Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meeting

Expand Messages
  • JAIL4Judges
    This is one reason why J.A.I.L. was developed, because the judicial misconduct procedure doesn t work. As long as judges remain as the sole judging authority,
    Message 1 of 2 , Sep 2, 2008
    • 0 Attachment

      This is one reason why J.A.I.L. was developed, because the judicial misconduct procedure doesn't work. As long as judges remain as the sole judging authority, justice won't prevail in that judicial system. The People have to be made part of the equation, to oversee and act upon the corruption inherent with an unaccountable judiciary. Otherwise the judicial system will continue to have a blank check for wrongdoing, no matter how malicious or corrupt-- the Constitution notwithstanding. Judges, as part of government (the way it's supposed to be) are subservient to the People, the "guardians of the People's rights" as the US Supreme Court has ruled numerous times. However, we know that in practice, the guardians of our rights are the ones who violate them routinely with impunity. See e.g., http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj7n2/cj7n2-13.pdf "The irony is unmistakable: those who are the guardians of the Constitution are themselves privileged to violate it with corrupt impunity."

      J.A.I.L. is the only answer!

      -Barbie
      victoryusa@...




      -----Original Message-----
      From: Charles Heckman [mailto:cwheckman@...]
      Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 10:33 AM
      To: dr.richard.cordero.esq@...; 'zhenlu zhang'
      Cc: ironman_89122@...; isidoror@...; jail4judges@egroups.com; james_liu29@...; jeritoms@...; jjzbj@...; jmiller@...; jon.roland@...; jonmoseley@...; judgewatch@...; justice@...; justice96@...; justiceenforcers@...; kara@...; lanzisera@...; law-discuss@yahoogroups.com; markadamsjdmba@...; martinjiml@...; mblibertarian7@...; mccray.michael@...; me@...; mgwynnlaw@...; michael@...; miked59@...; mlanson@...; news@...; nofearinstitute@...; opinion@...; ruthnk@...; scotsman@...; secretjusticepr@...; shantigirl@...; sherreelowe@...; spirit@...; stormyt@...; studio43@...; trvl@...; tulanelink@...; uiht@...; vern_md@...; vernon-sinn@...; JAIL4Judges; wiggins_k@...; yong01776@...; yongzhu@...; youngping2003too@...; zcrenshaw@...
      Subject: RE: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meeting

      Dear Dr. Cordero:
         Your information is absolutely sound, but I would just like to add that the reason so many people complain about the courts is that the system you describe fails to provide litigants in lawsuits against government agencies or powerful opponents in the private sector with any chance at all.  We know that the appeals courts usually rubber stamp decisions, often without any of the judges even reading the submissions.  Complaints against a judge have less than a 100 to 1 chance of being successful, and even those that are result only in a slap on the wrist for the judge.
         Making judges liable for malicious and corrupt actions will be necessary before any improvement can be seen.  Until then, aggrieved citizens may want to make an official record of how they were wronged by the judicial system by filing a lawsuit, but they have little chance of finding redress for their grievances.  The absolute constitutional right to trial by jury is violated by judges every day.
      Charles Heckman



