Dumb and Dumber

Share

This is just insane. I have to say that after 9 years being involved in court reform, I have seen cases where women just do not want to go back to work after being full time mothers. They often apply for disability. And the pattern is clear because most of their claims are fibromyalgia and other difficult to detect illnesses

At the same time, men suddenly lose their jobs at the beginning of divorces. If they were self employed, they suddenly go out of business. It isnt hard for the court to recognize these tactics either. But they often just go along with it if it brings in revenue for the county.

If people would stop hiring lawyers and being obnoxiously vindictive these courts would go out of business. Making claims suddenly of child abuse after a divorce begins, puts your children in danger of being put in foster care. Thats another idiocy I see all the time.

Pennsylvania Got Punked

Share

jcb front

In an article on Philly.com on November 15, 2015, regarding the ongoing judicial calamity in the Pennsylvania Court System, ethics expert Geoffrey C. Hazard Jr., an emeritus professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, took aim at the Judicial Conduct Board’s  position that its proceedings are confidential. “It is a little paradoxical that a board constituted to create greater transparency and trust in the judiciary is itself quite untransparent,” he said. Pennsylvania citizens did not need an Ivy League law professor to state the obvious,  it has been evident to litigants for decades.

An element of this crisis that still has received no attention from the government,  is the damage this flawed and irresponsible legislation has done  to thousands of people.   Since the judicial disaster in Luzerne County,  there has not been one mention that maybe many of the thousands of dismissed judicial complaints were valid.    People have suffered loss of their homes, had to purchase custody of their children, and the ultimate injustice -false imprisonments.

This is reminiscent of a past response from  Septa, for requests for a railroad  crossing gate. They were told that a certain number of accidents had to occur before it would warrant any such investment. Just what is the lucky number and how is the government going to provide restitution, if at all?

In 1993, the Pennsylvania Constitution was amended with Article V Section 18, forming the Judicial Conduct Board of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Board was established in response to a wave of corruption in the 1980’s.    The Judiciary’s answer was to self-police in secrecy.  Now we see how well that has worked out.

The authors of that amendment, must have realized they were creating a petry dish for  organized crime.  No interference from the public, the Legislature, the Executive Branch or law enforcement. This was their interpretation of judicial independence.   In retrospect, Pennsylvania got punked.  The whole thing reads like a deal that you can’t refuse from “The Godfather. “

The power to  add that amendment came in 1968, with the addition of Article V Section 10(c) of the state Constitution, which gave the Judicial Branch administrative autonomy.  They used that ambiguous legislation to create judicial immunity, self-recusal, broad judicial discretion (which is just a ticket for them to make their own laws) giving power to deny jury trials and then a secret self-discipline process. Put that all together and you have the perfect storm.    Do not forget about the unbridled campaign contributions from the lawyers to these judges, and the unregulated attorney hourly fee system.  What you get is cases that go on for years, often decades – to build up those fees in return for those contributions, and no where to turn for help.

These judges  felt they were so untouchable in their $150 million  castle they built in 2010,  that they had the insolence not to implement any of the recommendations of the Interbranch Commission that was formed in response to the Kids for Cash Scandal.   The Supreme Court  just decided that putting those two judges in prison would solve the problem – and they could  just maintain the status quo, and continue their racketeering as if nothing happened.

If it wasn’t for Attorney General Kathleen Kane- we would all still be feverishly filing, thinking one day we would eventually receive justice from these faux judges. But even with her release of the thousands of pornographic emails between members of the Judiciary, much of the public has stood silent while they  try to silence Kane with attempts to remove her from office.  This concerted effort has surfaced increasing evidence that the entire court system is tainted and unrecoverable.

One of the judges on the panel that found Kane in contempt for violating a protective order, should have recused himself.  Judge Richard Haaz, is the father of Sam Haaz, an Assistant District Attorney that works for DA Seth Williams.  He is even friends with him on Facebook.  The two prosecutors that instigated the charges against Kane,  Frank Fina and Mark Costanza, also work in DA Williams office, who has refused to terminate them, even after half their city council complained.  Now that leaves us thinking, why would the Philly DA keep those prosecutors employed – what do they have on him?

On top of that, Justice Michael Eakin sat on the panel that suspended Kane’s law license, after she announced he was one of the porn email senders.  He had his disciplinary case dismissed by the Judicial Conduct Board. Now  the Board’s Chief Counsel, Robert Graci, admitted concealing his conflict of interest in the review of Eakin after the local media exposed that Graci had worked on Eakin’s retention election campaign.  All of that leads to the suspicion that Graci, may have just gotten his job from  Justice Eakin, who’s disciplinary case has been resubmitted by Kane, with some new graphic emails.

