J.A.I.L. News Journal
April 30, 2002
The Farce of Judicial
by David Donley
The situation is the same in every state. The Boards
dismiss complaints against judges claiming they do not have the funding to
investigate yet it is the State's Supreme Courts that have repeatedly failed to
allocate sufficient funding for investigations even while they allocate
themselves pay increases, increased pensions, benefits,....
Another popular excuse is "lack of guiding case law,"
which doesn't stop them from looking to other jurisdictions or creating new case
law when it serves their purpose. The boards policing (protecting) the legal
profession are designed to protect the image of the profession not the "public".
The failure to discipline errant judges goes beyond
negligence to malfeasance and by rights should be considered a RICO action for
all the collusion involved from the Governors office to the
Not too long ago I submitted Miss Sassower's article,
"Argument Without Merit: The Empty promise of Judicial Discipline" in a court
pleading accompanied by an affidavit swearing under pain of perjury to the
veracity of my pleadings. I had downloaded the article from her web site (copies
have the web address on them). The article is no longer available on the
net. A few of us have enquired if this was the result of a court injunction or
Elena's free choice? If you read this Elena maybe you could respond. I happen to
like the "... Empty Promise Of Judicial Discipline" article as it documents how
efforts to create accountability are frustrated by the courts and legislators
The first Amendment was intended to protect speech
critical of government and keep the people informed of the character and conduct
of their government officials yet the legal profession has totally subverted
that major check against government abuse of authority by keeping complaints
If you consider the many groups forming around this
country in direct response to the many abuses perpetrated on the populace by an
"unaccountable judiciary" it becomes obvious the only ones they have deceived is
themselves. A key word search of the NET, "Legal Reform" will bring you to
the top 5% most frequented sites on the Net, many of them blue ribbon decorated.
The sheer volume of related sites and numbers viewing them indicates there is a
growing swell of the population that is concerned with the way our legal system
is operating. We the People want the Republic our founding Fathers
envisioned, "of, by, and for the People". The only way to accomplish this is to
create accountability within the judiciary and make our courts a public domain
not the personal money mills for the Bench and BAR that they are. Force
judges to abide by the "Supreme Law of the Land" our Constitution and many of
the other social problems and injustices perpetrated on the public by corrupt
officials will disappear.
When corrupt government officials realize
Accountability is for everyone not just the common masses they will act
David A. Donley, JIC,
reports the following news article:
METROLAND ~ 4/26/02
Appeal for Justice
Lawsuit alleges corruption at the state Commission on
Judicial Conduct-and seeks to disqualify all members of the Court of Appeals
from hearing it May 1 is a fitting day for Elena Ruth Sassower to serve her
papers with state Attorney General Eliot Spitzer and the state Commission on
Judicial Conduct. May 1, after all, is Law Day-a day established by
congressional resolution in 1961 to celebrate liberty, equality and justice
under the law.
Likewise, the point of Sassower's public-interest suit,
a proceeding against the Commission on Judicial Conduct alleging that it is
corrupt and has failed to fulfill its mandate to investigate civilians'
complaints against judges, is to draw attention to people's rights to "justice
under law." Or, in some instances, the lack thereof.
As coordinator for the Center for Judicial
Accountability Inc., a nonprofit citizens' organization that for more than a
decade has been dedicated to revealing the secretive and insular nature of the
commission, Sassower is filing a motion with the Court of Appeals to compel the
organization to investigate all complaints against judges, as required by state
law. As it stands now, the commission investigates complaints at its own
discretion, and critics say that all too often, complaints against politically
connected, higher-level judges are dismissed; when a complaint against a
powerful judge is heard, the resulting punishment often is little more than a
slap on the wrist.
The charges and evidence in Sassower's petition are
intensely critical of the commission, its administrators and members, and of
Spitzer, whom Sassower says has helped insulate the commission from public
accountability and judges from receiving complete investigations. In essence,
she has assembled an exhaustive set of legal papers that implicates officials as
high up as Gov. George Pataki in what she calls "willful misconduct," and an
attempt to subvert oversight of the judiciary-especially members of the
judiciary who have friends in high places.