      From: Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...: zhenlu32@...: andyrice@...; ckennedy292002@...; dxyue@...; corderoric@...; ablern0103@...; adztec@...; ahs@...; albert204@...; americansforlegalreform@...; amoj_main@yahoogroups.com; arbradorsey@...; b4chess2007@...; baileysmom59@...; barbaramorrisfamily@...; basixnow@...; beddi9@...; benitez.flavia@...; betsy@...; beverlymann2@...; billbutler921@...; brendashinn@...; brmiller@...; carlottta7344@...; carol88shi@...; charles_montgomery@...; che8888@...; cherylmoyer@...; cja@...; cordero.ric@...; corruptcourts@...; ctkangaroocourt@...; cwheckman@...; d.johnston@...; danielhanley@...; desco1kr@...; devinekristi@...; dms5ciig@...; docjohnson@...; dogpatch1940@...; donrufty@...; drventuress@...; eagotist@...; editor@...; egypt_48@...; elena@...; enlaw98@...; esoxlucios@...; esquiregen@...; fcnprod@...; frankknee@...; frarchet@...; garytrust@...; ghom@...; gostlps@...; gzerman@...; hannahphaynes@...; Huckleberryb@...; injuredworkers@...; injusticebusters@...; ironman_89122@...; isidoror@...; jail4judges@egroups.com; james_liu29@...; jeritoms@...; jjzbj@...; jmiller@...; jon.roland@...; jonmoseley@...; judgewatch@...; justice@...; justice96@...; justiceenforcers@...; kara@...; lanzisera@...; law-discuss@yahoogroups.com; markadamsjdmba@...; martinjiml@...; mblibertarian7@...; mccray.michael@...; ME@...; cordero.ric@...; mgwynnlaw@...; michael@...; miked59@...; mlanson@...; Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...; news@...; nofearinstitute@...; opinion@...; ruthnk@...; corderoric@...; scotsman@...; secretjusticepr@...; shantigirl@...; sherreelowe@...; spirit@...; stormyt@...; studio43@...; trvl@...; tulanelink@...; uiht@...; vern_md@...; vernon-sinn@...; victoryusa@...; VJobst@...; wellsofjustice@...; wiggins_k@...; yong01776@...; yongzhu@...; youngping2003too@...; zcrenshaw@...; zhenlu32@...; edwright@...; divinetherapy2@...; msright@...; peterpophamatlantausa@...; 0116cf@...; taffyrice@...: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meetingDate: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 10:40:53 -0400




      Dear Advocate Zhang and Judicial Reform Advocates,

      If the act that you want to sue a federal judge on is judicial in nature, e.g. that he made a mistake of law or abused his discretion, you cannot sue a judge; you must go up on appeal.

      If the act is non-judicial because the judge “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts, or…is unable to discharge all the duties of office by reason of mental or physical disability”, §351, such as:

      undue delay in making a ruling or deciding a motion or a case
      conflict of interests
      bribery
      corruption
      abuse of judicial power
      bias
      prejudice
      incompetence
      neglect
      mental or physical disability preventing the discharge of official duties

      you can file a judicial conduct or disability complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§351-364 with the chief judge of the circuit in question.
      http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28usc351-364.pdf

      To do so, you must follow the Rules for Conduct and Disability Proceedings:

      http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_complaints/adopted_rules_11mar8.pdf  

      It is all but certain that your complaint will be dismissed without any investigation, as 99.88% of the 7,462 filed between 1997-2006 were, according to the official statistics. See the graphs and links to the statistics at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org

      You can sue a federal judge for non-judicial acts, but your suit is all but certain not to survive a motion for summary judgment on the unjustified claim of judicial immunity.
      http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/no_judicial_immunity.pdf

      If you want to help yourself and others similarly situated, you now have the opportunity to contribute to the widest dissemination possible, particularly to bloggers, the media, politicians and lawyers, of the Newsrelease below and accompanying open letter, which request the Judicial Conference of the U.S., the highest policy-making body of the Federal Judiciary, to discuss a judicial misconduct complaint that was submitted to test the judges’ application of the new Rules.

      That Conference will take place on September 16-17, hence the dissemination must take place right away.
      Sincerely,
      Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
      ************************************


      for the Subject line: CA2 Chief Judge’s disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming U.S. Judicial Conference meeting
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     
      Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
      Newsrelease


      The Judicial Misconduct Complaint and The Case, DeLano, that Reveal
      Institutionalized Coordination of Wrongdoing
      in the Federal Judiciary


      Judges’ lack of accountability for their exercise of their power over people's property, liberty, and even lives leads in practice to the exercise of absolute power, which corrupts absolutely. This is starkly illustrated by a case, DeLano, which deals with a 39-year veteran of the banking industry who at the time of going “bankrupt” was and remained working precisely in the bankruptcy department of a major bank. This bankruptcy system insider’s fraudulent bankruptcy, involving concealment of assets and false statement of financial affairs, reveals that judges, trustees, and other insiders and court officers are running a bankruptcy fraud scheme.

      Their scheme has been supported by the federal bankruptcy judge, WBNY, who decided DeLano, the district judge, WDNY, who covered it up on appeal, and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which protected the bankruptcy judge, whom it had reappointed to a second term of 14 years under 28 U.S.C. §152. The case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. See its statement of facts and legal analysis at:
      http://judicial-discipline-reform.org/SCt_chambers/8application_4aug8/1DrRCordero-SCtJustices_4aug8.pdf 

      To show the corruptive effect of unaccountable judicial power, a judicial misconduct complaint against the bankruptcy judge has also been filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act (28 U.S.C. §351) and the Rules for Conduct and Disability Proceedings.

      As required by these legal instruments, the complaint was filed with the chief circuit judge of the federal circuit court that reappointed that judge, namely, Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, CA2. His failure to discharge the duties imposed on him by the Act and the Rules in handling this complaint, no. 02-08-90073, discussed in the open letter below to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., is a manifestation itself of judicial unaccountability that disregards the law in self-interest. See the letter, the complaint, and a proposed discovery order at:
      http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/JNinfo/DrCordero_newsrelease29aug8.pdf  .

      It was also sent to all the members of the Judicial Conference of the U.S., which is the highest policy-making body of the Federal Judiciary and presided over by Chief Justice Roberts. The Conference will hold its next semi-annual meeting on September 16-17, at the Supreme Court, (202)479-3011 and -3211. It will be followed by separate meetings of district and circuit judges at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus Circle NE, in Washington, D.C., where its secretariat is maintained by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, (202) 502-2400, http://www.uscourts.gov/. See a photo of the Building at
      http://www.uscourts.gov/library/annualreports/2006/2006_annualreport.pdf, page 54.

      The Service List accompanying the letter contains the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the Conference members, including CA2 Chief Judge Jacobs and all the other chief circuit judges. It will make it easier for readers, particularly journalists and judicial reform advocates, to inquire of them whether they will cause the complaint to be investigated or will tolerate the cover-up of the bankruptcy fraud scheme revealed by the DeLano case.

      Indeed, the judges’ official statistics for 1997-2006 show that they engaged in the systematic dismissal of judicial misconduct complaints without any investigation: In those 10 years, 7,462 complaints were filed, but the judges appointed only 7 special investigative committees and disciplined only 9 of their peers. They dismissed out of hand 99.88% of all complaints! Thereby they self-exonerated for doing what is forbidden and disregarding what is commanded.

      Thus, in the 219 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, of all the thousands of federal judges only 7 have been impeached and removed from the bench. On average that is 1 every 31 years, a period much longer than the average years of service of judges. This has fostered the mentality among them that they can do and not do anything because they do not have to fear any adverse consequences from either abusing their judicial power, having a disability, or engaging in illegal activity.

      Since they will cover for each other, they have assured themselves of impunity for their conduct. This explains why federal judges have felt free to institutionalize coordinated wrongdoing, for they have as a matter of fact placed themselves where no individual or class of people is entitled to be in our democratic society: Above the law.

      See links to the Act, the Rules, and the official statistics on impeachments and judicial misconduct complaints as well as graphs illustrating the latter at:
       http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

      Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
      Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
      Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...



      **************************************

      August 15, 2008


      Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.
      Presiding Officer of the Judicial Conference
      c/o Supreme Court of the United States
      1 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20543

      (Sample of letter sent to each member of the Judicial Conference.)

      Re: Judicial conduct complaint of 6/6/8, no. 02-08-90073, against J. John C. Ninfo, II, WBNY


      Dear Mr. Chief Justice Roberts,

      Over two months ago, I gave you, as presiding officer of the Judicial Conference, notice that I had filed the above captioned complaint to be processed by Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, CA2, under the new Rules for Judicial Conduct and Disability Proceedings (R #). To date CJ Jacobs has not notified me of having taken any action concerning this complaint.

