Exchange of gifts between American Inns of Court, attorneys and judges behind closed doors really smacks of corruption and should be investigated

I have written in this blog about the so-called American Inns of Court and the benefits this attorney-funded secret-membership organization gives to participating judges.

I have also just made a post about the swift actions of an Inn of Court in Albany and a federal judge Lawrence Kahn to remove Judge Kahn's name as the President of the Inn as soon as a federal civil rights lawsuit seeking discovery of Judge Kahn's perks from that organization was filed, and about the multiple suspicious connections that one of the powerful law firms whose members confirmed participation in Judge Kahn's inn of court have with Judge Kahn's court.

Here is a diagram I put together showing the possibilities of corruption through the secret communications and secret monetary and non-monetary arrangements between judges and attorneys through social networking organizations such as the American Inns of Court.

I say "possibilities of corruption" because the actual documents on true membership and true perks, both monetary and non-monetary, that judges receive from attorneys in such organizations are secret, and I can draw reasonable inferences only from the information I have found about judicial participation in the Inns of Court on the websites of the few Inns that made that information available.

As I already wrote in this blog, that in an action that clearly seemed like protecting their recent employees, and, possibly, protecting their personal interests, Judge Kahn together with Judge Suddaby, a judge whose former law clerk joined the law firm that was sued in Neroni v. Peebles that Judge Suddaby dismissed sua sponte, did not allow me a possibility to explore the issue of possible judicial corruption of judges who decided and are deciding my fate, through discovery.

Yet, please, look at the diagram above and look at the scans that I made from the list of certified CLE (continued legal education) providers below (a lucrative appointment allowing certified providers to charge hundreds of dollars for live CLE sessions while New York requires "new attorneys" to attend live CLE sessions for the first 2 years after admission):

These are, ladies and gentlemen, SECRET MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATIONS PROVIDING MONTHLY RECEPTIONS FOR JUDGES BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.  

Yet, these same organizations are in receipt of lucrative endorsement from the judiciary allowing more money to come their way - to be used for more catering for judges behind closed doors?

In encourage you, my readers, members of the public, whose rights are daily affected by judicial decisions, to check out on the Internet the websites of each and every "Inn of Court" which was endorsed as a certified CLE provider (see photos above).  

You will see, as I did, that all of those organizations conceal their membership, their schedule of meetings, whether judicial members are accepted and pay for their participation and what kind of perks were offered to judges and members of their families for free - such as, possibly, free international travel for judges and their spouses, as I described earlier in my blog when I first described the American Inns of Court.

So, each time you are in court, whether state or federal, against a large and powerful law firm, if the judge ruled for that law firm, you never know whether the judge ruled this way based on the law and the judge's so-called "discretion", or whether that "discretion" was motivated by a secret lavish dinner with alcohol, by a free international trip with the judge's spouse at the expense of the organization sponsored by the law firm.

When justice is bought this way, you can never be assured of "judicial independence" or "judicial integrity" of ANY judge who rules in your case, because, once again - membership in such organizations, as well as perks of particular organizations for its members, and member fees or lack thereof for judicial members are a SECRET that I could not reveal even through a federal lawsuit.

I wish that the U.S. Attorney's office already investigating corruption in New York State government, will finally turn their eye on these cosy arrangements, because such a blatant, how to put it politely,  this exchange of gifts between the judiciary and organization of politically powerful and wealthy attorneys who are providing monetary and non-monetary benefits to judges behind closed doors should simply stop. 

Even though children of judges may work in that office, like the son of Chief Judge Gary L. Sharpe of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York does...

If it isn't improper - why hide it? Judge Lawrence E. Kahn of the NDNY federal court removes his name from an American Inn of Court website when sued to disclose his perks

I've written in this blog about the "mutually beneficial interaction" of attorneys and judges through the secret-membership social networking organization "The American Inns of Court" and dangers of bribery of the judiciary and fixing cases without opponents' knowledge through such mediums.

