Arrested (rotten) Judges - State Jusicial Conduct Organizations
From: Robert Marlett [mailto:ceo@...]
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 2:36 PM
Subject: Re: Arrested (rotten) Judges - State Jusicial Conduct Organizations
While getting judges to recuse themselves may be effective in a single case,
Something I know, the Code of Judicial Conduct that most states have adopted requires a judge to be fair and impartial. When a judge gets recused, it is embarrassing to him; it means he has done a poor job of acting. When his poor acting disrupts judicial administration enough he will be examined by the judicial discipline committee (I believe they actually do something, just not where we can see it and applaud.) and he may even get a suggestion that he resign.
and may work in some states ( but certainly won't in some... its dangerous to even try it in some parts of Texas )
I don’t think there is as much difference between the states as you suggest. I’ve done work in more than 30 states and the judges seem equally corrupt and biased to me. It seems harder to get a federal judge to recuse but that’s probably because I haven’t figured it out yet. I’d like to tangle with one of those dangerous judges in Texas ; my experience is, the more corrupt and intimidating they are; the harder they fall. Jahuwah resists the proud but gives grace to the humble. James 4:6. Jahuwah the Mighty Ruler is exalted in justice. Isa. 5:16. The Father hates injustice and wants to help us deal with unjust judges in order that he may be exalted. Isa. 10:1-4.
it does nothing about the overall problem.
I have a vision. J I see many judges recused and other judges traveling all over the state to take their place; living out of suitcases; away from their families and wives; turning on each other because of the inconvenience caused by their fellow judges’ poor acting and resulting unjust, biased, actions/decisions.
Certainly it can be, and is, an admirable accomplishment in any case it works in, though.
Certainly, the next judge up has been given a lesson by the paperwork he finds in the file recusing the prior judge; you will not stand for bias/prejudice in your case; you recognize it; and, if you see it again, you will not hesitate to use the same tool again on him; you better treat me right. Gerry Spence says in one of his books, “A biased judge is no judge at all.” He also says, “There is no point in even talking to a biased judge.” I signed recusal affidavits for one father that was getting the shaft on child custody. Affidavits plural because he kept getting judges that were not fair and impartial and having to recuse them. Finally, he got a fair judge that gave him custody that was acceptable.
Incidentally, I found case law that says your new judge can review the prior judge’s actions and straighten out the incorrect ones.
on the big picture, finding an effective way to beat and trim judicial immunity,
As I see it, civil RICO has already accomplished this. Yes, I understand, that when you bring a suit against a judge using civil RICO, another judge will hear it, and, that judge will give immunity to the other judge where none exists as a matter of law. It’s a matter of professional courtesy, however, will the second judge see it coming that you intend to add him to the suit on a conspiracy/complicity theory. Once he’s added, he can no longer hear the case because he is a party. When a new judge takes his place and sees what you have done to the second judge he will be motivated to pay attention to what you have to say, regardless of whether there are judges involved. Wouldn’t he have a tendency to let the case go to a jury and let them make the decision regarding those judges fate? That seems to be their mode of operation, blame it on the jury. The trick is to make that principle work for you as a plaintiff. Now it’s on you to make your case to the jury regarding the crimes the judges committed. Now, this is premised on the concept that you have done your research and can write some good paperwork that will not let the judge defendant off on summary judgment or motion to dismiss.
A lawyer would probably not take this approach. Once a lawyer biases a judge against himself, he can no longer practice in that court. In fact, it would be unwise for anyone to use him as counsel. Doing so would be an exercise in futility; when all the motions are denied, off to the appellate court he’d go with his client in tow.
and getting enough political pressure on legislators ( in most cases) to get the dirty ones impeached should be a far bigger, but far better, strategy and goal.
My friend, an ABA certified paralegal and a lover of truth and justice, and I just finished a conversation that was prompted by the above comment. After repeatedly experiencing injustice in the courts, she has been aggressively pursuing a legislative remedy for 3-4 years. She has knocked on legislatures doors, met with them, and spent considerable time discussing the problem with them. She has been given the opportunity to testify in different hearing in the legislature on injustice in the courts. She called that whole effort a travesty. She got to testify against a judge that some lesbians succeeded in starting impeachment proceedings against. She says that all of his judge and lawyer buddies were allowed to testify as long as they wanted. Anybody that had been screwed in his court was put off for hours and hours until almost all of them had left without testifying. When she was allowed to testify they told her to keep it to two minutes; they were ready to go home. When she was adamant that she would take the same time everyone else was allowed the legislatures began to shuffle papers, read, and talk to one another until she was done.
Now, my friend has done something that has been quite effective in her opinion. She got involved in reviewing the rotten decisions issuing out of Colorado Courts for this web page:
When she has confirmed that a decision issued by a judge is contrary to the law they publish it on this site. She says that they got a call from a CO Supreme Court Clerk to let them know that they had misspelled a particular judge’s name; so the CO Supreme Court let them know in a round about way that they were monitoring the site. She says that nearly every judge they shined the light on in such a manner is now off the bench. She says that not one of those judges has threatened or sued for libel.
The tactic I like the most is guerilla in nature. I like to set the judge up using scriptural tactics and then when he sins, forgive him. I call it judge rehabilitation. I feel like exposed biased can be dealt with; concealed bias cannot. Once your judge has been rehabilitated, it’s like having your judge on a leash; hence I’ve coined the phrase “judge on a leash.” Once you’ve forgiven him, he thinks your alright and will show up for your case wearing his impartial judge hat, watching for reasons to rule in your favor. Bear
PHONE #s: 970-330-3883/720-203-5142 c.
For mailing: Excellence Unlimited, 2830 27th St. Ln. #B115, Greeley , CO 80634
BEAR'S WEB PAGES: