#TheCrimeToBeNamedMelania. Part 6. On cross-endorsements of judges. Judge John F. Lambert. When you need only one vote, your own, to be re-elected.

I continue to publish the series about the City of Oneonta, NY, with the help of corrupt public officials in the judiciary and not only in the judiciary, is trying to destroy the business of an immigrant, American Romanian, couple, Melania and Nicolae Pervu.

Part 1, #TheCrimeOfBeingNamedMelania. How to steal a lucrative business from an immigrant with the help of a New York court. A tutorial, 

can be read here.

Part 2, #TheCrimeOfBeingNamedMelania. How to steal a lucrative business from an immigrant with the help of a New York court. A tutorial. Part II. The politics of motions to withdraw in Judge John F. Lambert's court - can be read here.

Part 3, #TheCrimeOfBeingNamedMelania. How to steal a lucrative business from an immigrant with the help of a New York court. A tutorial. Part III. The burden of proof is on the Respondents - when a judge's and a city attorney's wives are involved in the mess. But, of course! - can be read here.

Part 4  - #TheCrimeToBeNamedMelania.  The case of The City of Oneonta v Melania and Nicolae Pervu, Part 4.  How the City of Oneonta tried to stamp out "a Russian crime family" supporting Trump - can be read here. 
Part 5 - #TheCrimeToBeNamedMelania. Part 5. No immigrant farmer will own prime real estate in the middle of the business district of Oneonta, New York. A special kind of due diligence necessary before buying property in Oneonta, New York and Otsego County - can be read here.

In 1992 attorney Doris Sassower, a trailblazer, a former chairperson of the Westchester County Women's Bar Association, was suspended from the practice of law, indefinitely.

The suspension of Doris Sassower happened close after she announced - and The New York Times featured that announcement - that she will pursue, PRO BONO, an appeal to the New York State Court of Appeal a challenge to constitutionality of cross-endorsements (secret agreements to support candidates in elections) by political parties in New York of judicial candidates.

Her lawsuit also pursued violations of Elections Law by conventions nominating judges as to quorum, roll call and other requirements.

Doris Sassower received an award from "The Giraffe Project", for sticking out her neck for the public - but remains suspended until now.

Her husband was disbarred and bankrupted.

Her daughter Elena Sassower was incarcerated for speaking out in the U.S. Congress against confirmation of judge Richard Wesley - 

and her repeated attempts to speak against this judge at confirmation were not only not helped by Democratic Senators Schumer and Hillary Clinton, but were labeled as harassment and eventually led to her conviction and 6-months' (maximum) incarceration, while attorney civil rights organizations stayed mum as to freedom of speech violations involved, and retaliation against a whistleblower for exposing judicial misconduct.

Judge Richard C. Wesley remains a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit and continues to block, for Doris Sassower, Elena Sassower and other whistleblowers of judicial corruption, their civil rights lawsuits on appeal.

That somebody went to federal prison for publicly, with the help of boxes of documents, opposing his judicial confirmation, is not listed in his official biography.

In 2005, Doris Sassower, as the President of a non-profit corporation, the Center of Judicial Accountability, challenged cross-endorsement of Judge Jonathan Lippman - and an agreement by Judge Lippman to trade endorsement of himself by one party for endorsement of another judge by the opposing party.

Both Jonathan Lippman and Joseph Alessandro were, nevertheless, elected according to the illegal cross-endorsements.

Moreover, Jonathan Lippman became the state's Chief Administrative Judge, and then Chief Judge, and retired only at the end of 2015, and only after he fought tooth and claw to change the State Constitution in order to prolong his own time as Chief Judge of the State of New York for 10 more years.

The author of the bill to prolong Lippman's retirement age was, predictably, an attorney - Rep. Helene Weinstein, who was, for some time, reportedly, "of counsel" in a personal injury law firm of her family while she is also a state legislator sponsoring bills for judges, regulators of her own license, her family members' licenses, and upon whom their family's financial well-being and "victories" in court depend.

Helen Weinstein is not practicing law at present - at least judging by her attorney registration.

Moreover, while Helene Weinstein received complaints from her constituents about injuries that insurance companies do not want to compensate, her law firm litigate personal injury cases.  God only knows whether or how many of complaints by constituents were referred by Rep. Weinstein to her family's personal injury law firm.

Business as usual.

Judge Joseph Alessandro - whose cross-endorsement as part of Jonathan Lippman deal Doris Sassower fought in 2005 - was eventually taken off the bench in 2009, for refusing to return (stealing money) a $250,000 private loan to finance his judicial election campaign in 2003, as a County Judge, which paved his way later to the endorsement for the New York State Supreme Court.

Judge Joseph Alessandro was disbarred for that behavior in 2012 

and in the court mentioned in the order of disbarment the following:

In determining an appropriate measure of discipline to impose, we note the respondent's arguments that he "cooperated, assisted and appeared in all proceedings . . . including the{**100 AD3d at 214} present action, without any hesitation or reservation"; that, since his removal from the bench, he has not practiced law in the Second Judicial Department but, rather, has been providing pro bono services to senior citizens in the Bronx; that, prior to his removal from the bench, his character and reputation as a lawyer and judge were unblemished; that "[his] inexperience as a political candidate in 2003 may have contributed to his decision to accept a problematic loan from his campaign [*3]manager"; that he faced several " 'unfortunate events' " in his life during the subject period such that a "black and white" description of those events—and the underlying conduct—fails to paint the "full color picture" necessary to understanding the "context" of the charges; that a monetary claim against him was settled and, therefore, there was "no monetary loss involved"; that he accepts the findings made against him, is sorry for the hurt he caused, and realizes that his actions "reflect adversely on everyone with whom he was associated or dealt"; and that he has already been punished for his conduct through his removal as a judge and the "attendant publicity and public humiliation." Moreover, we have considered the numerous letters submitted on the respondent's behalf. However, the Commission, in its determination, concluded that the respondent engaged in "truly egregious behavior" that "[in] its totality . . . constitutes a departure from the high standards of conduct required." The Court of Appeals concluded, similarly, that the respondent failed to meet the "highest level of . . . honesty and integrity." It is notable that the Commission rejected the same claims of mitigation offered herein. Just as " 'deception is antithetical to the role of a Judge who is sworn to uphold the law and seek the truth' " (Matter of Alessandro [State Commn. on Jud. Conduct], 13 NY3d at 248, quoting Matter of Myers, 67 NY2d at 554) so, too, is it incompatible with the position of trust and confidence occupied by an attorney at law. "[L]awyers must be held to the 'highest standards of ethical conduct' because the legal profession needs the respect and confidence of society if it is to play its critical role in sustaining the rule of law and the concept of justice upon which our free and democratic society depends" (Matter of Bikman, 304 AD2d 162, 165 [2003], quoting Matter of Rowe, 80 NY2d 336, 340 [1992], cert denied sub nom. Rowe v Joint Bar Assn. Grievance Comm. for Second & Eleventh Jud. Dists., 508 US 928 [1993])."

Once again:

"[L]awyers must be held to the 'highest standards of ethical conduct' because the legal profession needs the respect and confidence of society if it is to play its critical role in sustaining the rule of law and the concept of justice upon which our free and democratic society depends".

These lofty words said, the suspension of Doris Sassower for challenging corrupt and criminal backroom deal to "elect" judges, or rather, put puppets of political parties and businesses on benches, continues, despite the fact that she was suspended 

• without a petition;
• without a hearing; and 
• without a court order listing the reasons for her suspension - 

which is blatantly unconstitutional, yet, the New York State Court of Appeals repeatedly refused to review her constitutional appeals, 5 times by 1998, that the State Constitution requires that court to review AS OF RIGHT.

Note that Doris Sassower's constitutional appeal was directed also to Rep. Helene Weinstein - who, in several more years, supported Lippman in prolonging his stay on the bench until he turns 80, by sponsoring a respective bill for such a referendum:

As to the professional fate of Doris Sassower, of course, nothing helped - showing to the public and to attorneys that when an attorney who challenges even an abuse of power by the attorney's own regulators judges, that attorney is committing, in the "rule-of-law" United States of America, an unavoidable and merciless professional suicide.

And, yet another female attorney, Susan Settenbrino, wrote a book about illegal cross-endorsements in judicial nominations in New York, 

and, as an apparent direct result of that, was forced - without a suspension - to stop practicing law in New York.  Her registration does not show her address, indicating that she is not practicing law at this time.

With that history, it is easily discernible, so to say, that whenever a judge runs in his election, for a lucrative, well-paid and all-powerful seat, without any opposition, which means, his own voice is enough to get him elected - a cross-endorsement is involved.

And, you know who in the Watershed/upstate New York area was elected without an opposition - and, thus, likely with a secret cross-endorsement?

