Judges fixing court cases, beware - FBI may be listening: the story of PA judges Waters and Segal

The FBI was listening, I am not kidding.

In 2011, one Pennsylvania judge, Municipal Court Judge Joseph C. Waters Jr.,  reportedly called another Pennsylvania judge, Dawn Segal, and asked her to give a favorable treatment to a politically connected defendant that will appear in front of her that day.

Judge Segal  agreed.

Judge Segal did give the favor and repeatedly called Judge Waters back, repeatedly, to report and make sure he understood that she "took care of it".

Here are the pictures of the two criminals in black robes:

the one who requested to fix the case for a politically connected defendant

and the one who agreed to carry out the request, used her judicial office corruptly, ruled in favor of the politically connected defendant and happily reported her crime back to Waters, several times, to make sure he gets it - and tells the politically connected defendant, so that Judge Segal could gain her own favors for "doing a job" for the "right person".

Specifically, Segal and Waters "allegedly discussed a felony gun case she was hearing, and Segal downgraded the charges to a misdemeanor after their conversation, according to disciplinary records."

The telephone conversation was wiretapped by the FBI.

Now, Judge Waters is in federal prison for two years, after he pled to a single count of mail and wire fraud, convicted for 

"fixing cases on behalf of campaign donors and political allies"

which, as the report went, made him "the latest in a string of city jurists facing time behind bars for breaking their oaths".

I resent the fact that Judge Waters was allowed to plea - and that indicates to me that those "political allies and campaign donors" still have the power, because they were allowed to be prevented from having their names appear in a federal jury trial, while the public has a right to know not only the names of corrupt judges, but who corrupted them and who obtained those favors.

Shouldn't the corrupted cases be overturned, shouldn't the opponents of corruptly favored litigants entitled to justice?

A plea, obscuring the names of cases and parties favored, makes such justice impossible.

Here is what the convicted felon, former Judge Waters, reportedly said at his sentencing:

"Honest to God, I'm here today to say I screwed up," Waters said, in front of a courtroom packed with family, police officers, defense lawyers, and even former Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Seamus P. McCaffery, who resigned last year in the midst of a pornographic e-mail scandal.

And "honest to God" statement from a former judge convicted, on admission, for mail and wire fraud, is sweet.

And, are we to understand that Waters fixed cases for police officers, defense lawyers and former Judge McCaffery - who "packed the courtroom" to make sure they hear whether Waters would implicate them in his parting-to-prison speech? 

And, of course, the report gave this characteristic to the convicted felon, that former Judge Waters is:

• a former police captain, 
• a Temple Law grad, 
• a Fulbright scholar, and 
• a devoted Catholic 

Imagine if an attorney would have overheard the case-fixing scheme and reported it.

That attorney's license, reputation and livelihood will be in the gutter by now.

Wiretapping by the FBI was different.

The former police captain, Temple Law grad, Fullbright scholar and devoted Catholic went to federal prison.

Judge Segal and another Philadelphia judge, O'Neill, are suspended, and Judge O'Neill has been indicted in early March, 2016 on case-fixing charges.

The reports on O'Neill reveal that "Waters contacted O'Neill twice in 2011 seeking favors for Samuel G. Kuttab, a Democratic fund-raiser who counted mayors and congressmen among his friends".

Here is the picture of O'Neill, the country should know its "heroes".  The picture is watery, but I found no other:

By the way, both O'Neill and Segal remain licensed attorneys with no record of attorney or judicial discipline in PA, here are screenshots from PA attorney lookups for their names I made today.

Here are screenshots for Segal:

and for O'Neill:

Kuttab was convicted on a plea and got 6 months in prison.

I found mentioning of Mr. Kuttab's name in connection with Bill Clinton's healthcare initiatives in 1993, otherwise it appears that the Internet has been purged of any information pertaining to ties of Mr. Kuttab.

As to how the criminal proceeding of now-former Judge Waters proceeded, I will dedicate a separate blog post - what I found on Pacer.gov in the docket of the criminal case is simply hilarious.

For purposes of this blog post, what was happening in the good old Philly courts, was happening in New York (for example) all the time.

For example, Oneonta attorney Richard Harlem (and son of a retired and now late Supreme Court Justice who was also Chief Administrative Judge of the 6th Judicial District Robert Harlem) proudly put his ex parte communications with judges into his billing statements - to be billed against the victims of his ex parte communications.

And judges proudly grant Richard Harlem's requests, ordering such victims to pay legal fees for Richard Harlem's ex parte communications with judges.

I guess, FBI has its hands full with Pennsylvania judges now.

But, since Preet Bharara has recently hinted to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, buddy of New York State Chief Judge Janet DiFiore, to "stay tuned", New York judges should also start to be wary about their case fixing activities.

Who knows.

FBI may be recording.

As to the story of the federal criminal proceeding against Judge Waters, containing information that somehow escaped reporting so far - 

Stay tuned.

A Mississippi judge holds assistant public defender in contempt of court - for defending his indigent client. When will this crap end?

Yet another jerk of a judge, now in Mississippi, punished an attorney for speech in defense of his client.

Attorney Chris Routh was sent to jail for contempt of court by judge Jeff Weill for asking the judge to give the attorney reasoning - just REASONING - as to why the judge is sending a criminal defendant in a capital murder case, a mother of a 3-month-old baby, to jail without bail.

The hearing was to revoke the bond for Ms. Blackwell, and all that her attorney was asking was - reasoning from the court as to why the decision was made.

Given the circumstances, that the woman had a 3-month-old baby, the request was more than reasonable.

What Judge Weill did is he sent the public defender to jail WITHOUT BOND for contempt of court.

Arguing for your client in criminal court, in a capital murder case is contempt of court.

No wonder young attorneys do not wants to go into criminal defense, especially into public defenders' offices.

The work is becoming too dangerous.

Lawyers to the breastfeeding mother: don't have your tit hanging out while addressing a judge, you out there!

In 2011, a breastfeeding mother, Natalie Hegedus, was kicked out of court in Michigan by Judge Robert Hentchell for feeding her 5-month old child.

The mother reported being humiliated by the judge, where the following dialogue reportedly happened in court:

===

In the court transcript, Hentchel says “You think that’s appropriate in here?”

Hegedus responds “[I]t’s not [against the law], I have to feed my son,” and Hentchel says “Ma’am, it’s my courtroom, I decide what’s appropriate in here. [C]ome on up, okay? You have to understand that a judge — the laws don’t apply in a courtroom. [T]he judge’s law applies, do you understand that?

==

Judge Hentchell was not disciplined for his violation of state law allowing the mother to breastfeed anywhere she wants in public places in the State of Michigan, and for violating judicial ethics requiring the judge to follow the law and respect litigants - where the judge publicly humiliated the breastfeeding mother, calling breastfeeding inappropriate.

Instead of disciplining Judge Hentchell, his chief administrative judge, Judge Paul Hamre, reportedly said the following:

that "he didn't understand why the issue has gotten so much attention", and that

'This is abuse of the information age. A one-to-two sentence exchange has now turned into a national story,' Judge Hamre told WOODTV.

Here is the judge for whom humiliation of a breastfeeding mother in open court is not a big deal:

In 2013 in Missouri a breastfeeding mother, Laura Trickle, was held in contempt of court for breastfeeding her 5-month old son while on jury duty - by judge Marco Roldan. 

Judge Marco Roldan gave Laura Trickle, reportedly, two options:

"I would be able to pump on breaks. Unfortunately, Axel doesn't take a bottle, so that was not an option for us," Trickle told ABC News. "The other option was to have someone stay with me all day and then be able to nurse on breaks. But since I'm a stay-at-home mom, we don't have child care."

Reportedly, after that incident, the Missouri State Sen. Rob Schaaf, a doctor, said he started to draft legislation to exempt breastfeeding women from service.

It was actually very easy to exempt the mother from jury duty - there were two attorneys who picked her, and the judge who kept her on the jury.  Three idiots.  Neither one had the generosity of heart to relieve her of her duty - even for the sake of their clients, because a woman whose mind is elsewhere, on her hungry baby, is not a good and attentive juror anyway.

One of those three idiots, the judge who could easily let the mother go, instead of holding her for contempt of court for breastfeeding -  is smiling here:

If judge Hentchel openly claimed that HE IS THE LAW in HIS courtroom - something I frequently heard from many judges - Judge Roldan pretended to abide by the law and wait with "making his verdict" of contempt against the breastfeeding woman.

In defense of his actions, Judge Roldan reportedly said this:

"Roldan said the court system does everything it can to help citizens with hardships. Missouri law does allow potential jurors to get a one-time postponement.

Court records show that Trickle received several postponements.

This is a comment to the 2011 episode of kicking a breastfeeding mother out of court - by an anonymous member of the public."

Please, let's not be hypocritical.

I myself saw how judges and attorneys agreed not to "inconvenience" an attorney called for jury duty.

Since 2009 I was NEVER called for jury duty - because I was married to a criminal defense attorney and was a criminal defense attorney myself.  Nobody wanted me on the jury, and the allegedly "random" system of juror selection did not pick me for jury duty.

Yet, this young breastfeeding mother was picked THREE TIMES?  

Give me a break.

In 2013 in Pennsylvania, in a custody proceeding, Judge Stephen Baratta allegedly ordered a breastfeeding mother, Jessica Moser, to stop nursing and switch to the bottle in order to give the child to the father on weekends for visitation.

Now, the father does have visitation rights, but couldn't they be arranged around the needs of the breastfed child?

Apparently, for the judge, it was the mother's whim to breastfeed.

When the judge was flooded with phone calls and letters from all over the country, he claimed he never made such a decision.

That is - instead of recusing, while the judge was obviously "irritated" with the mother exposing the judge's intention.

Even though the judge claimed that he never made a RULING, he never denied he told the mother his pre-ruling OPINION about breastfeeding.

And Judge Baratta had no qualms repeating that opinion to the press:

“I don’t see how [breastfeeding]’s relevant,” Baratta said. “This case is about if a father can have visitation with his daughter. And a lactation expert will tell me that? A breast-feeding expert doesn’t belong in a custody battle between a mom and a dad, I don’t think. But I’ll read the report.”

In 2013 in Connecticut a breastfeeding mother Danielle Gendron was not allowed by the court marshall to testify in court.

The mother told the reporters that she felt terribly humiliated, and that such attitude discourages mothers from breastfeeding.

In 2015 the U.S. Supreme Court denied the anti-discrimination petition of Angela Ames, from Iowa, a mother who was forced out of her job for breastfeeding - affirming the lower court determination that such a constructive firing is not sexist because - gulp - "men can lactate, too" - Judge Robert W. Pratt, of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, Central Division, was the one who produced the "male lactate, too" masterpiece:

The decision was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit - and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari petition.

Here is the lactating male judge.

Now, in 2016, we have a judge in North Carolina who kicked a mother out of a courtroom because she dared to breastfeed her child - uncovered - in front of him.

I wrote about it earlier on this blog.

I looked up the public's reaction on Facebook - in comments to this particular story posted by various sources.

Most of the public, despite the existing laws, claim that the mother should have covered up. 

And that she could hold off feeding her baby.

And that she is simply attention-hungry.  

Well, the public sentiment can be whatever it can be - but the law is the law.

And what bothered me the most is the reaction to this story by lawyers and one "judicial assistant" on the more or less mainstream legal blog "Above the Law".

By the way - the comments that I am publishing now appeared yesterday, yesterday I saved them, today they disappeared.

Since it is a matter of public importance that lawyers - possibly, future judges - have such an opinion that the law should not be followed and that it was all right for a judge to discriminate against a breastfeeding mother in court, I will publish those comments.

Here they are, in all glory (3 comments are shown today, yesterday there were more):

Here is a Diane Troxell, a self-admitted Judicial Assistant from Illinois.

She volunteers information that, in her judge's court, the bailiff "politely" asked people to leave if they were "in any form or undress or were wearing an inappropriate attire".