I have also filed a lawsuit to verify membership and perks of judges who were or are about to decide my fate through a federal lawsuit Neroni v. Peebles, which was dismissed with a lightning speed by the court which was named as a Defendant, which was even more illegal that its judges were sued in their individual capacities for misconduct they appeared to be involved in against me outside of any court proceedings.

The interesting thing is that I provided in Neroni v. Peebles, as an exhibit, Judge Lawrence E. Kahn's membership in the Albany "Innovation" Inn of Court.

The quality of the snippet is poor, but the quality of the exhibit submitted to the court is good and allows to see Judge Kahn's name as the President of this Inn of Court, the document is available on Pacer.gov.  I put this scan here to show the path on top of it, that evidence of Judge Kahn's participation in this particular inn of court was submitted to the NDNY in Neroni v. Peebles on May 28, 2014.

Here is a better scan where Judge Kahn's name as the President of the Inn is clearly visible:

After the lawsuit was filed, information that Judge Kahn was president of that particular Inn of Court, was removed from its website.

"Key contacts" remained, Judge Kahn's name was removed.

There are peculiar coincidences about the removal of Judge Kahn's information and about known members of that particular Inn of Court (information about memberships is not available on the website of the Inn, only by self-reporting of the members).

Multiple attorneys from a large and powerful law firm Hiscock & Barclay of Albany, NY self-reported membership in the same Inn of Court where Judge Kahn was (and, possibly, still is a member - only in secret), see, for example, a partner in that law firm John Cook who is also, "coincidentally", a former law clerk of NDNY and a current member of the "Local Rules Committee".

In other words, Hiscock & Barclays decides what local rules need to be introduced in the courts where Hiscock & Barclays appears as attorneys of record.

And, Hiscock & Barclays likely pays or paid for monthly dinners of Judge Kahn, because judicial members are participating in Inns of Court for free (I only can derive this information from Inns where it is available - and it was available from a Federal Inn of Court).  Well, at least another judge, Judge Glenn Suddaby, whose former law clerk has also recently been accepted as an attorney into Hiscock & Barclays, and who worked as a prosecutor together with William Fitzpatrick, law school roommate of a famous New York rogue judge who wanted my disbarment because I reasonably questioned his integrity, did not allow my lawsuit against NDNY to proceed.  

That was the same William Fitzpatrick who wanted to share in the blackmail money from Judge Hedges (the judge who, according to affidavits submitted to NDNY in the Morin v. Tormey, lawsuit "outed" Judge Tormey's role in her harassment to the victim) and turned the judge in for a disciplinary proceedings when that effort failed.  

Without the joint efforts of: 

(1) Judges Tormey, 
(2) Suddaby (who dismissed sua sponte Neroni v. Peebles), 
(3) Kahn (who dismissed portions of my husband's case pertaining to John Casey's corruption and remanded my own disciplinary case back to the 3rd Department, disregarding evidence of selective enforcement of law and corruption by John Casey) and, of course, 
(4) efforts of the disgruntled judge Carl F. Becker, who acted obviously in concert with John Casey and his law firm, but was allegedly covered by absolute judicial immunity for malicious and corrupt acts, disciplinary proceedings against my husband (which resulted in his disbarment) and proceedings against me would not have been possible.

Talking about company, coincidences, transparency, accountability and judicial integrity.

By a "sheer coincidence", Hiscock & Barclays' partner John Casey was involved in prosecutorial corruption in investigation and prosecution of myself and my husband when he was a member of the Committee for Professional Standards, Appellate Division, 3rd Judicial Department, and that was discussed in two federal lawsuits over which Judge Kahn was presiding in Neroni v. Zayas (what remained of it is still pending), and in that lawsuit Judge Kahn ruled in such a way that precluded further discovery of prosecutorial misconduct of John Casey in order to accept as paying clients AGAINST myself and Mr. Neroni two people who John Casey was supposed to prosecute in the Committee for Professional Standards.