Kevin Dowd - in 2012, as a state Supreme Court justice,

for 14 years, while he had to retire at the end of 2017 because of his age, meaning that his election in 2012had, and did cost New Yorkers another election 1/3 through his term.

Dowd was incompetent, anti-Semitic, dumb as a brick (for which he was quickly yanked from an assignment in Binghamton, a bigger city with larger businesses that did not want such a dummy deciding their cases, no matter how favorably he ruled) and notoriously corrupt.

You know who else was - JUST this past election - elected unopposed?

The Otsego County Judge John F. Lambert, during the pendency of Melania and Nicolae Pervu's case, where Lambert was assigned by the notoriously corrupt previous judge in that same case, the Chief Administrative Judge for upstate New York (and, "coincidentally", husband of a witness in the proceedings, Ellen Coccoma), Michael V. Coccoma.

He was endorsed by four parties - openly - and one, Democratic - secretly, since the Democratic party did not offer an opposing nominee.

I am writing this part before 

• analysis of the main jurisdictional defect of the petition that would require any minimally honest and competent judge to toss the petition after reading it for 5 minutes, with sanctions against the City of Oneonta and attorney David Merzig who filed it, and before 
• analyzing all others, gross, judicial errors, that simply CANNOT be made by judges of minimal honesty and competence

for a reason.

When conditions of election are created for a judge where the judge

• does not need even to set up a financial campaign support committee, or collect funds - as other judicial candidates have to do - to get elected, 

• and is allowed to be re-elected, for a salary of $209,000, with no other votes than one, his own - 

such "gifts" are not given to anybody, especially not in New York, for free.

John F. Lambert owed - big time - to people who allowed him to stay on that bench and draw that salary and wield that power.

And those people were not voters.

The were politicians and businesses.

As to what kind of politicians and what kind of businesses were interested in getting Melania and Nicolae Pervu's property, the Oneonta Hotel, in downtown Oneonta, New York, I will write in my following blogs in this series.

Stay tuned.

#TheCrimeToBeNamedMelania. Part 5. No immigrant farmer will own prime real estate in the middle of the business district of Oneonta, New York. A special kind of due diligence necessary before buying property in Oneonta, New York and Otsego County

In the four articles of the #TheCrimeToBeNamedMelania series so far, I have written about discriminations and misconduct surrounding the Oneonta Hotel bought in 2015 by a couple of Romanian Americans, Melania and Nicolae Pervu - whose business is now practically shot with the help of, among other people, husband and wife Merzigs - the wife who authored the "order to vacate", as the Chairperson of the Oneonta, New York Board of Public Service, and the husband who verified that petition - instead of the wife, mind, as the law requires, not to draw attention that he is enforcing his wife's (a local business consulting firm owner's) order and not acting "for public interest".

Part I, #TheCrimeOfBeingNamedMelania. How to steal a lucrative business from an immigrant with the help of a New York court. A tutorial, 

can be read here.

Part II, #TheCrimeOfBeingNamedMelania. How to steal a lucrative business from an immigrant with the help of a New York court. A tutorial. Part II. The politics of motions to withdraw in Judge John F. Lambert's court - can be read here.

Part III, #TheCrimeOfBeingNamedMelania. How to steal a lucrative business from an immigrant with the help of a New York court. A tutorial. Part III. The burden of proof is on the Respondents - when a judge's and a city attorney's wives are involved in the mess. But, of course! - can be read here.

Part 4  - #TheCrimeToBeNamedMelania.  The case of The City of Oneonta v Melania and Nicolae Pervu, Part 4.  How the City of Oneonta tried to stamp out "a Russian crime family" supporting Trump - can be read here. 

It is an open secret that the City of Oneonta, New York and Otsego County is predominantly white and deeply racist and xenophobic - anti-immigrant and anti-non-white.

The City of Oneonta was repeatedly sued for racial profiling in criminal cases, yet, it continued to do that for years, and, as far as multiple readers report to me, they continue to do it to this day, and racial profiling in the City and County was the subject of repeated local protests.

In 1992.
In 2005.
In 2012.
In 2014.


To check the racial profiling in how the all-white police investigates, how the all-white prosecution prosecutes and how the all-white judicial corps judges criminal cases, one can simply visit the Oneonta City Court (in Oneonta) and the Otsego County Court (for felonies, the worst of crimes) in Cooperstown, New York on arraignment days - they are open to the public.