So far, Sassower's case has been dismissed out of hand
by lower courts; she points out, however, that her case was steered before
judges who had a vested interest in seeing its demise, although the assistant
solicitor general Carol Fischer, acting on behalf of the attorney general's
office, argued in 2000 that "any question of judicial bias is meritless."
Practically no one in state government or the court system is willing comment on
This time around, Sassower's case is going to be
particularly difficult for the courts to contend with because she is asking that
none of the judges sitting on the Court of Appeals be allowed to preside over
"What is most dramatic [about this case] is not the
fact that I'm going to be serving my notice of appeal on the commission and its
attorney, the state attorney general," Sassower commented. "But that I am also
accompanying that with an unusual motion to disqualify the judges of the Court
According to Sassower, all save one of the Appeals
Court judges have "personal and pecuniary" interests in her case.
Take, for instance, Associate Judge Albert Rosenblatt.
In 1998, Sassower made a judicial misconduct complaint against him, charging
that he committed perjury when he was being interviewed for his position by the
commission in charge of appointing Appeals Court judges, the Commission on
Judicial Nomination. Sassower believes that Rosenblatt was not forthcoming with
the commission when it asked him whether he had ever been a subject of
misconduct complaints. The Commission on Judicial Conduct dismissed Sassower's
complaint without investigation in December 1998. It was after failing to
receive satisfactory answers to her repeated questions about the dismissal of
her complaint-and subsequent related complaints-that Sassower began her legal
proceedings against the Commission on Judicial Conduct.
"It's the complaint against him based upon his perjury
in his application to the court of appeals which was dismissed by the
commission, so he has direct interest," Sassower said. She said that both Judge
George Bundy Smith and Judge Victoria Graffeo were involved in the events that
gave rise to the initial suit-the "ramming through" of the approval of
Rosenblatt despite complaints against his appointment-and should also be
disqualified from the case.
As for Chief Judge Judith Kaye, Sassower said that over
the past two years, she has provided her with full copies of her complaints and
lawsuit against the commission: "I said, 'You need to appoint a special
inspector general [to investigate].' . . . But what does she do? She says she
has no authority. I say she sure does have the authority to undertake an
official investigation. So I filed a misconduct complaint [against her] with the
commission based on the ethical rules that a judge must take appropriate action
when faced with evidence of violative conduct taking place in front of him."
Judge Carmen Ciparik ought to be disqualified, Sassower
contended, because she served on the commission from 1985 through 1993.
Judge Howard Levine should be disqualified, she said,
because he sat on a panel hearing a case brought by Sassower's mother, Doris
Sassower, which alleged corruption in election laws as it pertains to judges.
The case resulted in the abrupt and unconditional suspension of Doris Sassower's
law license without a hearing or notice of charges.
The only Appeals Court judge who is not somehow
directly involved with the case is Richard Wesley. But Sassower says that he
should also be disqualified because of the "appearance that he cannot be fair
and impartial" if his colleagues are all implicated in the suit.
"Because virtually every judge in the state is under
the commission's disciplinary jurisdiction and because the criminal
ramifications of this lawsuit reach this state's most powerful leaders upon whom
judges are directly and immediately dependent and with whom they have personal
and professional relationships," Sassower's court papers state, "I raised
legitimate issues of judicial disqualification and disclosure in the courts . .
. Their disqualifying interest is based on participation in the events giving
rise to this lawsuit or in the systematic governmental corruption it exposes-as
to which they bear disciplinary and criminal liability."
Sassower acknowledged that her suit has already been
denied by both the Supreme and Appellate courts in the past, but she said she's
not going to be dissuaded, even if Appeals Court refuses her again: "I did not
bring this case with the idea that the public's rights would be vindicated in
the court," she said. "I brought this case because, if the courts are corrupt
from bottom to top, I was going to put it all together in a neat package where
it could be presented to the public in a neat form. . . . The public needs to
know what is going on with judiciary discipline and judicial
J.A.I.L. is an acronym for Judicial Accountability Initiative
JAIL's very informative website is found at www.jail4judges.org
JAIL proposes a
unique new addition to our form of government.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is
dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
JAIL is spreading across America like a
fast moving wildfire!
JAIL is making inroads into Congress for federal
JAIL may be supported at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA
To subscribe or be removed: AddRemove@...
E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
"Give me your lives, your fortunes, and your sacred
and I will give you your
- Ron Branson