegal self-gift far beyond its declared scope - does that sound honest to you?
• Judges toss majority of comlaints against themselves, thus falsifying statistics, and then claim that, because statistics of judicial discipline (that is within the hands of the judiciary) is low, the "majority of judges are honest".  
• Judges "regulate" attorneys and regulate them in such a way that they strip those who, even correctly, expose judicial misconduct, based on irrefutable evidence, lose their reputation, license and livelihood.

When creator of statistics falsifies the statistics by not recording events that are supposed to be recorded, by refusing to register complaints about judicial misconduct, by tossing majority of such complaints without investigation or with little investigation - that is not called statistics.

That is called fabrication of image.

And no, no reasonable person should "assume" that judiciary of any state or federal court is honest in its majority -

• specifically because of self-gifts of judicial immunity FOR MALICIOUS AND CORRUPT ACTS,
• specifically because of leniency by judges to judges for ascertained acts of judicial corruption,
• specifically because judges retaliate against attorneys who report true facts on judicial misconduct

And a "Scalia" afterthought - he went on that trip AFTER a judge was suspended for 30 days because he went to a hunting trip to Texas, on a trip paid by a party in litigation who won in the judge's court?

AFTER THAT?

What kind of audacity are we talking about?

At the highest level of the judiciary?

And, by the way, Judge Free who was suspended for 30 days for the all-expenses-paid trip to a Texas ranch (that Professor John S. Baker, Jr. was writing about in his article) is, possibly, facing a suspension again:

this time, for

• making joking comments about domestic violence as defendants arrested on those charges appeared before him,
• using mocking language with female defendants,
• improperly holding defendants in contempt and
• jailing them without following Supreme Court rules and, in one case,
• speaking to family members of victims in a vehicular homicide case when the defendant and his lawyer were not present

A 30 days' suspension for misconduct was, I guess, not enough of a "deterrent of future misconduct", for Judge Free.

And, yet another Louisiana judge, James Best (think about it - one is Judge Free, the other is Judge Best, you really cannot make it up) - is now investigated for "cutting short the probation of a sex offender he knew casually from his church choir without notifying prosecutors about a hearing in the case."

A sex offender
a judge casually knows
from a church choir

gets a benefit from the judge

who was previously suspended for corruption - for whopping 30 days.

Oh wow!

And, as Professor Baker says - no amount of legislation will help when existing laws, and principles of honesty, integrity and court neutrality, are not adhered to.

What Professor Baker does not say though - judicial corruption may start to crumble when:

1) cameras are allowed into courtrooms;
2) rules of "frivolous conduct" used by judges as weapons of mass destruction against critics of corruption - are repealed; and
3) regulation of attorneys by judges, infringing upon independence of court representation and also preventing reporting of court corruption, is abolished.