With the census and a visitor's own eyes show that the city of Oneonta, New York and the County of Otsego are overwhelmingly white (but for students in Oneonta, New York - who are, together with their young minority professors, repeatedly targeted with racial profiling), those in jail jumpsuits and hand- and leg-cuffs in court are predominantly minority - Latino and African American.

The City of Oneonta was sued (including its former, now deceased by suicide, mayor Richard Miller, sued in his individual capacity) for deliberately trying, with the help of fabricating criminal charges, following around a man, Timothy Baron, who committed the double offense of being black and an immigrant, stopping him illegally, dragging him out of the car in the middle of the night while he did nothing wrong, beating him up, tasering him, pepper-spraying him, locking him up and fabricating criminal charges against him (a B felony).

Then, the county prosecutor John Muehl, famous for his 1. drinking and 2. corruption (just word-search my blog about his name, I have a lot of documentary information posted on the blog about him, as about all other public officials I mention in this article), kept threatening that man that if he does not cave in, does not plead guilty and does not go conveniently to prison, as John Muehl and so many others wanted him to do, John Muehl would pad up the charges through yet another grand jury and will pack him away for more.

And, the white Judge John Lambert, the former prosecutor from the same DA's office, after numerous ex parte conferences with John Muehl, the police and probation, kept denying motions of that black man and kept dragging him to unnecessary "conferences", to drain him of finances for an attorney, so that he would not be able to afford an attorney at trial - as is Judge John Lambert's habit of so many years, both in criminal and in civil proceedings.

Then, right before trial, when the man could not be coerced into a plea and the trial was right around the corner, John Muehl suddenly filed with the court for a permission to DROP charges because - lo and behold - he did not have his supposed main witness for prosecution (and, possibly, never had that witness in the first place).

So, all his threats of padding up the charges in order to coerce the man into a guilty plea and to go to prison was just bluff.

Charges were dropped and the man sued in federal, putting into his lawsuit a description of how his entertainment business, catering to minorities in Oneonta, New York, 

• was repeatedly raided by the city police, 
• badmouthed without basis that it was a source of crime in the city, and 
• denied - by mayor Dick Miller who was coincidentally the Chairman of the Board of the Oneonta Art Performance Center (where the Oneonta City judge Lucy Bernier who was packing the man away in jail at arraignment and trying to deny him release when I asked for a felony hearing despite the fact that the felony hearing was not provided, and the release without bail was required by law, was a member of the Board) - denied a rental space in the Performing Arts Center while the Center advertised and continued to advertised that it had rental spaces available, specifically because Dick Miller advised the man, Timothy Baron, that Dick Miller did not want "his kind of people" not only in the Performing Arts Center, but in town, too.

The most recent lynching mob against minorities in Oneonta, New York was held on social media just last month when a black man, Terrence Truitt, was arrested without a good reason, charged with an arson that supposedly was the cause of death of a local former firefighter John Heller, and the local mourners of John Heller turned into a lynching mob and demanded death of Truitt, as torturous as possible, presumed his guilt and viciously bashed at anybody who dared to point out his presumption of innocence.  Moreover, the complaints of the lynching mob in Oneonta, New York caused the GoFundMe to stop a fundraising campaign for the defense of the presumed-innocent indigent black man - while the same GoFundMe freely allows fundraising campaigns of accusers of crimes, like Dr. Ford - accuser of the now U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

So, any immigrant needs to be beware what kind of town they are trying to settle in.

Just run the words "racial profiling" and "city of Oneonta New York" together in Google and see the results.

Just go to Pacer.gov, register a credit card account and look up lawsuits against the City of Oneonta - before you are making an investment in that city, without regard whether lawsuits are won or not - considering how hard for plaintiffs of this kind to get an attorney and how hard federal courts try to revoke licenses of attorneys who dare to sue state and local governments.

Just look up the mentioning of corruption in the local government - or how the local government used its authority of claiming a business is not up to code to get rid of "unwanted" (minority) business owners, in order to give it to wanted (white) business owners.  

It is actually all in open access, a matter of public records.

The racism, the xenophobia, the family clans, the corruption, the double standards.

The County Attorney (a DSS lawyers, DSS contracts to subsidize poor tenants, a lawyer for the Sheriff and the county prosecutor) and the Chief Administrative Judge for the entire upstate New York who assigns all judges to cases in upstate New York and is seated in Otsego County as a Supreme Court (trial court of general jurisdiction) judge are wife and a husband.

 Which allows the wife to hold both a fulltime County Attorney job at the expense of taxpayers, and a job at a private law firm, Hinman, Howard and Kattel, working for that firm on taxpayer-paid time.

