Category Archives: featured

Federal Judges Caught Fixing Cases and a Path of Corruption to SCOTUS


Last Updated May 29, 2017 : 8:10 PM EST

Even for those that have long suspected the court system is really nothing more than a legal industry, the series of events in the following  brings a whole new perspective to judicial corruption.   While similar deception is likely happening across the country, the state of Pennsylvania has very unique influence all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.   If none of the following is true, the above pictured cabal of judges surely would have offered proof to refute it, and to “preserve confidence” in the judiciary.

What started as an employment discrimination law suit in 2013, became the uncovering of a judicial cabal that has apparently been  deceiving the public about sending appeals when  required, to a full appellate court panel.  Obviously this makes it simple to rig outcomes when instead, only a few people are actually seeing the case.  Essentially they are forging names if they falsely claim that all judges listed on Orders participated in the decisions.

This became a real probability  when a Plaintiff did some investigating after District Court Judge Paul Diamond dismissed their case in 2015. It was quite obvious that Diamond was complicit with concealment of evidence by the Defendant, who is one of the largest corporations in Pennsylvania. Judge Anthony Scirica was the only appellate judge to sign the final Opinion dismissing the appeal of Diamond’s order in 2016,  pretentiously using case law he had written himself apparently for just such occasions.

But it was his denial of a request for signatures from the full 12 judge “en banc” panel to verify they had all reviewed the appeal, that was the red flag.  Sirica then  had a clerk send  a letter  saying the judge was not going to respond to a further request, which was for the law allowing him to  refuse to provide that proof.  In four years of litigation, this self-represented citizen had not been allowed in a court room and has never seen any of the above judges. They have taken it upon themselves to eliminate signature requirements and having to face the public by doing away with courtroom hearings and jury trials at their “discretion.”

Sirica, who was a Montgomery County Common Pleas judge and former State Representative,  is the Chairman of the Judicial Conduct Committee of the Judicial Conference of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington DC. The alleged Disciplinary Council at the Third Circuit level was chaired by former Chief Justice Theodore McKee, who is also on the Conduct Committee with Scirica (and who also had the power to assign judges to appeal panels).

After a complaint against Judge Diamond  appeared to similarly have never been sent to the eleven member Disciplinary Council, a complaint against McKee was sent to Chief Justice John Roberts of SCOTUS to bypass McKee and Scirica. Although it may have been related  that McKee announced soon after that he was “stepping-down” early as Chief Justice, nothing else was done. The Plaintiff received a letter from Washington DC Administration of Courts stating they would not address any further disciplinary complaints and to go hire a lawyer. The entire system is just a three-ring circus.

Of course no lawyer was hired, but a law suit was filed in 2017 against Scirica  and six other judges involved at various levels- Diamond, Fisher, Jordan, Fuentes, McKee and Vanaskie for fraud, but it got the same treatment as every other civil rights case.  The claim was dismissed, this time citing  judicial immunity,  by Judge Sanchez.   But it is now on appeal, which should be interesting, because they are running out of cabal members to assign, as most are now defendants in this other lawsuit by the same Plaintiff.

In the particular case that started this all, the Defendant Thomas Jefferson University,  was caught concealing evidence and witnesses, which is a federal crime. The Plaintiff had applied for 50 other jobs during six years of employment with them, but was laid off after made to train someone 30 years younger. The Defendant then claimed the seven most recent jobs which were still timely enough to dispute in the case, had all coincidentally been cancelled. This was later discovered to be untrue.

Judge Paul Diamond fully assisted in the deception as the Defendant is a major Pennsylvania political lobbying entity and donor. The Plaintiff’s evidence was extremely compelling, and also included allegations that executives had taken huge bonuses while freezing pay raises, while laying off employees because of funding cuts in 2011.  There was  no way the case should have been shot down on appeal, which is when it became obvious what was happening…the appellate court is part of the sham.

The Plaintiff has been unable to get another job because to discourage employment discrimination allegations the courts deliberately refuse to seal such cases. Obviously employers now google applicants names and would be hesitant to hire someone suing their previous employers…but please read on because the rest is important to understand the history behind this cabal.