Now, what "attire" is appropriate for a public courtroom?

And did the "polite bailiff" care to verify whether people who he turns out of the public courtroom had money for attire he considers "appropriate"?

And, in the context of the discussion, this "judicial assistant" considers breastfeeding as simply an act of undressing in the courtroom - nothing more.  No baby.  No baby's needs.  No law regarding breastfeeding.

Inappropriate - period.  And she calls that humiliation and violation of the law "politeness".

Here is another one.

The one for whom breastfeeding in court - despite the law on the subject - is a bit ... "weird!" - works in a law firm, Coepio Legal, that is in California Bay area, according to the law firm's website:

According to Stephania Avialotis/Lewis' voluntary attorney advertising on the Internet, she has "two energetic kids" of her own and worked in the California court system previously.

So, this attorney's views may reflect the views of her environment in the California court system - breastfeeding in court is "weird!".

Just so Ms. Avialotis/Lewis' present and potential clients would know her views that when a judge refuses to comply with the law of the state and publicly humiliates a young mother in open court, it is the woman to blame - because her completely legal actions are "a bit ... Weird!".

Yet, this one commentator has outdone them all.

For Sherry Ane Moore, the only thing that matters is - not the state law allowing the mother to do what she did, but that she had her "tit hanging out while addressing a judge".  And that was, to Sherry Ane Moore, "unacceptable".

Here is Sherry Ane Moore's Facebook profile:

Nevada attorney and officer of the court Sherry Ane Moore thinks that it was the breastfeeding mother, who followed the state law by breastfeeding her baby when and where the baby wanted to be fed, who was nevertheless wrong, not the judge who humiliated the mother in open court for following the law and taking care of her baby.

Sherry Ane Moore works in a Las Vegas law firm Zieve, Brodnax & Steele, LLP and boasts of having graduated from the University of Nevada with a Criminal Justice degree "magna cum laude" - with top grades.

Yet, this young female lawyer thinks more about how to please the judge rather than whether the judge violated the law in this context - and he did, clearly, so the question whether what the judge did was "appropriate" or "inappropriate", asked of lawyers, was a trick question - the judge clearly violated the law, what can be appropriate about it?

Here is what a member of the public said about the conduct of judge Robert Henchel, who kicked a breastfeeding mother out of "his" courtroom because of "his" rules in 2011.

I do not believe that a woman "could have handled it better" - she followed the law, and that is the beginning and the end of the issue, but I do agree that a judge may not put himself above the law.

That was, by the way, the name of the blog on which the three female attorneys explained that when judge violates the law, the litigant has to comply with it.

With all the J.D. degrees, passed bar examinations and prestigious jobs in law firms, these attorneys did not get through their heads the main thing that schoolchildren in this country are taught - 

NOBODY IS OR SHOULD BE ABOVE OR BELOW THE LAW.

Did the feds get to Becker, after all?

A reader has sent me a picture, and I can't help wondering - is Becker being criminally investigated for his shenanigans?

Look at his face.

Here is his official picture - published in May of 2015 when his retirement was announced:

Here is his picture from the (illegal) January 2016 swearing-in ceremony of Richard Northrup where Becker is illegally impersonating a judge, while not being one:

Here is Becker in April of 2016 - a tip from a reader who saw him in a store and took a quick picture on his cell phone:

Becker has shrunk two times since July of 2015, and considerably since January of 2016.

He claimed he was not retiring for health reasons, and that he is as fit as a fiddle, so it's not health.

But - he looks thin, bitter and extremely unhappy.

A criminal investigation under way?

Finally?