The County Attorney also is in charge of reviewing and denying Freedom of Information requests - about her own timesheets, as Ellen Coccoma did with my requests.

And, the Chief Administrative judge's influence will get Ellen Coccoma a free assigned counsel in federal court, a representation by  NY State Attorney General who represents STATE officials, in order to claim that she was NOT sued as a state official - and dismiss the lawsuit this way.  The representation became necessary when Ellen and Michael Coccoma's personal liability insurance denied them coverage of legal representation because they did not cover legal representation of intentional misconduct and fraud - as was alleged in the federal lawsuit against the both.

Remember that local public officials who violate your constitutional rights are entitled to an "assigned counsel for the rich" if you sue them - while you will be scrambling to find an attorney who would dare to go against the government.

And, even if you find and attorney to represent you when the government sues you - and sink tens of thousands of dollars into that representation - he will be trembling like a leaf, telling you, as attorney #HonRyanTDonovan reportedly told Melania Pervu, not to even mention the word "corruption" - which was obvious in the case - and, when Melania Pervu insisted that Donovan should do his job and address all issues in the case, including misconduct of local public officials, Donovan took leave and left Melania and Nicolae Pervu in the middle of a contempt proceeding, while Donovan was amply paid for representation in that proceeding.

As to the lawsuit against Michael and Ellen Coccomas (brought by my husband, pro se) was that the lawsuit was denied, my husband sanctioned for bringing it, ordered to pay attorney fees to those he sued (meaning, the sanctions decision is ON THE MERITS, while the court dismissed the lawsuit BEFORE REACHING THE MERITS) - and blocked from filing CIVIL RIGHTS LAWSUITS in the future without asking permission to file.

Because saying the "c" word (corruption) in court is not allowed in our God-blessed country.

Also, public records are available that Michael Coccoma was assigned to the case that started in 2007 and eventually led to the unlawful disbarment of my husband in 2011, quickly recused (as he did in Melania and Nicolae Pervu's case), but then, as an Administrative Judge kept assigning judges to it throughout its long history - and his wife Ellen Coccoma, as a member of attorney disciplinary committee, made a decision to bring disbarment proceedings - no, not against a local son-of-a-judge attorney Richard Harlem who sued on behalf of a client who never hired him to do that, sued representing both defendants and plaintiffs in the same case - but my husband who complained about the conflict of interest.

So, this couple.

Another husband-and-wife couple in the local government worth noting is the husband and wife Merzigs.

The wife, Margery Merzig is the longtime business consulting owner - and a Chairperson of the Oneonta Board of Public Services, issuing decisions that buildings of local businesses are not up to code.

The husband, attorney David Merzig, as a City Attorney, seeks enforcement of his wife's decisions through local (all-white) courts, featuring:

Judge Lucy Bernier - Oneonta City court, the former Board member of the Oneonta Performance Arts Center who got off the board when a lawsuit for racial discrimination was brought against the Center;

Judges Michael Coccoma, Brian Burns and John Lambert - at the County and Supreme Court level, all former prosecutors of the same county.

Let's not forget the Sheriff Richard Devlin - just re-elected for another term - and his son, a local police officer.

The son, reportedly, openly threatened to shoot up two elementary schools, the father blocked investigation for nearly 2 years, put the son on a PAID leave, never investigated or charged him with a crime - and the son was allowed to simply "resign" from the force, under public pressure, after getting paid for so many months for being under administrative (not criminal) investigation.

The father was re-elected - consider that somebody actually voted for that particular Sheriff to get him reelected.

Of course, running the "Devlin" last name on the website of the New York State Board of Elections website, their Campaign Finance, disclosure reports page, using the last name Devlin as a search criteria, returns a lot of names of judicial candidates with the same last name:

making one wonder.

Devlin, you know, is not Smith, and there are a lot of governmental dynasties in the State of New York, including judicial dynasties.

And, of course, one needs to check out the site guidestar.org, a database of non-profits across the United States, and browse freely and openly available tax returns of local non-profits, and who is on their boards of directors, who are their highest paid officers and employees (listed in tax returns), and how they cross-finance one another.

This way, a potential non-politically-connected investor conducting a due diligence research of what can potentially jeopardize his investment in Otsego County, New York, will find a Dewar Foundation, stationed in Oneonta, New York, a multi-million pot of money through which the local Chief Assistant District Attorney (and son-of-a-late-judge) Michael Getman gives tens of thousands of dollars to many local nonprofits, including those where local judges are on boards of directors - securing/buying for himself favorable rulings of all government officials in the area and immunity in case of any complaints about his misconduct.