Even more "coincidentally", those clients for whose benefit John Casey traded his oath of office, but created a financial benefit for his law firm Hiscock & Barclay, were a retired judge Robert Harlem and his son attorney Richard Harlem, of Oneonta, NY who escaped disbarment, apparently, only because of the efforts of John Casey - read what these two attorneys did in the Blanding saga.

Even more "coincidentally", John Casey similarly rescued (and accepted as law partner) attorney M. Cornelia Cahill, the wife of Judge Richard Sise, the Chief Judge of the New York Court of Claims, when she was turned in to be investigated and prosecuted by John Casey's Committee for fraudulently receiving benefits from school districts as if she were the school district's employee.  She disgorged those benefits, but was never disciplined - thanks to John Casey who instead embraced her as a partner and allowed her to be promoted as the manager of the Albany office of Hiscock & Barclay.

"Coincidences" did not stop here.  

Hiscock & Barclay also employ multiple recent law clerks who worked for various judges in the Northern District of New York, including a former law clerk of the Chief Judge.

It would be bad politics for the judge to punish these people and expose corrupt practices of their law firm or partner, especially since the law firm likely very literally feeds the judge lavish monthly dinners (at least) through the American Inn of Court where Judge Kahn was President at the time when he was deciding Neroni v. Zayas.


Even before he came to the federal bench, Judge Kahn was known for making self-serving political decisions on the bench.

For example, Judge Kahn first tossed a state lawsuit challenging legality of cross-endorsements of judicial candidates by multiple political parties which was challenged as depriving voters of choice in judicial elections - and three years later got elected exactly because of the same cross-endorsement deal that he ruled (for his own sake, obviously) was valid.

A well respected attorney Doris Sassower who for decades was a pillar of legal community, suddenly became an outcast once she filed that lawsuit and was quickly suspended without a hearing once she announced that she is going to appeal the decision of the intermediate appellate court legalizing the cross-endorsement deal to the New York State Court of Appeals.

The timing of suspension was, I understand, also " coincidence" - her announcement to pursue the appeal of the cross-endorsement deal to the Court of Appeals was published on May 19, 1991, and she was suspended in June of that year.

At Judge Kahn's confirmation hearings a recess was called in and police was asked "to restore order" when a speaker from the audience requested to be given an opportunity to speak against confirmation of Judge Kahn, as reported, based on documentary evidence, by the Center of Judicial Accountability founded by Doris and Elena Sassowers.

I guess, to expect justice from Judge Kahn under the circumstances is beyond naive.  Judge Kahn appears to be a politically and, possibly, financially motivated block to fair resolution of cases in federal court rather than an impartial tool of that resolution.

And it will remain this way until citizens demand from their representatives in the federal legislature to provide better mechanisms of judicial selection and accountability.

Judge Revoir's revenge against the indigent mother who complained against him to the Judicial Conduct Commission

On September 1, 2014 an indigent mother, a family court litigant, filed a complaint agAinst judge Frank B. Revoir with the  NYS Judicial Conduct Commission.

On September 5, 2014 Judge Revoir issued a bench warrant for complainant's arrest for failure to comply with the judge's order dated September 4, 2014 that was served upon the mother to her Albany P.O. box by mail, so by law she was not required to comply with the order until 5 days after it was served by mail (Civil Practice Law and Rules), and that would be September 9, 2014.

 

 

Yet, Judge Revoir issued a bench warrant for her arrest on September 5, 2014, without any legal basis for it, and when she was ready to transfer her child to the father who came unannounced to pick the child up from visitation, she had the Delaware County police, with a TASER gun and handcuffs, on her porch, assaulting the child's middle-aged disabled grandmother with a TASER gun and with the police vehicle in an effort to destroy video recording of the unlawful arrest and arresting the indigent mother in front of her child, with a red spot of the TASER gun trained on the indigent mother's back.

 

Was all of this Orwellian SWAT-team production somehow in the best interests of the child?