These cabal members have very sordid backgrounds. Most got appointed because of one specific politician. At least six of these “judges” accused of fixing cases all paid their way onto the bench via Senator Arlen Specter. Their history clearly shows that they did not get to where they are because of their skills. Who are these people really?

The plot gets even thicker. Federal District Court Judge Paul Diamond who tossed the discrimination case, was Senator Specter’s campaign Treasurer and close friend for decades.. That is of course how Diamond went from being an assistant DA to a Federal judge. Most of them got bumped up to the Appellate Court, and have Paul Diamond to thank for their jobs, so forget about winning an appeal against him, unless its already in the script. At a fee of $505 each, appeals are a main source of revenue for the Federal court.

Petrese Tucker as President Judge would not answer the letter of inquiry sent to her for confirmation that the judges are being randomly assigned, according to the rules. Therefore it is likely Tucker makes sure specific cases go to Diamond or one of his other appointees like Sanchez, for immediate dismissal of all pro se cases.  Diamond “somehow” was assigned another unrelated case of this same Plaintiff which he of course dismissed. He is so arrogant ( or psychopathic),  that he refused to disqualify himself even though he was a defendent in the other case.

Pennsylvania even has the rules committee tied up.  Congressman Tom Marino- the former Assistant U.S. Attorney that had to resign because convicted billionaire mobster Louis Denaples accidentally used him as a reference for a casino license. Marino then went to work for Denaples for $250,000 year- after which he was able to run for Congress.. well that Tom is on the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Federal Judge D. Mike Fisher, who is the former Attorney General of Pennsylvania, is also a DeNaples disciple with tens of thousands in campaign contributions from him.  He also had contributions from Thomas Jefferson University and the law firm defending them who was Carianne Torrissi of Klehr Harrison, Harvey and  Branzburg, LLC. They were also major contributors to Senator Specter, who put Fisher on the federal bench. It appears Fisher’s consolation prize after losing against Fast Eddy Rendell in a 2002 run for Governor, was the federal judgeship.

But it doesn’t end there.  Samuel Alito-  the SCOTUS Judge was from the Third Circuit  – is Sirica’s bosom buddy. It has been alleged that  Alito was “too soft” on organized crime when 22 accused mobsters went free when he was prosecuting the case in New Jersey, before getting nominated to the Supreme Court. Scirica spoke at his nomination for SCOTUS. So anyone from Pennsylvania that tries to get heard before the Supreme Court, has to go through Alito, because he is the Third Circuit SCOTUS gatekeeper.  This cannot be working out very well for those that try for certiorari to the Supreme Court, who cannot get relief for state court due process violations through the federal district courts.

The protection from this level of corruption is supposed to be Congress- they have the duty and the power to initiate an investigative committee into the judiciary. But Congressman Brendan Boyle- with a brother Kevin in the state legislature- just refuses to do anything. They are just too heavily funded by the legal industry. These are crimes being committed under color of law and there is a criminal code for it 18 USC 242. Except it is not being enforced against judges anywhere in the country.

This is the reason why there needs to be term limits for every legislative office – both in state and federal government. Specter put about a dozen federal  judges on the bench because he was in office for over 30 years. He was able to be in office so long because he had a lot of money, some of which came from people he appointed to the bench. As a result these people were all associated before they even got into the courts, so there are conflicts of interest between every jurisdiction.

Lawyers are the only profession in the country that is completely self-regulating. Judge Scirica has been doing the speech circuit pontificating about how they must not allow the legislature to impose an OIG on them like they have been trying for 15 years. He claims it is a threat to their independence- but campaign contributions are just fine! Scirica sounds more like an underboss than a federal judge.

 It not only affects discrimination cases, it obstructs all other forms of civil rights, such as allegations of abuse in the prison system and complaints against state judges and public officials, which are challenged through this same jurisdiction. There is not one law enforcement agency that can or will stop them.

While the country is wasting resources in being distracted with nonsense about Russia, we are being destroyed from the inside. This path of organized crime from Harrisburg straight to SCOTUS is being covered up by Congressman Boyle. Having these miscreants serve for a life time is a complete disaster.  Democracy is completely dead. No hearings. No civil jury trials. But what do you expect from the state that gave us Porngate, Kids for Cash and is trying to rob poor old Bill Cosby before he dies?

Can all the kings horses and all the kings men put America back together again?



U.S. Federal Courts Refuse to Release Statistics on Judicial Decisions in Civil Rights Cases


Even with the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and establishment of the state Right To Know offices, government reform advocates often battle for years to obtain information which should be publicly available.   In America today,  millions of your tax dollars are paid to contracted law firms that file endless objections, at both the national and state levels for information requests.  Without a doubt, the most difficult nut to crack is the Judicial Branch, which has built a wall to conceal potentially revealing  data.

One judicial reform advocate attempted to investigate the Pennsylvania Eastern District Courts and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.    The inquiry was made directly to the U.S. Administration of Courts (AOC) in Washington, DC. Cases were requested of civil rights cases with the correlating names of federal judges,  in their decisions involving self-represented litigants (pro se is the legal term). That information could reveal patterns of judicial bias or other violations of due process.  Civil rights cases can involve such complaints as abuse by state court judges or discrimination law suits.

The answer from the  AOC (below the email thread can be viewed),  was that “judge-specific information cannot be released unless required to do so by law.” The ambiguity of this statement is only overshadowed by the absurdity of it. One would think that such data would be regularly reviewed  and published, for effective oversight of judges, to ensure the integrity of the U.S. federal courts. However, since the entire Judiciary is self-policing, no one really knows just how many citizens have been denied due process,  by specific judges, with the concealment of such information.

It has long been suspected that citizens who either cannot afford, or are attempting to circumvent outrageous legal fees, are faced with judicial prejudice when they represent themselves in court.  The largest area of pre-trial dismissal of cases has statistically been in civil rights claims- most specifically employment discrimination law suits, an area where litigants often represent themselves, and petition for a waiver of filing fees.  Approximately 77% of all employment discrimination law suits are dismissed before trial, by a single judge.

This control of case outcomes is accomplished predominantly by use of the “motion for summary judgment” (MSJ) ( F.R.C.P. 56). Do not be fooled by the fancy title -it is really quite simple. It has replaced jury trials with the power of one judge to dismiss any case. Its abuse began in the 1980’s,  with the rule originally intended to reduce frivolous filings, predominantly by incarcerated criminals. After the discovery process, which allows for the demands for evidence between both parties, the use of an MSJ allows individual judges to dismiss cases instead of granting a trial, based on how they think  a jury might find the facts of a case.

This MSJ is a “rule” – not a law- instituted by lawyers themselves, and not by the elected legislators. It is supposedly necessary for economic purposes to reduce meritless law suits. But its potential for abuse has become more than obvious in civil litigation,  with   only 1.1% of cases now allowed to  proceed to jury trial. The U.S. Constitution’s Seventh Amendment (Amendment VII) states “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved…. ”  Obviously, something got lost in the translation to  the court rules committees.  The banality of this rule has resulted in a massive decline in jury trials, and its abuse in the lower courts appears heavily supported by the appellate courts.

Another federal rule is being used against pro se litigants, who also often file “informa pauperis,” allowing them a waiver of filing fees, which have risen to upwards of $400 in federal courts. The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution adopted in 1868, which addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, surely intended to provide justice and protect for those that cannot afford legal counsel or filing fees. However, this federal rule intended to be used toward prisoners,  is now being used to allow a single judge to dismiss any civil case if it is filed informa pauperis, before the opposing party is even required to respond, under 28 U.S. Code Chapter 123- Fees and Costs at Section 1915.

There is a plethora of  acadmic scholarly research articles regarding the constitutionality of MSJ use, which has been buried in the vaults of law schools. Most agree that it has changed the legal system dramatically in a most undemocratic manner.  While they do not use the term “abuse, ” these scholars more politely cite other possible reasons for so many pre-trial dismissals – and they decline to focus on pro se litigants. They attribute it to perceived ineptness at court procedures, which have become increasingly complex- even for seasoned lawyers.  There  are also opinions that judges feel that discrimination has become obsolete with all of the agencies in place to address these issues, such as the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission(EEOC).

More compelling agendas stem from  the obvious evolution of the justice system into nothing more than a legal industry, focused purely on profit.  This collusion between the courts is easily facilitated by the ubiquitous national, federal, appellate, state and county lawyer unions – aka bar associations.   The bar associations certainly serve no other legitimate purpose than to provide venues for judges and lawyers to synchronize their control of the courts. The current strong  connections between politicians and members of the legal industry, fuel obligations to protect corporate donors against discrimination law suits, which are most commonly instituted by self-represented litigants.

When both parties are represented by lawyers, at the very least, it allows for the inevitable complicating  of litigation to maximize their hourly fees.  And if a represented party receives an award, between 33% and 50% percent of that award will go to a law firm. This has generated resentment for those who file for free and represent themselves. It is alleged by many court reform advocates that self-represented litigants are treated as pariahs, and are not allowed jury trials which often result in  sizeable awards in civil rights cases.

What is the Administration of Courts hiding?  The data that was denied by the courts, would give insight into patterns of constitutional violations of due process and judicial bias. The only way to identify such abuse would be to review MSJs granted by specific judicial districts – and even more pointedly- by specific judges within those districts. The criminal courts clearly are overburdened by frivolous inmate filings- however, the rule should never have been extended to civil cases. While the courts claim that MSJs are not unconstitutional, the obstruction of jury trials and prejudice against indigents is another question altogether.

Obstructing jury trials is contrary to every principle of fairness and justice in our now sinking democracy. The solutions are there,  but the public just has to speak louder. The problem is that people are not compelled to get involved until it effects them – which is then too late to avoid the catastrophic effects of judicial misconduct.

Class Action Scams


Why You Should Opt-Out

If you have ever received a notice in the mail inviting you to join in a class action lawsuit, or received an unexpected check for some negligible amount, please read on. These lawsuits are being generated not by the public, but by the lawyers. While they claim they perform a public service by controlling corporate corruption, the regulations are designed by the bar associations specifically to cycle money into their political machine and pockets, rather than for maintaining social order.  Instituting your own lawsuit would, if you prevailed, be substantially more rewarding.

Websites make class actions convenient with one-stop shopping, such as which has a whole cornucopia of topics you can search, to join in a lawsuit which you never would have thought of  yourself. These lawsuits are so commonplace in the news, which places them in a false positive light, society assumes they have little effect on their lives.  But while approximately 42% of all adults are now unemployed, this may be one of the reasons.

While they may sometimes seem like a nice little windfall, it is nothing compared to the fees generated for the attorneys.  One recent class action was based on “non-emergency telephone calls from Capital One’s dialer(s) to cellular telephones through the use of an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice in an attempt to collect on a credit card debt ..”   This did not sound like misconduct so egregious as to have caused much damage.

The outcome of the case is rather stunning, considering the cause of action.   The final order of the lawsuit stated that 1,378,534 people were “Plaintiffs” in this class action against Capital One Bank and its vendors. Five of those people were “class representatives” that received “incentive awards.”  The settlement total was a whopping $75,455,098.74. The “class representatives” each got $5000 – for a total of $25,000.  The other 1,378,529 “plaintiffs” got $39.10 each, for a total payout of $53,900,679.40.  But as far as individual benefits,  it was lawyers who by far reaped in the rewards.

Doing More Harm Than Good

Without a doubt, the most astounding (or disturbing) part is the attorney fees in the amount of $15,668,265.00, for litigation that lasted only a few months and never went to trial.  And it is  a mystery of what happened to the remaining $5,861,154.30?

It is clear that justice is not the objective here, to allow such a frivolous action to cause such a huge debt;   the attorneys on both sides went through the motions of advocating for clients.  Damages, if there were any,  are not going to the injured party, but into the pockets of racketeering “officers of the court.”  These “officers” are keeping an elite group in power. It is no secret that lawyers are the largest contributors to judicial campaigns, so the judge has this on his mind when allowing a case to move forward.  Whether or not it is an appointed federal judge or an elected county judge, they all are members of the inter-related national and local bar associations.  These bar associations lobby heavily in congress at the state and national levels.