By the way, the level of impunity as to Michael Getman can be demonstrated by the fact that the New York State Attorney General investigated and even filed a civil lawsuit against Michael Getman and his then-alive judge-father Frank Getman in 1999 for stealing from that same Dewar Foundation, big time.

Neither one was disbarred.

Neither one was criminally prosecuted.

Frank Getman was not disciplined as a judge or taken off the bench.

The case was hushed ("settled") in such a way that nobody suffered.

Michael Getman was only removed from voting on Dewar's decisions for a short while, and now is right back holding the reigns of Dewar and distributing its money.

But, I bet, nobody does this kind of due diligence before buying property in Otsego County.

People, especially starry-eyed immigrants who came to this country as a beacon of freedom and protector of human rights (this is how the U.S. portrays itself in self-propaganda anyway), presume that there is rule of law in Oneonta, New York, and in Otsego County.

But, if you do just a little research before you buy a property - and you see husbands and wives, sons and fathers - in key positions, for years and decades, in the local government, you can, and should, EXPECT CORRUPTION, and be wary of buying property up there, because it will be super-easy to deprive you of your life savings, without any remedy at law.

As it happens in Otsego County again, and again, and yet again.

People routinely learn about discrimination, and about their own inability to do anything about it - because they already voted in, through apathy or lack of knowledge, the same clans into the same key positions over, and over, and over again - only when they already invested their money and do not have an easy way to just up and leave.

As Melania and Nicolae Pervu did.

As to WHO may have been interested in the property, and the specifics of how those investors' desire to squeeze the Pervus out of their prime real estate was, and is handled by the local government officials, I will continue to write in these series.

Stay tuned.

New York disbars an attorney for misconduct as a judge? For something that ALL judges do routinely? What really happened in #AlanSimon's case? Whose path did he cross?

This is a long story of double standards in how judges are or are not taken off the bench in the glorious State of New York, and are or are not disciplined for misconduct as judges and as attorneys, so, please, bear with me.

A couple of days ago New York State disbarred an attorney, Alan Simon, for misconduct that he committed as a judge, and was taken off the bench for this misconduct.

The disbarment of Alan Simon is actually a spectacular thing that happened - because, as a sneak preview, he was taken off the bench and disbarred for what many, if not all other judges in New York State, at all levels, routinely do in court, and the punishment usually falls on the opposite side, on those who dare to criticize and expose them, in and out of court.

Let's look at those double-standards.

Under the canons of constitutional jurisprudence of the U.S. Supreme Court, regulation of the "practice of law" is unconstitutional.

For 2 reasons.

1. The law, to be constitutional, must have a clear prior (before the conduct happened) statutory definition - and what the hell "the practice of law" is, nobody knows.  In New York, "the practice of law" is also not clearly defined by statute - but is vigorously regulated and used as a sword against attorneys criticizing the courts anyway.
2. Remember the standard of proof in criminal proceedings - beyond the reasonable doubt?  Violations of the regulation of the "practice of law" are prosecuted in the U.S., the State of New York included, through criminal proceedings, for 
1. "unauthorized practice of law", and for
2. criminal contempt of court.

In both of these cases, the "practice of law" is the main element of the crimes - so, that element must have not just a clear prior statutory definition, but a clear prior statutory definition that would be cler beyond the reasonable doubt of a non-lawyer juror of average education and intelligence, from the cross-section of the community.

Do we have that definition anywhere in the United States, including the glorious and now "democratic" and "pro human rights" State of New York?

Of course, not.

So, has the regulation of the practice of law declared unconstitutional by court on these simple grounds, and based on the supposedly mandatory and binding precedents of the U.S. Supreme Court - I pointed out a lot of them in my recent 3.5 page article that suddenly attracted interest from law professors from across the world and jumped to the top 4% of articles read on Academia.edu?

Of course, not.

Because who regulates the "practice of law" - unconstitutionally?

Right, courts do.

And who is supposed to declare that regulation unconstitutional?

Well, the courts are supposed to.

And will courts declare what they themselves do, and what gives them power over access to court of all Americans, as well as over financially powerful attorneys (who finance judicial election campaigns), and over financially and politically non-powerful attorneys who may sue judges for civil rights violations, and over powerful prosecutors who may bring criminal charges against judges violating people's civil rights and committing, thus, federal crimes - through unconstitutional regulation of the "practice of law"?