 

One thing I know - the child might not forget this trauma for the rest of her life, simply because Judge Revoir needed to play out his revenge on her mother in the cruelest way possible.

Moreover, Judge Revoir did not reduce his screaming on the record of August 29, 2014 to a written order and thus prevented the mother's appeal of his decision.

 

Moreover, there was no petition before the court from the father so that Judge Revoir would be able to rule on such a petition and issue the September 4, 2014 order that was the basis of the September 5, 2014 bench warrant agaisnt the mother.

 

Moreover, Judge Revoir himself said on August 29, 2014 that all future petitions must be filed in another state, and thus there is no reason for him to accept new petitions in New York state on behalf of the father, nor were there any petitions submitted to result in the September 4, 2014 decision that was used to issue the September 5, 2014 bench warrant.

 

Moreover, Judge Revoir has failed to search the registries of sex offenders and protective orders which is a jurisdictional requirement for all orders in New York involving custody or visitation, thus making Judge Revoir's orders in this case void.

Additionally, the police came to the mother's house to "help" the father retrieve the child from the mother, while there was no indication the mother was not surrendering the child, on the contrary, the mother texted the father that she is packing the child's belongings and the child will be soon ready to be picked up.

 

And here, one more curious detail transpires.

Family Court in New York does not have criminal jurisdiction, only jurisdiction for civil contempt of court, to coerce a person into obeying a court order, not to punish her - that is criminal jurisdiction that Family Court does not have.

As I stated above, since the mother was served with Judge Revoir's invalid order of September 4, 2014 by mail, she could, first,  never be held in contempt of an invalid order, or at the very least, she could not be held in contempt until at least 5 days passed after she was served.

Yet, Judge Revoir could not wait with his revenge and harassment that long.

That is obviously why on September 5, 2014 he has ordered the mother arrested for violating the order Judge Revoir knew the mother could not possibly have recieved yet, not to mention that the order was jurisdictionally invalid on many grounds I mentioned above.

But, this is the judge for whom legal grounds and legal arguments are the equivalents of "lying", did not consider lack of authority or legal grounds as a bar for his abuse of power where he could use it to harass the person who dared to complain about his misconduct to the Judicial Conduct Commission.

 

And I must point out once again that, before being elected, Judge Revoir claimed he has a perfect judicial temperament for the job.

 

Right.

Family court has the most emotional proceedings of all courts, and judges who rule in such courts without a jury, should be of the highest competence, integrity and the most balanced temperament.

Judge Revoir sorely failed that on all points test by committing grievous misconduct against an indigent mother with a low social status, and, when she filed a formal complaint about the judge, retaliated with more misconduct, with worse misconduct and with the illegal use of police power.

 

The use of police power was illegal because, once the child was returned to the father (coercion to obey the order), the bench warrant from a Family Court judge who did not have criminal jurisdiction, lost its grounds even if it had such grounds (it didn't, as I described above).

 

Thus, dragging the mother in handcuffs and under a TASER gun and dragging her to the court after the child was delivered to the mother was clearly illegal - and Judge Revoir knew what he was doing when he was issuing such an illegal bench warrant.

 

It is obvious that this judge, as many other local judges I know, would be guided only by his own whims. 

 

The temperament that Judge Revoir demonstrated in this case is the temperament of a petty tyrant, not of a balanced, reasoned and competent judicial officer.

I truly believe this judge should be removed from the bench and stripped of his law license for his gross abuse of his power in this case, to the detriment of an indigent parent and of an innocent child.

Judge Tormey is at it again - now he has put two of his direct subordinates on my disciplinary case. Will this judge and these attorneys be punished for fraud upon the court and disbarred?

I've written in this blog about the disciplinary prosecutors of the 3rd and now the 4th Department who are perpetrating fraud upon the court while attempting to "discipline" me.
 
I did not realize the depth of fraud, and incestous relationships with the judiciary of my so-called prosecutors who are supposed to be neutral and impartial to me.  Right.
 