      However, R 8(b) provides that “The clerk must promptly send copies of a complaint…to the chief judge…and to each subject [complained-about] judge” and R 11(a) adds that “the chief judge must review it”. In addition, R 11(f) requires that “If some or all of the complaint is not dismissed or concluded, the chief judge must promptly appoint a special committee to investigate the complaint or any relevant portion of it and to make recommendations to the judicial council”. (emphasis added) The tenor of the Rules is that action must be taken expeditiously.

      Indeed, this follows from the provisions of the law itself, which at 28 U.S.C.§351(a) states as grounds for complaining against a judge his or her having “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts”. Subsection (b) even provides that the chief judge “in the interest of the effective and expeditious administration of [that] business…may…identify a complaint…and dispense with filing of a written complaint”.

      Thereafter §352 expressly provides for “(a) expeditious review; limited inquiry. –The chief judge shall expeditiously review any complaint”. What is more, §353(a) requires that “If the chief judge does not enter an order under section 352(b), the chief judge shall promptly- (1) appoint…a special committee to investigate…(2) certify the complaint and any other documents…to each member and (3) provide written notice to the complainant of the action taken” (emphasis added).

      The need for prompt action on my complaint is exacerbated by the pending proceedings before Judge Ninfo in Pfuntner v. Trustee Gordon et al., 02-2230, to which I am a party and from which he has refused to recuse himself. It would be a denial of due process to force me to litigate before him since in that case and in the related DeLano, 04-20280, he has engaged in a series of acts so consistently in disregard of the law and the facts and biased toward the local parties and bankruptcy system insiders, and against me, the sole non-local outsider, as to form a pattern of coordinated wrongdoing in support of a bankruptcy fraud scheme.

      Judge Ninfo must now continue his abusive conduct to cover up his past abuse. Thus, he does not show even “the appearance of impartiality” needed for an objective observer to reasonably expect just and fair proceedings from him. Liteky v. United States, 510 U. S. 540, 548 (1994).

      Therefore, I respectfully request that you use the Rules’ ‘informal means for disposing of complaints’ to cause:

      a) the appointment of a special investigative committee,

      b) the certification of the proposed production order (¶20.f infra), and

      c) the placement of the subject of the fraud scheme on the September agenda of the Judicial Conference.

      Meantime, I look forward to hearing from you.

      Sincerely,

      Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
      Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
      Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...





      _________________________________________________________________
      Be the filmmaker you always wanted to be—learn how to burn a DVD with Windows®.
      http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/108588797/direct/01/

      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
      Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.14/1647 - Release Date: 9/2/2008 6:02 AM

    • JAIL4Judges
      Yes Charles. It s taking a long time for the People of America to see the light. What s amazing is that even well educated and respected attorneys are so
      Message 2 of 2 , Sep 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment

        Yes Charles. It's taking a long time for the People  of America to see the light. What's amazing is that even "well educated" and respected attorneys are so naïve, as to think the system will correct itself. We can petition Congress or any other part of so-called "government" all we want. It's not the "right to petition" that counts,  but the "right to petition government for REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES."  The system in power does not offer the People redress. See http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2007/2007-05-16.html

        We don't have a real government-- we have a power foreign to our Constitution that has usurped government and taken over control of this country. Can't the People see that??  The Constitution means NOTHING to those in power. The oaths are just window dressing to fool the People. Only the People will be able to bring this country back to a constitutional republic intended by the organic Constitution. Until they do, it'll be "business as usual" --despotism by default. See http://www.jail4judges.org/JNJ_Library/2007/2007-12-20.html

        -Barbie-
        victoryusajail4judges.org
        ____________________________________________________________________

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Charles Heckman [
        mailto:cwheckman@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 7:46 AM
        To: JAIL4Judges
        Subject: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meeting