Carl Becker's friend, the Delaware County Treasurer Beverly Shields, strikes at Barbara O'Sullivan's family for bailing her out

Right after I ran a blog post that the Delaware County is withholding bail money posted by the family of my friend Barbara O'Sullivan,  the Delaware County Treasurer reportedly released SOME, but not all bail money to the family of my friend Barbara O'Sullivan - $300 were reportedly withheld as the Treasurer's fee ("poundage"), despite the fact that criminal charges against her were dismissed because:

1) the underlying arrest warrant was falsified by Judge Richard L. Gumo of Delhi Town Court, who was most recently admonished for misconduct by the NYS Judicial Conduct Commission (discipline didn't help him change his ways, I guess); there is a separate court decision by Judge John F. Lambert calling Gumo's testimony in Barbara's proceedings "was totally confused or disingenuous in his sworn testimony" - a not-so-subtle doublespeak for "perjury";

2) criminal charges against Barbara (that she allegedly had a dog bite a police officer who came to arrest her, with two other officers, to her lonely house in the woods at night after dark) had to be dismissed, because legality of officers' presence on the property and legality of the arrest warrant they allegedly had to "serve" upon Barbara and to arrest her - went out the door with Gumo's testimony and Judge Lambert's decision.

The County was already sued for withholding bail money once, and had to release bail to my client in Shields v Carbone, after two appeals, and sanctions imposed by Judge Becker, naturally, upon me, for asking him to recuse - not the County.

I guess, the County is asking for more lawsuits - that the homeowners of Delaware County, the captive cash cows (myself included), will have to fund.

Given that the whole criminal charges were precipitated against Barbara O'Sullivan: 

• because of personal animosity of the now-quickly-retired Judge Carl Becker against her since Barbara exposed Becker's misconduct in People v Glenford Hull's murder trial in 2006; 
• criminal charges were brought against Barbara by Becker's close friend Northrup (close friendship got revealed only in January of 2016);
•  and by Becker's former law partner or associate John Hubbard (employment at Becker's law firm by Hubbard was revealed in January 2016 and April 2016); 
• Becker's name was somehow on the bail receipt when Barbara was released from jail, even though Becker pledged recusal from Barbara's cases long time ago, which precipitated dismissal of Barbara's federal civil rights case against him,
• since Becker's close friend/girlfriend Beverly Shields managed to kick Barbara's family again, even after the dismissal, by withholding $300 in "poundage" when releasing bail, 2 months after dismissal of charges on jurisdictional grounds - Becker's footsteps are all over Barbara's case.

See the bail receipt in Barbara's case - appearance listed is in front of Judge Becker, who was nowhere near the case, but who, apparently, handled bail issues and monitored the case anyway.

And, Becker's conflicts of interest in handling a previous botched up bail exoneration case, where he manipulated exoneration of bail in a criminal proceeding to please a high-ranking public official who handled complaints against Becker, comes to mind.

Here is a non-final list of conflicts that started to come out slowly during People v Carbone and Shields v Carbone proceedings, and which continue to come out until this day.

• Becker's personal hatred against me and my husband;
• Becker's personal  hatred against my close friend Barbara O'Sullivan based on animosity that arose long time before Barbara and I even met, the animosity that Becker fully applied to me and my family;
• Becker's animosity against my legally blind now-former (because of the suspension only) client whom Becker criticized in open court in criminal proceedings for being "not as blind as he pretended to be" /the client was legally blind, as ruled by a team of physicians/, after I exposed Becker's misconduct (and stupidity) in accepting a plea of guilty from a legally blind man who said, at the urging of his prior counsel, twice, on record, that he "drove the truck" - which he not only could not physically do, but could not do also because another person was convicted for speeding for driving that same truck on that same occasion - apart from those interesting details, Becker had FIVE more undisclosed conflicts of interest (that I know now, there may be more):
• Becker's fear to hurt the feelings of the dismissed prior defense counsel, who at that point was the Vice-Chair of the NYS Commission of Judicial Conduct Stephen Coffey - I bet, Becker could have claimed a Guinness Book record of complaints filed against him and had to have the Vice-Chair of the Commission on his side, law or no law;  I did not know of Stephen Coffey's position at the time I argued against him and, obviously, earned myself a powerful enemy (Coffey quietly resigned from the Commission after I started to raise issues of corruption involving him - for which my license was suspended - and then, after I raised the issue of Coffey advertising his participation in the Commission to drum up business, quietly removed any mentioning of him ever being on the Commission from his website, as the Commission removed such mentions from its website - while Coffey's law firm and its partners continues to be the focus of scandals involving unethical behavior of its partners);
• Becker's friend and former boss of 23+ years, then-County Attorney Richard Spinney, represented the Plaintiff, Delaware County Treasurer Beverly Shields, and admitted on record to a prior ex parte communication with Becker, that Spinney (came to Becker's office or called) to discuss - guess what - exoneration of bail.  That discussion produced a, what Judge Fitzgerald of Delaware County Supreme Court called "unusual" bail exoneration order (which the 3rd Department reversed on the law, twice) - and embroiled the County, at taxpayers' expense, into litigation that lasted from 2009 to this day, with, so far, two trips to the Appellate Division on the issue of bail, where I won on both trips; see here and here;  when Spinney admitted to an ex parte with Becker, according to Mr. Neroni who was present at that hearing (I wasn't), Becker went pale and nearly fainted - but did not recuse;
• Delaware County Treasurer Beverly Shields "came out" as Becker's close personal friend or girlfriend in Becker's election campaign of 2012, after Becker recused from the Shields v Carbone case in August of 2012, without vacating his decisions tainted with his multiple conflicts of interest

