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

** Law School - Sowing the Seeds of Judicial Corruption **

Expand Messages
  • jail4judges
    J.A.I.L. News Journal _____________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California February 15, 2003
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 15, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
       
      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      _____________________________________________________
      Los Angeles, California                                      February 15, 2003
       
      HotSeat4Judges/M-Th/5pmPT   TheJAILerMakers   What?MeWarden?
      T-ShirtMe!
                      FedJAIL4FedJudges                   E-mail&hosting
       
       
      Law School - Sowing the Seeds of Judicial Corruption
      Students are taught that law is not what the Law says,
      but what the Court says the law says.
      J.A.I.L. will end this practice!
       
       
       Another red letter day in the law was when I heard that the judge who cheated me out of $100,000 claimed that although he broke the law, he was "immune." I asked the court how this could possibly be Constitutional. They said that "judges have absolute immunity."
      -- Lawrence C. Agee
       
       
      [By Lawrence C. Agee, Oregon JAILer]:
       
      I appreciated the post from JAILer Jim L. [Jim Lorenz, Utah] He stayed in law school one year. This is my second. 
       
      I chose to go to law school after being defrauded by lawyers three times. I 
      agree with Jim. The professors speak of "the law" and pontificate that they 
      know "the law." Yet when some are challenged with "the law" they often seem to find an excuse why "the law" does not apply. Most professors will not look you in the eye when they are forced to explain why "the law" has clearly failed in a case. There is always an excuse to justify their position. 
       
      To illustrate, I was once insulted by my Contracts professor when I 
      challenged why a man who was not a father was forced to pay child support for a child determined not to be his. I still do not understand.
       
      I was speaking to a student the other day who is taking immigration law. 
      There is a test that immigrants take to become U.S. citizens. She asked me 
      one of the questions on the exam "what is the supreme law of the land?" I 
      answered "the Constitution, of course." This was correct! Yet, I am amazed to see the Constitution is rarely mentioned in law school, except in Con Law. 
       
      I met a man at the judicial retention hearings I attended. He was an immigrant from Sicily, has a great family, 3 nice kids. He took that oath. The lawyers foreclosed on his home after a $66,000 judgment against him for asking his neighbors not to run over his children. Of course the money that may have sent his kids to college is now in the pocket of a lawyer who shortly thereafter dropped dead. He will tell you the Constitution looks like a good document but the judges didn't acknowledge it. He calls it "the big lie." He is now very regretful he came to America.
       
      I recalled one of my own cases. When I had my opportunity to present my side of a case in 1998, I began to speak. After 3 minutes, I was cut off. An award of $100,000 was given, essentially sending me into bankruptcy. I said this was unconstitutional. They said it was not. My appellate lawyer told me "hey, people lose $70,000 in the stock market everyday" and to "put it behind you."  I told him what I thought of him and walked out of his office. (The award has subsequently grown to 100k due to 12% interest on the lien on my home which I can't pay). Of course, when it came to the $700 balance on his $10,000 bill, there was no limit to the extremes he would go to to collect "what was his." And of course he dumped my case before the appeal was completed. 
       
      The other thing I was always dismayed to hear were the comments by numerous other lawyers: "Perjury, ha! It happens all the time." I walked out of several other offices upon hearing this. This is contrary to the things I 
      learned in legal ethics. I guess real lawyers quickly forget that class.
       
      Another red letter day in the law was when I heard that the judge who cheated me out of $100,000 claimed that although he broke the law, he was "immune." I asked the court how this could possibly be Constitutional. They said that "judges have absolute immunity." Then they said something about saying some magic words and I didn't understand how the magic words made a difference. The judge who cheated me by the way, sits on the
      "Supreme Court" of the state where this occurred and it would seem to me that he must have heard of "due process." Apparently not.
       
      The topper though was when they cheated me out of my ability to earn a 
      living. I guess suing judges is frowned upon in our society. I understand the 
      "public interest" demands that judges be left alone so they can do their jobs. I wonder why I am not entitled to the same considerations? I guess that 
      old "equal protection clause" is also a little antiquated.
       
      They tell us here in law school we must learn to "think like lawyers." I don't seem to be getting the hang of it. I'm now $40,000 poorer, but I still think perjury is wrong and that there is no reason to protect judges who help their lawyer buddies steal money. I guess I am just a little slow. I guess both Jim and I see somthing the rest of them don't.
       
      Lawrence C. Agee
      Oregon JAILer

      [Response from Dave Donley, Vermont JAILer-In-Chief]
      Looks good, Dr. Agee. We need to educate the public and shatter the myths. This could be another example of how the www.jail4judges.org web site benefits us all with public education, awareness and providing a "gathering
      ground" for the enemies of our enemies- corrupt treasonous, thieving, lying judges and lawyers serving their self-serving agendas rather than the "ends of
      justice" or public welfare!!!
       
      Have you found the copies of the letters I sent former Governor Dean and Gerry Spence yet? I quoted from Spence's book, "With Justice for None - Destroying a Great American Myth," some of his thoughts about misinformed, self-aggrandizing and deluded law professors.  There is much fodder there for destroying the myth that the courts are halls of justice. The
      Vermont Bar Journals attached to the Spence letter demonstrate the practice of law in Vermont is "less a science" and more a business and practice of Political demagoguery.

      I wrote that letter to Spence when I heard he was coming to Vermont Law school to speak at their Graduation ceremonies in 2001. As you will see in the letter I let him know "Vermont's judiciary is nothing to be proud of." His response and speech indicated he agreed (get a local lawyer, soon!!!)  He missed a good opportunity to challenge some Bar brain who spoke before him brainwashing the new recruits with admonishments of "overlooking judges' and jurors' bias, you'll have that occasionally." They all turn a blind eye to the excesses of their brethren at the BAR (how many corrupt, perjuring, embezzling, conniving judges or lawyers have you heard of going to jail in this land of "equal justice under the law"?), to maintain their self- serving bench-made power structure (professional courtesy you know).
       
      Spence did thunder out a few good thought provokers though. He pointed
      out "the law can be a bully!,..., if you are going to work for the dead-government or Corporations, I don't want anything to do with you,..., if you are for people, I am there,... what is justice, well that might be difficult to explain,..., what is injustice, that is easier to identify, your forefathers knew what injustices were, they FOUGHT WARS over INJUSTICES!!!"

      One of the BAR association talking points is that we are anarchists for challenging the inequities of the "status quo."  I would counter that they are the anarchists for not abiding by the "Supreme law of the Land-- the U.S. Constitution" .....
       
      Advocating for legislation as proposed by www.jail4judges.org is the reasonable alternative to what is brewing all across the nation as evidenced by the many "property, children, family, ..., rights" groups and Marches forming in direct response to "judicial tyranny."  The big question is, will the powers- that-be learn from the lessons in history and what an attitude of indifference and "let them eat cake" results in?  Or, will the "reasonable man standard" prevail and open-public debate be allowed to better insure the "general
      welfare, common defense, domestic tranquility, the Supreme Law of the Land - the U.S. Constitution."

      Sincerely,
      Dave Donley, JAILer-In-Chie
      f
      Vermont JAIL4Judges
      davedonley@...


      J.A.I.L. is an acronym for Judicial Accountability Initiative Law
      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 accountability!
      JAIL may be supported at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
      To subscribe or be removed:  add-remove-jail@...
      E-Groups sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
      Open forum to make your voice heard JAIL-SoundOff@egroups.com
      Ask not what J.A.I.L. can do for me, but ask what I can do for J.A.I.L.
       
      "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
       
      "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
      striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.