        I can only add that the Sixth Amendment guarantees each defendant in a criminal case trial by jury, and the Seventh Amendment guarantees the same for litigants in a civil lawsuit where more than $20 is at stake.  Each decision by a judge in a trial for which both party have not specifically waived their right to trial by jury is a violation of civil rights.  The decision is fraudulent because the judge is claiming to have a right to dismiss that is specifically denied him in the Constitution.  All remedies denied to the litigant whose civil rights have been violated are stolen from him through fraud perpetrated by a corrupt clique.  As the number of victims grows, American will gradually become aware of the fact that they are no long free, and that their rights are no longer respected.
        Charles Heckman



        Subject: RE: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meetingDate: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 20:33:01 -0700From: victoryusa@...: cwheckman@...; dr.richard.cordero.esq@...; zhenlu32@...: ironman_89122@...; isidoror@...; jail4judges@egroups.com; james_liu29@...; jeritoms@...; jjzbj@...; jmiller@...; jon.roland@...; jonmoseley@...; judgewatch@...; justice@...; justice96@...; justiceenforcers@...; kara@...; lanzisera@...; law-discuss@yahoogroups.com; markadamsjdmba@...; martinjiml@...; mblibertarian7@...; mccray.michael@...; me@...; mgwynnlaw@...; michael@...; miked59@...; mlanson@...; news@...; nofearinstitute@...; opinion@...; ruthnk@...; scotsman@...; secretjusticepr@...; shantigirl@...; sherreelowe@...; spirit@...; stormyt@...; studio43@...; trvl@...; tulanelink@...; uiht@...; vern_md@...; vernon-sinn@...; wiggins_k@...; yong01776@...; yongzhu@...; youngping2003too@...; zcrenshaw@...

        This is one reason why J.A.I.L. was developed, because the judicial misconduct procedure doesn't work. As long as judges remain as the sole judging authority, justice won't prevail in that judicial system. The People have to be made part of the equation, to oversee and act upon the corruption inherent with an unaccountable judiciary. Otherwise the judicial system will continue to have a blank check for wrongdoing, no matter how malicious or corrupt-- the Constitution notwithstanding. Judges, as part of government (the way it's supposed to be) are subservient to the People, the "guardians of the People's rights" as the US Supreme Court has ruled numerous times. However, we know that in practice, the guardians of our rights are the ones who violate them routinely with impunity. See e.g., http://www.cato.org/pubs/journal/cj7n2/cj7n2-13.pdf "The irony is unmistakable: those who are the guardians of the Constitution are themselves privileged to violate it with corrupt impunity."J.A.I.L. is the only answer!-Barbievictoryusa@...