Becker's invisible hand continues to rule issues pertaining to Barbara, I guess - by pulling the strings of influence through his friends, he still hurts Barbara or her family.

Well, obviously Delaware County officials want to play their game and show, to the bitter end - or no end - how pissed county officials are with what happened, that they could not nail Barbara O'Sullivan and pack her off to prison, with a D felony conviction, for up to 7 years, as Becker obviously wanted.

We will see who will have the last laugh though.

I will post further whether the County returned the unlawfully withheld $300 to Barbara's family.

Stay tuned.

A Freedom of Information Act request has been made with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit about records of the State-Federal Judicial Council of the State of New York

I wrote on this blog about my battle with the New York State Court Administration to produce records - any records of the mysterious "State-Federal Judicial Council" which is not shown in any statutory provisions, no information is available as to its composition, operation, financing, and the only information that is available is the spotty proud announcements by various attorneys that they have been "appointed" - by whom, nobody knows - to the "Advisory Council" of that "Council".

There is this mysterious old "advisory", a federal public document, as to what such "councils" "may" discuss.

It is the most interesting document because - guess what - state judges are usually brought into federal courts as DEFENDANTS, so any "councils" between state and federal judges are ex parte communications between judges and defendants in federal civil rights actions.

I finally got one (ONE) document coughed up by the NYS Court Administration indicating ONE letter of appointment by New York State Chief Judge Lippman, on the last day in office, on December 31, 2015, to that "Council" (that's over nearly 40 years of the alleged existence of this "Council" - judging by this law review article written by a judge).

Here is the letter:

Based on information revealed in this letter, I made two federal Freedom of Information Act requests - 

1) to the federal appointing judge, that is, according to the letter above, the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, my FOIA request is here,  and to

2) Judge Mae D'Agostino, of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York, who, Judge Lippman said, was the Chairperson of the Council as of December 31, 2015, the FOIA request is here.

Also offered for your attention is my printout from the database of non-profits, Guidestar.org, where I searched the database for the Federal-State Judicial Council.  

The search returned no information, so this "Council" is not a non-profit.

I simply want to know what is the legal authority to form it, appoint people to it, finance it, operate it, what is its structure, and who, and at what time, was appointed to it as judicial members and non-judicial "advisors" to judicial members.

I am also most interested in responses of these two judges, because both of them handle civil rights lawsuits AGAINST New York State judges, so I am most interested to see the list of members of this so-called Council.

Of course, I predict that I will be told that there are "no records responsive to my request" or any other such crap.

Yet, any answer to this request will be interesting, and I am looking forward to see how these two judges will be wiggling out of the situation.

I will post any responses to these requests on this blog.

Stay tuned.

A FOIL/Judiciary Law 255 has been filed with the Delhi Town Court, NY

Here it is:

I filed the request by mail today and will publish any responses to the request on this blog.

Stay tuned.