The 4th Department Grievance Committee notified me just which of their subdivisions is prosecuting me only last Friday, while the case was transferred to them on June 11, 2014 (by an ex parte court order, and access to the application for such an order is denied to me until this day - I have filed a complaint  to the Judicial Conduct Commission against Appellate Division Third Department because of that and some other things).
 
I definitely did not have time to conduct a full investigation of all of their disqualifications, especially that I was sick this weekend and these two days, to the point that I had to move two court appearances.
 
Yet, tonight I started looking "who is who" in that particular grievance sub-committee - and was horrified to learn that two out of 16 attorney members of the prosecuting team are court employees of the Onondaga County court system and direct subordinates of Judge Tormey, while the 3rd Department Committee have snuck in the court order by Judge Tormey punishing me, among other things, for suing HIM and making a motion to recuse HIM and because I mentioned in my motion to recuse the lawsuit in which the Onondaga County Family Court clerk was embroiled.
 
If the 3rd Department felt it was disqualified for this case because I sued all of the judges and all of the attorneys and attorney members in that Department for potential misconduct and conflicts of interest, how come the 4th Department's Grievance Committee has selected for prosecuting me specifically the 5th Judicial District Grievance Committee, where most attorneys appear routinely in front of Judge Tormey and thus are interested in ruling against me in a way Judge Tormey would be pleased with, and two of these prosecutors are Judge Tormey's employees and subordinates who have a direct financial interest in the outcome of my prosecution - because if they do NOT prosecute me, no matter how fraudulent are the charges, the fate of Bobette Morin, demotion or termination from their jobs can await them, and they might not be as lucky or persistent as Attorney Morin in suing Judge Tormey.

By the way, Judge Tormey punished me for his own inability to read - because, without reading the record, he claimed there was only one case by a certain name, and I mentioned two, with two different index numbers, not that Judge Tormey cared - and he punished me as if there was just one court case, only the case where I was attorney of record, and my case was specifically about the fraud upon the court in the case where I was not attorney of record.
 
Here is the list of attorneys for the grievance committee, 5th Judicial District.

Here is the table I put together today based on attorney registration records as to where these attorneys are employed.

No.	Name of Attorney	Name of law Firm	County	Ties with the state and federal judiciary
1.	Lawrence W. Golden	The Golden Law Firm	Utica, NY, Oneida County	To be investigated
2.	Alan S. Burstein	Scolaro, Cohen, Shulman, Fetter and Burstein	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	To be investigated
3.	Julie Ann Grow Denton	McMahon and Grow	Rome, NY, Oneida County	Several years of clerkships in federal courts, including being a confidential clerk to the Hon. Richard Cardamone of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals
4.	Matthew R. Dunn	Goettel, Poplaski & Dunn, PPLC	Watertown, NY, Jefferson County	Mr. Dunn's partner had the questionable honor of having being a Judicial Law Clerk to the dishonorable judge Mark Ciavarella of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, Pennsylvania, who is now doing time in federal prison for his involvement in Kids-for-Cash scandal, which did not deter Mr. Dunn from allowing his partner to call Mark Ciavarella "Honorable" as of today on his website (scan of website on file with me in case Mr. Dunn chooses to erase that evidence)
5.	Donald R. Gerace	Law Offices of Donald R. Gerace	Utica, NY, Oneida County	To be investigated
6.	Peter L. Hubbard	Menter, Rudin & Trivelpiece	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	Glen T. Suddaby (presiding judge on Neroni v. Peebles, the case that was made part of the record when the 3rd Department Committee recused) worked in the Menter law firm, Judge Suddaby's law clerk Jason C. Halpin who is now with Hiscock & Barclay (H & B partner John Casey is a defendant in the Neroni v. Peebles lawsuit) worked for Menter law firm; Glen T. Suddaby worked in the Onondaga County District Attorney's office where; Judge Glenn Suddaby worked under Onondaga County DA William Fitzpatrick, law school roommate of Judge Tormey, who tried to get money from Judge Tormey's co-defendant in the Morin v. Tormey lawsuit Judge Hedges and, when the blackmail failed, turned Judge Hedges into the Judicial Conduct Commission and made sure he was taken off the bench, even though he already resigned
7.	Loretta R. Kipatrick	New York Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Commercial Division	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	Employee of the court, subordinate of Judge Tormey
8.	Joseph E. Lamendola	Joseph E. Lamendola, Attorney-at-Law	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	To be investigated
9.	Karl Manne	Karl Manne, Esq.	Herkimer, NY, Herkimer County	To be investigated
10.	James H. Messenger Jr.	James H. Messenger, Attorney-at-Law	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	To be investigated
11.	C. Andrew Pappas	Pappas, Cox, Kimpel, Dodd & Levine	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	To be investigated
12.	David M. Primo	Chief Clerk IV, Onondaga County Family Court	Syracuse, NY, Onondaga County	Employee of the very same court where Judge Tormey harassed attorney Bobette Morin until she sued in Morin v. Tormey; David M. Primo is a  subordinate of Judge Tormey who must remember well the treatment by Judge Tormey of Bobette Morin and would not want to repeat her fate - he might not be as successful as she is in suing Judge Tormey...
13.	Mark R. Rose	Mark R. Rose Law Offices	Little Falls, NY, Herkimer County	To be investigated
14.	Vincent J. Rossi	Rossi and Murnane	New York Mills, NY, Oneida County	To be investigated
15.	Susan A. Sovie	Sovie Law Firm	Watertown, NY, Jefferson County	To be investigated
16.	Michael F. Young	Company & Young, PLLC	Lowville, NY, Lewis County	To be investigated