        -----Original Message-----From: Charles Heckman [mailto:cwheckman@...]Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 10:33 AMTo: dr.richard.cordero.esq@...; 'zhenlu zhang'Cc: ironman_89122@...; isidoror@...; jail4judges@egroups.com; james_liu29@...; jeritoms@...; jjzbj@...; jmiller@...; jon.roland@...; jonmoseley@...; judgewatch@...; justice@...; justice96@...; justiceenforcers@...; kara@...; lanzisera@...; law-discuss@yahoogroups.com; markadamsjdmba@...; martinjiml@...; mblibertarian7@...; mccray.michael@...; me@...; mgwynnlaw@...; michael@...; miked59@...; mlanson@...; news@...; nofearinstitute@...; opinion@...; ruthnk@...; scotsman@...; secretjusticepr@...; shantigirl@...; sherreelowe@...; spirit@...; stormyt@...; studio43@...; trvl@...; tulanelink@...; uiht@...; vern_md@...; vernon-sinn@...; JAIL4Judges; wiggins_k@...; yong01776@...; yongzhu@...; youngping2003too@...; zcrenshaw@...: RE: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meetingDear Dr. Cordero:   Your information is absolutely sound, but I would just like to add that the reason so many people complain about the courts is that the system you describe fails to provide litigants in lawsuits against government agencies or powerful opponents in the private sector with any chance at all.  We know that the appeals courts usually rubber stamp decisions, often without any of the judges even reading the submissions.  Complaints against a judge have less than a 100 to 1 chance of being successful, and even those that are result only in a slap on the wrist for the judge.   Making judges liable for malicious and corrupt actions will be necessary before any improvement can be seen.  Until then, aggrieved citizens may want to make an official record of how they were wronged by the judicial system by filing a lawsuit, but they have little chance of finding redress for their grievances.  The absolute constitutional right to trial by jury is violated by judges every day.Charles HeckmanFrom: Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...: zhenlu32@...: andyrice@...; ckennedy292002@...; dxyue@...; corderoric@...; ablern0103@...; adztec@...; ahs@...; albert204@...; americansforlegalreform@...; amoj_main@yahoogroups.com; arbradorsey@...; b4chess2007@...; baileysmom59@...; barbaramorrisfamily@...; basixnow@...; beddi9@...; benitez.flavia@...; betsy@...; beverlymann2@...; billbutler921@...; brendashinn@...; brmiller@...; carlottta7344@...; carol88shi@...; charles_montgomery@...; che8888@...; cherylmoyer@...; cja@...; cordero.ric@...; corruptcourts@...; ctkangaroocourt@...; cwheckman@...; d.johnston@...; danielhanley@...; desco1kr@...; devinekristi@...; dms5ciig@...; docjohnson@...; dogpatch1940@...; donrufty@...; drventuress@...; eagotist@...; editor@...; egypt_48@...; elena@...; enlaw98@...; esoxlucios@...; esquiregen@...; fcnprod@...; frankknee@...; frarchet@...; garytrust@...; ghom@...; gostlps@...; gzerman@...; hannahphaynes@...; Huckleberryb@...; injuredworkers@...; injusticebusters@...; ironman_89122@...; isidoror@...; jail4judges@egroups.com; james_liu29@...; jeritoms@...; jjzbj@...; jmiller@...; jon.roland@...; jonmoseley@...; judgewatch@...; justice@...; justice96@...; justiceenforcers@...; kara@...; lanzisera@...; law-discuss@yahoogroups.com; markadamsjdmba@...; martinjiml@...; mblibertarian7@...; mccray.michael@...; ME@...; cordero.ric@...; mgwynnlaw@...; michael@...; miked59@...; mlanson@...; Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...; news@...; nofearinstitute@...; opinion@...; ruthnk@...; corderoric@...; scotsman@...; secretjusticepr@...; shantigirl@...; sherreelowe@...; spirit@...; stormyt@...; studio43@...; trvl@...; tulanelink@...; uiht@...; vern_md@...; vernon-sinn@...; victoryusa@...; VJobst@...; wellsofjustice@...; wiggins_k@...; yong01776@...; yongzhu@...; youngping2003too@...; zcrenshaw@...; zhenlu32@...; edwright@...; divinetherapy2@...; msright@...; peterpophamatlantausa@...; 0116cf@...; taffyrice@...: CA2 Chief Judge's disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming Judicial Conference meetingDate: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 10:40:53 -0400Dear Advocate Zhang and Judicial Reform Advocates,If the act that you want to sue a federal judge on is judicial in nature, e.g. that he made a mistake of law or abused his discretion, you cannot sue a judge; you must go up on appeal.If the act is non-judicial because the judge “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts, or…is unable to discharge all the duties of office by reason of mental or physical disability”, §351, such as:undue delay in making a ruling or deciding a motion or a caseconflict of interestsbriberycorruptionabuse of judicial powerbiasprejudiceincompetenceneglectmental or physical disability preventing the discharge of official dutiesyou can file a judicial conduct or disability complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§351-364 with the chief judge of the circuit in question.http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/28usc351-364.pdfTo do so, you must follow the Rules for Conduct and Disability Proceedings:http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_complaints/adopted_rules_11mar8.pdf  It is all but certain that your complaint will be dismissed without any investigation, as 99.88% of the 7,462 filed between 1997-2006 were, according to the official statistics. See