The settlement agreement reveals a few other questionable items.  If you don’t cash the check within 180 days- where does it go? It states that it goes to a currently “unnamed nonprofit” organization.  It settled with amazing speed -in about three months, considering individual pro se litigants average five years(self-represented litigant). I  have seen how people are treated when money is not readily available for re-circulating to the courts and lawyers; the tactic is to drag out the litigation creating installment payments.  If you refuse to pay an attorney, you will most likely receive no justice at all.

The terms of the agreement also stated that no identities may ever be revealed as to the “plaintiffs” (other than the “class representatives”).  So therefore, it is not possible to determine if these people really had a claim or if they were ever mailed or received their payments.  There is a clause that this class action cannot be released to the news media.    It also stated that the Defendants never agreed to any wrongdoing or liability and merely agreed to the settlement under threat of being dragged through litigation and bad publicity,  for years.

But who really pays in the end and is this just a backend method of funding politics?   It decreases corporate ability to employ people and increases  lay-offs. Since Capital One is a bank, you can be sure the costs are passed on to the consumer through increased overdraft fees, credit card interest rates and other bank fees. Actually in 2012, Capital One paid out another $210 million in settlements- with two  million consumers getting about $70 each.  Assuming it was again ~20% for the attorneys  that’s about $40 million in legal fees.  Total securities settlements last year were  $1.1 billion, the largest settlement amount in 2014 was $265 million, compared with $2.5 billion in the prior year.  At 20-30% fees for attorneys, do the math.

The effects are even more damaging to society from medical malpractice and product liability class actions, driving up the cost of healthcare, prescriptions and just about every commodity you can think of. Of course, you can always jump on the bandwagon, and maybe get picked as a “class representative.” A few thousands dollars may give you temporary relief for all the unemployment and inflation caused by these scams, that really only benefit the courts and lawyers.  Or you can exempt yourself, so that this money does not go into the hands of political parties whose agenda you do not support. Clearly, this practice must be outlawed; there is no benefit to society whatsoever.

Game Over for the Judiciary
Are Judge and Lawyers Around the Country Finally Realizing Its Game Over?

“The Fraternity “- The Corruption of the Legal System Exposed by a Judge



"The once honorable profession of law now fully functions as a bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside the elected Congress and state legislatures.”

-- Justice John F. Molloy

When I began practicing law in 1946, justice was much simpler. I joined a small Tucson practice at a salary of $250 a month, excellent compensation for a beginning lawyer. There was no paralegal staff or expensive artwork on the walls. In those days, the judicial system was straightforward and efficient. Decisions were handed down by judges who applied the law as outlined by the Constitution and state legislatures. Cases went to trial in a month or two, not years. In the courtroom, the focus was on uncovering and determining truth and fact.

I charged clients by what I was able to accomplish for them. The clock did not start ticking the minute they walked through the door.

Looking back

The legal profession has evolved dramatically during my 87 years. I am a second-generation lawyer from an Irish immigrant family that settled in Yuma. My father, who passed the Bar with a fifth-grade education, ended up arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court during his career.

The law changed dramatically during my years in the profession. For example, when I accepted my first appointment as a Pima County judge in 1957, I saw that lawyers expected me to act more as a referee than a judge. The county court I presided over resembled a gladiator arena, with dueling lawyers jockeying for points and one-upping each other with calculated and ingenuous briefs

That was just the beginning. By the time I ended my 50-year career as a trial attorney, judge and president of southern Arizona's largest law firm, I no longer had confidence in the legal fraternity I had participated in and, yes, profited from.

I was the ultimate insider, but as I looked back, I felt I had to write a book about serious issues in the legal profession and the implications for clients and society as a whole. The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion was 10 years in the making and has become my call to action for legal reform.