It also recently made headlines, that one of the Conduct Board members, Police Chief Dooley,  was also in the chain of porn emails, and failed to recuse while he was also reviewing Justice Eakin.    That is notwithstanding about the fact that the Judicial Conduct Board is not even in compliance with the Pennsylvania Constitution, which states they  must have six non-judicial members.  Three of those supposed “citizen” members are  two retired judges and  a retired attorney- and of course we have the Police Chief- another judicial employee. I do not think that is what the PA Constitution had in mind.

Yet all these players still claim the porn emails have nothing to do with the charges against AG Kane that she leaked information from a long closed grand jury. How can you “leak” information when the entire judiciary is already communicating behind the backs of the people?

Enough is enough. What more evidence does the Pennsylvania government need?  Justice McCaffery was forced to resign and former Justice Orie-Melvin is in prison. Another judge, Feudale seems to have been caught trying to sell grand jury information to the media. The entire Philadelphia Traffic court bench had to be fired.

This system  simply cannot be salvaged. These judges cannot be rehabilitated. Their brains are too indoctrinated into thinking they are royalty. Every appellate court judge needs to be removed.  Every common pleas judge needs to be put through the ringer, with all of their cases reviewed.   Every dismissed  judicial complaint from the last 23 years needs to be pulled out of the closet into the sunlight. The people need relief.

The days of appearing in costumes of black robes and sitting on thrones above our heads- need to be over. The entire archaic system, was inherited from the monarchy from which we separated in 1776, and has no place in America. It’s time to demolish this train wreck and start over, and  some of those black robes need to be  exchanged for orange jumpsuits.

The Judiciary Feifdom Continues to Fortify Itself from Liability for Corrupt Judges

Share

Russo v. Allegheny County, — A.3d —, 2015 WL 5824528 (Pa. Cmmw. Ct. Oct. 7, 2015): per Gardner Collins, SJ., the three-panel court held that the Court of Common Pleas, as a court of the unified judicial system, is entitled to the sovereign immunity of the commonwealth. The court also held that the General Assembly did not intend for the judiciary to be in included within the definition of an employer subject to the whistleblower law because it would “infringe on separation of powers.”

The courts decided they know what the General Assembly was thinking when it comes to the whistleblower law.  Hmmm… I think they should be asked themselves- its their law- don’t you?  Or better yet- let’s pretend we are still a democracy and let the people vote on it in a referendum.

However, they can be sued under the 1978 Act 152. Under Mayle v. Pennsylvania Department of Highways.

Police Have No Right to Take Your Cell Phone

Share

This ruling in Pennsylvania Superior Court may come in handy one day.

Commonwealth v. Wright, 99 A.3d 565 (Pa. Super. Aug. 29, 2014): per Stabile, J., held that the “plain view doctrine did not operate to justify warrantless seizure of defendant’s [cell phone].” Under the Fourth Amendment and Article I, § 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, “plain view doctrine permits a warrantless seizure if . . .1) [the] police did not violate the Fourth Amendment during the course of their arrival at the location where they viewed the item in question; 2) the item was not obscured and could be seen plainly from that location; 3) the incriminating nature of the item was readily apparent; and 4) police had the lawful right to access the item.” Here, the court held that the police did not have any evidence that the cell phone in question had any relation to the crime they were investigating and thus failed the third factor the plain view test

Where do they come up with this stuff? – 2014 PA Superior Court Decision on the Right to Jury Trial

Share

Where they come up with it is, making decisions that are most lucrative for corporate interests.  If the case will not result in large fees for attorneys, it can be totally rigged by judges as to the outcome.  That is why jury trials became more and more limited, as the judiciary became more and more a rogue branch of government.

They began narrowing the right to jury trial since the Pennsylvania Supreme Court gained too much independence in 1968.  This is just another example. If a whistleblower case is not beneficial to the members of the “legal industry”, i.e. will it generate huge fees that can be redistributed back into the political machine through law firm campaign contributions,   it will be dismissed on a motion for summary judgment- by one biased judge. 

The only good thing about this ruling, is that it gives some clarification of how they decide the right to a jury trial. But of course, they can always use their “discretion” aka pretzel logic – to deny you a trial anyway…which is 99% of the time if you are self-represented.

98 A.3d 672 (Pa. Super. Ct. Aug. 19, 2014): per Olson, J., held in part that “there is no state constitutional right to jury trial on a whistleblower claim.” After denying the appellant’s statutory claims for a jury trial, the court determined that appellant had not met the “two requirements [that] must be satisfied for a jury trial to be guaranteed by our Constitution,” which includes “show[ing] that a right to a jury trial ‘would have been required in 1790, when the Pennsylvania Constitution was adopted,’ and that “the action must have a common law basis, not a statutory basis.”