Well, they may be corrupt crooks, but they are definitely not idiots and will not upset their own apple cart.

So, the unconstitutional regulation of the "practice of law" continues.

And is used as a sword against attorneys criticizing judges, representing the poor and bringing civil rights lawsuits against the government, including judges - the unforgivable "abuse of legal process", in judges' opinion.

In 2008, a New York suspended attorney John Aretakis, the first attorney who sued Catholic priests for sexual abuse of children, on behalf of those children.  For making a motion to recuse a judge - and criticizing the judge in that motion for corruption.  The judge sanctioned John Aretakis, in a criminal proceedings for "frivolous conduct", the court-created rule not applicable to criminal proceedings.  The Appellate Division 3rd Department, instead of reversing and dismissing proceedings against John Aretakis, reversed and REMANDED them to the same judge, with instructions to the judge how to sanction John Aretakis in a way that will stick on appeal.  The offended judge did as he was instructed, sanctioned John Aretakis, on remand, for "contempt of court" (remember - for making the same motion to recuse?).

Then, the 3rd Department, wearing 3 hats at once, of 

• a legislator of attorney "ethical"/disciplinary rules in (unconstitutional) regulation of "the practice of law", see above, 
• an investigator/prosecutor (and also an "arm of the court", imagine a prosecutors and investigators being PARTS and ARMS of the court - an immediate disqualification for both sides, but this kind of thing continues across the U.S. in attorney disciplinary proceedings for 100+ years); and
• of adjudicating court

suspended John Aretakis's license, for 1 year, that was 11 years ago, and John Aretakis is still without a license - because the court did not provide in its decision for an automatic reinstatement after 1 year, but John Aretakis has to humbly beg the court to return the license that was unconstitutionally revoked in the first place, in a regulation that is unconstitutional in the first place.

And John Aretakis did not beg.  So, he remains without a license.

While, this week, the revolutionary New York Legislature finally gave victims of sexual child abuse at the hands of Catholic priests the extension (not full repeal, mind) of the shameful statute of limitations that prevented John Aretakis to fully sue the bastards on behalf of the children.

But, among celebrations of the legislation, I do not see the name of John Aretakis mentioned. Because he is, you know, a suspended attorney, and recognizing that the suspension was as shameful as the statute of limitations upon his clients, is "not done" in New York.

By the way, John Aretakis was suspended without a hearing, just on the basis of the contempt of court sanction imposed upon him by the judge who was in that proceeding 

• the initiator/party;
• the alleged victim;
• the unsworn witness;
• the investigator;
• the prosecutor;
• the judge and the jury -

all in one.

In 2015, New York suspended the law license of another attorney, me, for 2 years, also without automatic reinstatement, also without a hearing, also based on sanctions imposed by the "offended" (corrupt) judge, also based on a motion to recuse the judge to which the judge reacted by instituting a "frivolous conduct" proceeding, based on a judge-made "rule of frivolous conduct", which is as vague (and as unconstitutional) as regulation of "the practice of law" is, and where the judge acted, like in John Aretakis' case, as

• the initiator/party;
• the alleged victim;
• the unsworn witness;
• the investigator;
• the prosecutor;
• the judge and the jury -

and then, the licensing court acted, behind closed doors, as

• a legislator of the substantive and procedural rules;
• the investigator and prosecutor; and
• the adjudicator.

Of course, the result in such "court proceedings" is obviously pre-judged, so many attorneys do not even bother litigating, they just surrender their law licenses once they see they are targeted and move on with their lives, what's left of them.

"Coincidentally", I was an attorney who, in a poor rural mountain area, was THE ONLY lawyer who combined litigation in state criminal, civil (consumer debt, foreclosure), Family and federal civil rights courts, and sued local government officials, including social services and judges - who other attorneys, including the revolutionary ACLU and NYCLU, refused to touch with a 10-foot pole.

Well, now there is nobody to do that for the indigent in that poor area, as far as people keep telling me - but, what can I do?

In 2018, New York suspended, for 2 months only (but before judicial elections), the law license of yet another attorney, Gino Giorgini, for criticism of a corrupt judge in a motion to recuse.