the graphs and links to the statistics at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.orgYou can sue a federal judge for non-judicial acts, but your suit is all but certain not to survive a motion for summary judgment on the unjustified claim of judicial immunity.http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/no_judicial_immunity.pdfIf you want to help yourself and others similarly situated, you now have the opportunity to contribute to the widest dissemination possible, particularly to bloggers, the media, politicians and lawyers, of the Newsrelease below and accompanying open letter, which request the Judicial Conference of the U.S., the highest policy-making body of the Federal Judiciary, to discuss a judicial misconduct complaint that was submitted to test the judges’ application of the new Rules.That Conference will take place on September 16-17, hence the dissemination must take place right away.Sincerely,Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.************************************for the Subject line: CA2 Chief Judge’s disregard for judicial misconduct law & upcoming U.S. Judicial Conference meeting                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Judicial-Discipline-Reform.orgNewsreleaseThe Judicial Misconduct Complaint and The Case, DeLano, that RevealInstitutionalized Coordination of Wrongdoingin the Federal JudiciaryJudges’ lack of accountability for their exercise of their power over people's property, liberty, and even lives leads in practice to the exercise of absolute power, which corrupts absolutely. This is starkly illustrated by a case, DeLano, which deals with a 39-year veteran of the banking industry who at the time of going “bankrupt” was and remained working precisely in the bankruptcy department of a major bank. This bankruptcy system insider’s fraudulent bankruptcy, involving concealment of assets and false statement of financial affairs, reveals that judges, trustees, and other insiders and court officers are running a bankruptcy fraud scheme.Their scheme has been supported by the federal bankruptcy judge, WBNY, who decided DeLano, the district judge, WDNY, who covered it up on appeal, and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which protected the bankruptcy judge, whom it had reappointed to a second term of 14 years under 28 U.S.C. §152. The case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. See its statement of facts and legal analysis at:http://judicial-discipline-reform.org/SCt_chambers/8application_4aug8/1DrRCordero-SCtJustices_4aug8.pdf To show the corruptive effect of unaccountable judicial power, a judicial misconduct complaint against the bankruptcy judge has also been filed under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act (28 U.S.C. §351) and the Rules for Conduct and Disability Proceedings.As required by these legal instruments, the complaint was filed with the chief circuit judge of the federal circuit court that reappointed that judge, namely, Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, CA2. His failure to discharge the duties imposed on him by the Act and the Rules in handling this complaint, no. 02-08-90073, discussed in the open letter below to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr., is a manifestation itself of judicial unaccountability that disregards the law in self-interest. See the letter, the complaint, and a proposed discovery order at:http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/JNinfo/DrCordero_newsrelease29aug8.pdf  .It was also sent to all the members of the Judicial Conference of the U.S., which is the highest policy-making body of the Federal Judiciary and presided over by Chief Justice Roberts. The Conference will hold its next semi-annual meeting on September 16-17, at the Supreme Court, (202)479-3011 and -3211. It will be followed by separate meetings of district and circuit judges at the Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus Circle NE, in Washington, D.C., where its secretariat is maintained by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, (202) 502-2400, http://www.uscourts.gov/. See a photo of the Building athttp://www.uscourts.gov/library/annualreports/2006/2006_annualreport.pdf, page 54.The Service List accompanying the letter contains the names, addresses, and phone numbers of the Conference members, including CA2 Chief Judge Jacobs and all the other chief circuit judges. It will make it easier for readers, particularly journalists and judicial reform advocates, to inquire of them whether they will cause the complaint to be investigated or will tolerate the cover-up of the bankruptcy fraud scheme revealed by the DeLano case.Indeed, the judges’ official statistics for 1997-2006 show that they engaged in the systematic dismissal of judicial misconduct complaints without any investigation: In those 10 years, 7,462 complaints were filed, but the judges appointed only 7 special investigative committees and disciplined only 9 of their peers. They dismissed out of hand 99.88% of all complaints! Thereby they self-exonerated for doing what is forbidden and disregarding what is commanded.Thus, in the 219 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, of all the thousands of federal judges only 7 have been impeached and removed from the bench. On average that is 1 every 31 years, a period much longer than the average