I will continue to investigate backgrounds of these attorneys and their law firms, but as of now, what can be readily visible from the table is that:

(1) 7 of 16 of attorney-members/disciplinary prosecutors are out of Onondaga County, where Judge Tormey's seat is;
(2) 6 of 16 of attorney-members/disciplinary prosecutors are likely solo private attorneys, totally dependent in their business on the good attitude of the local judges, and especially on Judge Tormey, the Chief Administrative Judge of the 5th Judicial District.

(3) 6 of 16 of attorney-members/disciplinary prosecutors are law partners in established law firms, with "Martindale" ratings, "Super lawyer" ratings etc., and they will not try to be fair to me and risk losing their business in Judge Tormey's courts, and that can be arranged pretty easily - it is called "judicial discretion", and they will not be able to prove that they lost cases or were sanctioned for "frivolous conduct" because they disobediently were fair to an attorney who stepped on Judge Tormey's toes and was marked for destruction;

(4) 2 of 16 of attorney-members/disciplinary prosecutorsare employees and subordinates of Judge Tormey, and he can do with them as he pleases if they disobey and do not prosecute me on fraudulent charges  - as he did before with Bobette Morin.  Since it was the State of New York (us the taxpayers) who have paid the $600,000.00 settlement to Ms. Morin for Judge Tormey's misconduct, Judge Tormey is not deterred to fire another employee who would not do his bidding.

Will that be Loretta B. Kilpatrick, law clerk to the Onondaga County Supreme Court Commercial Division, part of the disciplinary prosecuting team against me?  Will she be fired if she does not commit fraud upon the disciplinary court?

Will that be David M. Primo, the Chief Clerk IV of the Onondaga County Family Court, the same court where Bobette Morin worked and where Judge Tormey demoted and harassed her for her refusal to yield to his illegal demands that she should spy on a Democratic judicial candidate? He is also part of my prosecuting team.

Why didn't these attorneys notify me of their direct and obvious disqualification and conflict of interest?

Fear for the job was greater than honor? Than duty? Than oath as attorneys?
 
But - with two of Judge Tormey's subordinates in the prosecuting team, the hope of any shreds of integrity disappeared and it became obvious why the case was assigned to this particular grievance subcommittee, and why the grievance subcommittee proceded with frivolous and fraudulent charges no matter what - because the alternative for at least two members of the prosecuting team was to be demoted or to lose their jobs, the way Bobette Morin did.
 