That the judge was corrupt was confirmed by:

• a series of newspaper articles about the judge's fixing cases through handing out lucrative assignments to friends and friends of friends (rich and politically powerful, of course);
• New York State court system having to change the rules of assignment because of the judge misconduct;
• New York Commission for Judicial Conduct NOT booting the judge in question off the bench only because "he did not know" that what he did was unlawful - because supposedly it was not discernable from the rules of assignment that it is bad for a judge to be partial and play into the hands of friends and financial sponsors; and by
• the New York State Court of Appeals that reversed the judge's most corrupt decision.

That did not save Gino Giorgini's law license, though.

He was still suspended, and was told in the order of suspension that he is not allowed by disciplinary rules to criticize the judge's political corruption, in those words.

That said, there was one sacred cow for judges that was untouchable in attorney disciplinary proceedings.

That sacred cow was - judges themselves.

And, even though the suspension was only for 2 months, and "stayed", Gino Giorgini remains suspended as of today:

For example, 

1. an East Greenbush village part-time justice (and an employee of the Chief Administrative Judge for upstate New York Michael V. Coccoma), Diane L. Schilling, who was (and still is) and attorney was taken off the bench for trying to fix a traffic ticket for another judge's wife - but nobody touched her law license, and she continues to practice with "no record of public discipline".

Beautiful woman, isn't she?  Judge Coccoma has a good taste in female beauty in picking - and protecting - his employees.

And,

2.  A Family Court judge, who was also an attorney, Bryan Hedges, was taken off the bench for sexual molestation of his 5-year-old deaf-mute niece - but his law license remains intact, and he has "no record of public discipline", too.

And, 

3. A New York State Supreme Court Justice Christina Ryba, just before her day of election as a judge, was booted from her job of "special counsel" of (gasp!) the attorney licensing court, the Chief Judge of this court, for dishonest and unethical behavior - for using her position and the court system to circulate e-mails just before the election day in order to impress voters that she had support of the court system.

In other words, she has gotten herself elected by fraud.

The 3rd Department fired her, the Chief Administrative Judge for upstate New York Michael V. Coccoma immediately hired her for a bridge job, the court system stonewalled the details of her re-hiring by Judge Coccoma (remember his taste for beautiful female employees?), being an ugly old midget that he is.

She was not disbarred - after being fired BY AN ATTORNEY LICENSING COURT, FOR A BIG ETHICAL VIOLATION.

Instead, she was sworn in, 

my request to the New York State Commission for Judicial Conduct to take her off the bench as elected by fraud was denied - the Commission did not see any judicial misconduct in the situation.

And, she now "serves" as a Supreme Court Justice, with the truncated word "Honorable" as part of her job title, no less:

has "no record of public discipline", and - lo and behold - 

is on the Board of Trustees of the Albany Law School.

Imagine, you can only be trusted with funds of a non-profit forging (pun intended) the new lawyers of America if you have a record of fraudulent behavior, right?

And, after the former New York State Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman has publicly announced that the statute making it a crime to videotape OPEN court proceedings in New York is shameful and should be abolished, and despite the fact that now New York has a Democratic majority in the Legislature baking statutes left and right as pancakes, that statute - as well as the statute protecting records of police misconduct from public access - remains on the books and there is no indication that the "revolutionary" Legislature is going to repeal it any time soon.

Not to mention that, on top of that statute, the New York State court administration invented a rule,  court rule 22 NYCRR 29.1(a), prohibiting also AUDIO-recording (allowed by New York Penal Law without requesting consent of those recorded, as long as the person recording the conversation secretly is a party in it) - ANYWHERE in the courthouse, and here is how that rule is used in criminal proceedings.

Why?

Because:

1. Judges do not want to be booted off the bench after being caught on tape or on the audio recording in doing what they are habitually doing - fixing cases, making incompetent and rude statements and harassing litigants and attorneys; and

2. Judges do not want to be reversed on appeal if video-recordings are made part of the record.  Now they are not part of the record, and appellate courts routinely "defer" to the decisions of trial judges because they saw demeanor of witnesses, and the appellate court doesn't.  Why? Because it prohibits to create the full record through criminal law.

For example, Judge Carl F. Becker behaved quite as Alan Simon, and worse, but it was me who was suspended from "practicing law", and not him booted off the bench for pointing out to the Commission for Judicial Conduct what he was doing.

And, the same happened to attorney Gino Giorgini.

And, the same happened to attorney John Aretakis.

With this background, now I am asking a question - what was the REAL reason why judge Alan Simon was taken off the bench and then disbarred for his conduct on the bench - for which NO OTHER JUDGES get taken off the bench, or disbarred?

I will attempt to give some insights into this curious situation in one of my next blogs.

Stay tuned.