years of service of judges. This has fostered the mentality among them that they can do and not do anything because they do not have to fear any adverse consequences from either abusing their judicial power, having a disability, or engaging in illegal activity.Since they will cover for each other, they have assured themselves of impunity for their conduct. This explains why federal judges have felt free to institutionalize coordinated wrongdoing, for they have as a matter of fact placed themselves where no individual or class of people is entitled to be in our democratic society: Above the law.See links to the Act, the Rules, and the official statistics on impeachments and judicial misconduct complaints as well as graphs illustrating the latter at: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.orgDr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@...**************************************August 15, 2008Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr.Presiding Officer of the Judicial Conferencec/o Supreme Court of the United States1 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20543(Sample of letter sent to each member of the Judicial Conference.)Re: Judicial conduct complaint of 6/6/8, no. 02-08-90073, against J. John C. Ninfo, II, WBNYDear Mr. Chief Justice Roberts,Over two months ago, I gave you, as presiding officer of the Judicial Conference, notice that I had filed the above captioned complaint to be processed by Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs, CA2, under the new Rules for Judicial Conduct and Disability Proceedings (R #). To date CJ Jacobs has not notified me of having taken any action concerning this complaint.However, R 8(b) provides that “The clerk must promptly send copies of a complaint…to the chief judge…and to each subject [complained-about] judge” and R 11(a) adds that “the chief judge must review it”. In addition, R 11(f) requires that “If some or all of the complaint is not dismissed or concluded, the chief judge must promptly appoint a special committee to investigate the complaint or any relevant portion of it and to make recommendations to the judicial council”. (emphasis added) The tenor of the Rules is that action must be taken expeditiously.Indeed, this follows from the provisions of the law itself, which at 28 U.S.C.§351(a) states as grounds for complaining against a judge his or her having “engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts”. Subsection (b) even provides that the chief judge “in the interest of the effective and expeditious administration of [that] business…may…identify a complaint…and dispense with filing of a written complaint”.Thereafter §352 expressly provides for “(a) expeditious review; limited inquiry. –The chief judge shall expeditiously review any complaint”. What is more, §353(a) requires that “If the chief judge does not enter an order under section 352(b), the chief judge shall promptly- (1) appoint…a special committee to investigate…(2) certify the complaint and any other documents…to each member and (3) provide written notice to the complainant of the action taken” (emphasis added).The need for prompt action on my complaint is exacerbated by the pending proceedings before Judge Ninfo in Pfuntner v. Trustee Gordon et al., 02-2230, to which I am a party and from which he has refused to recuse himself. It would be a denial of due process to force me to litigate before him since in that case and in the related DeLano, 04-20280, he has engaged in a series of acts so consistently in disregard of the law and the facts and biased toward the local parties and bankruptcy system insiders, and against me, the sole non-local outsider, as to form a pattern of coordinated wrongdoing in support of a bankruptcy fraud scheme.Judge Ninfo must now continue his abusive conduct to cover up his past abuse. Thus, he does not show even “the appearance of impartiality” needed for an objective observer to reasonably expect just and fair proceedings from him. Liteky v. United States, 510 U. S. 540, 548 (1994).Therefore, I respectfully request that you use the Rules’ ‘informal means for disposing of complaints’ to cause:a) the appointment of a special investigative committee,b) the certification of the proposed production order (¶20.f infra), andc) the placement of the subject of the fraud scheme on the September agenda of the Judicial Conference.Meantime, I look forward to hearing from you.Sincerely,Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.orgDr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@..._________________________________________________________________Be the filmmaker you always wanted to be—learn how to burn a DVD with Windows®.http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/108588797/direct/01/No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.comVersion: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.14/1647 - Release Date: 9/2/2008 6:02 AM

        _________________________________________________________________
        Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live.
        http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/msnnkwxp1020093185mrt/direct/01/

        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
        Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.15/1648 - Release Date: 9/2/2008 5:29 PM
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.