And where do I complain about these attorneys who are obviously defrauding the court for financial and financial reasons and who have FAILED TO NOTIFY ME OF THEIR DISQUALIFICATION? I guess, to themselves, there is nowhere else to complain but to the same attorneys of the same grievance committee - to, please, investigate and prosecute themselves.
 
What a joke.

"TASC assigned". Fast-paced courts and flighty rights of criminal defendants going up in a puff

I often hear this phrase - "a fast-paced court".

This or that judge "runs a tight/fast-paced court", and usually it is said as an approval of the judge's skills.

I've been to fast-paced courts.  It is always instructive to see how a "fast-paced court" operates especially when you do not know the judge and you are in that court for the first time.

I've been to such a court recently.  It is a criminal court close to New York city.

Boy is it a fast-paced court.

The prosecutor rattles off, the attorneys rattle off, criminal defendants obviously do not even have time to realize what is happening before their rights are taken away.

What "fast-paced courts" do not afford to a criminal defendant and sometimes even to his attorneys is time to THINK or make objections.

As an example, in the "fast-paced court" in question, there is a key word exchange regularly pronounced by the prosecutor and the court as a mantra, and I've been in that court several times by now:

PROSECUTOR:  People ask to assign "TASK"
JUDGE:               "TASK" assigned

This is how I heard it the first time when I appeared in that court - because in the local courts where I practice there is no such thing as "TASK assigned".


When I've heard this "TASK" thingy and did not react, because it was a "fast-paced court", it moved like a fast conveyor, and every attorney before me did not stir when hearing it, I immediately learnt what exactly this "TASK" thingy is.

It is not "TASK", it is "TASC" - a mental health program requiring your client, often at his own expense, to talk to a mental health professional ABOUT THE CASE and about his alleged drug or alcohol problems, whether there are such problems are not, as long as the client is charged with a crime associated with drugs or alcohol.

I've learnt about it when I was directed to approach the clerk of the court who gave me a "TASC" form to be filled out where the judge's approving signature was PREPRINTED!!!! 

Well, I had an issue with this whole TASC thingy and asked for the case to be recalled, because I never agreed to that and it definitely violated my client's right to remain silent, especially that it was a local court, my client was charged with a felony, the local court had no authority to handle any plea bargaining in a felony or conduct any investigations in lieu of a pre-sentencing or pre-plea investigation, and that is by statute.

The judge initially simply bent over from the bench (the clerk handing out the TASC forms was sitting close to the judge) and asked me what's the problem.  I explained to the judge that I never realized that what I perceived as a "task" was a "TASC" and that assigning the "TASC", at the request of the People, is violating my client's right to remain silent.

I also asked the judge whether the "TASC" disclosures of my client will be made available to the People.  The judge said "of course", and I felt that it was a routine procedure in that particular court.  I said that it violates my client's right to remain silent.  The judge became visibly perturbed and initially said that "your request is denied".

I asked to recall the case, because I said there is no way I will have my client comply with a court order, in a criminal proceeding, to make statements available to the People, over defense counsel's objection.  As you understand, I ran the risk of being found in contempt of court and thrown into jail for simply saying to the court that I will not have my client comply with a court order - and that is, possibly, the reason why other attorneys ambushed into the "TASC assigned" situation may let it slide, at their client's expense.

The situation was becoming hotter because it was, once again, a "fast-paced court", the courtroom was packed both with the public and with attorneys, regularly appearing in the court (as I later realized after several appearances) and I was creating a precedent disrupting the "fast-paced court" because all attorneys before me agreed to "TASC assigned" without a peep.

The judge then said reluctantly that he will allow me to make my arguments on recall.

I sat and waited for the recall, "TASC" form in hand. 

After hearing some cases, the judge called a break.  It was a long, 15-minute break.