Disturbing evolution

Our Constitution intended that only elected lawmakers be permitted to create law. Yet judges create their own law in the judicial system based on their own opinions and rulings. It's called case law, and it is churned out daily through the rulings of judges. When a judge hands down a ruling and that ruling survives appeal with the next tier of judges, it then becomes case law, or legal precedent. This now happens so consistently that we've become more subject to the case rulings of judges rather than to laws made by the lawmaking bodies outlined in our Constitution.

This case-law system is a constitutional nightmare because it continuously modifies constitutional intent. For lawyers, however, it creates endless business opportunities. That's because case law is technically complicated and requires a lawyer's expertise to guide and move you through the system. The judicial system may begin with enacted laws, but the variations that result from a judge's application of case law all too often change the ultimate meaning.

Lawyer domination

When a lawyer puts on a robe and takes the bench, he or she is called a judge. But in reality, when judges look down from the bench they are lawyers looking upon fellow members of their fraternity. In any other area of the free-enterprise system, this would be seen as a conflict of interest.

When a lawyer takes an oath as a judge, it merely enhances the ruling class of lawyers and judges. First of all, in Maricopa and Pima counties, judges are not elected but nominated by committees of lawyers, along with concerned citizens. How can they be expected not to be beholden to those who elevated them to the bench?

When they leave the bench, many return to large and successful law firms that leverage their names and relationships.




fraternitycoverThe Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion

Business of law

The concept of "time" has been converted into enormous revenue for lawyers. The profession has adopted elaborate systems where clients are billed for a lawyer's time in six-minute increments. The paralegal profession is another brainchild of the fraternity, created as an additional tracking and revenue center. High powered firms have departmentalized their services into separate profit centers for probate and trusts, trial, commercial, and so forth.

The once-honorable profession of law now fully functions as a bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside the elected Congress and state legislatures.

Bureaucratic design

Today the skill and gamesmanship of lawyers, not the truth, often determine the outcome of a case. And we lawyers love it. All the tools are there to obscure and confound. The system's process of discovery and the exclusionary rule often work to keep vital information off-limits to jurors and make cases so convoluted and complex that only lawyers and judges understand them.

The net effect has been to increase our need for lawyers, create more work for them, clog the courts and ensure that most cases never go to trial and are, instead, plea-bargained and compromised. All the while the clock is ticking, and the monster is being fed.

The sullying of American law has resulted in a fountain of money for law professionals while the common people, who are increasingly affected by lawyer-driven changes and an expensive, self-serving bureaucracy, are left confused and ill-served. Today, it is estimated that 70 percent of low-to-middle-income citizens can no longer afford the cost of justice in America. What would our Founding Fathers think?

This devolution of lawmaking by the judiciary has been subtle, taking place incrementally over decades. But today, it's engrained in our legal system, and few even question it. But the result is clear. Individuals can no longer participate in the legal system.

It has become too complex and too expensive, all the while feeding our dependency on lawyers. By complicating the law, lawyers have achieved the ultimate job security. Gone are the days when American courts functioned to serve justice simply and swiftly. It is estimated that 95 million legal actions now pass through the courts annually, and the time and expense for a plaintiff or defendant in our legal system can be absolutely overwhelming.

Surely it's time to question what has happened to our justice system and to wonder if it is possible to return to a system that truly does protect us from wrongs.

A lawyer from Tuscon, Arizona, John Fitzgerald Molloy (b. 1917) was elected to the Superior Court bench where he served for seven years as both a juvenile court and trial bench judge. He subsequently was elected to the Court of Appeals where he authored over 300 appellate opinions, including the final Miranda decision for the Arizona Supreme Court. During that period, he also served as president of the Arizona Judge's Association. After 12 years, Molloy returned to private practice to become president of the largest law firm in southern Arizona. His book has received widespread praise for its candor and disquieting truths. (Photo courtesy of Paragon House)

Copyright 2004, Paragon House

From an Internet released preview of the book by John Fitzgerald Molloy, The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion, Paragon House, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2004. Reprinted in accordance with the "fair use" provision of Title 17 U.S.C. § 107 for a non-profit educational purpose.