After the break, the judge called my case and the following exchange occurred.

The first thing the judge did is to ask me to give him back the "TASC" form (with his pre-printed approval on it).  I had to comply - so I did give it back.

The second thing the judge did is grant my request to cancel "TASC assigned" for my client without a necessity of an argument in front of the public and other attorneys.  Apparently, the judge consulted somebody during that break and did not want me to elaborate on the unconstitutionality of the situation and to make the public aware that what is a routine procedure in that "fast-paced court" is in reality a major constitutional violation.

My client's right to remain silent was protected.

As to other criminal defendants in that court, I appeared in that court several other times, and each time I appeared, in all cases where the use of alcohol or drugs was charged, even, as I  understand, in felony cases, the prosecutor continued to rattle off "People ask to assign TASC", no objection from attorneys followed, the judge would immediately say "TASC assigned", and the attorney would proceed to the clerk of the court for the TASC form.

Each time I wondered if criminal defendants in the "TASC assigned" cases realized they were waiving their right to remain silent and, forgive my French, were potentially screwing their cases.

And, by the way, the felony charges against my client in that particular court were dropped by the People voluntarily and substituted by misdemeanor charges.  After all attempts of the court ("TASC" was not the only one) to tell me that because how serious the charges are, I'd better "cooperate" with the prosecution.

As a bottom line - when you see a "fast-paced court", there must be something amiss, because people are not given enough time to think what kind of rights they may be losing when the court is quickly steering them through the "regular routine" of the court.

In a fast-paced court, before you agree to anything you are being steered into, take a time-out.

Actually, instead of challenging the court-ORDERED TASC as an unconstitutional violation of their clients' 5th Amendment rights, local Westchester County attorneys advertise knowledge of the TASC program as their local "know how":

In that advertisement, please, note that the attorney says that TASC will (not "may") be "assigned" (ordered" by the court in certain cases at the stage when the defendant is still "accused" - or, in other words, covered by the presumption of innocence.

Such "assignments" are, of course, possible - ON CONSENT of the defendant, because such an assignment, as any pre-sentencing evaluation, involves a waiver of the defendant's right to remain silent THROUHGOUT the criminal proceeding.

In Harrison Town Court where I was the witness of how TASC is "assigned", nobody asks consent of the criminal defendant - TASC is simply ordered, and the judge tells the attorney point-blank that the defendant MUST undergo the evaluation, MUST provide to the evaluator, therefore, potentially self-incriminating information, and the results WILL be turned over to the court and to the prosecutor.

==
Update as of 2016:  The District Attorney in the case where TASC was assigned in a FELONY case in the JUSTICE court (justice courts in New York do not have authority in felony cases beyond holding a preliminary hearing, or, if the hearing is not held, holding the case over to the grand jury) and whose office I asked to disqualify and punish - became the New York State Chief Judge and retaliated against me by tossing the appeal of my disciplinary suspension "as of right" as if it was her discretion to do that - and the suspension was for, guess what, criticizing judges, activity fully protected by the 1st Amendment, where punishment for such activity is regarded as presumptively unconstitutional content-based regulation Reed v Town of Guilbert (2015).

And, please, note that this program unconstitutionally used by the local courts, is "sponsored" by the Westchester County, home of Governor Cuomo and presidential candidate Clinton, former president Clinton and the now-Chief Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals Janet DiFiore.  In fact, Janet DiFiore participated in stripping criminal defendants of their 5th Amendment rights - for years.

And Janet DiFiore punished me for:

• making a motion to disqualify her DA's office in the Harrison Town Court because of misconduct in 2014;
• opposing her confirmation as New York Chief Judge by written testimony in January of 2016 (oral was not allowed to me) submitted to the New York State Senate where I asked to investigate DiFiore for possible criminal conduct; and
• making a motion to recuse her in New York State Court of Appeals in 2016;
• filing a complaint against her with the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct where I asked to get her off the bench for misconduct and to investigate her for possible criminal conduct

How appropriate.