KIDS FOR CASH is a riveting look behind the notorious judicial scandal that rocked the nation. Beyond the millions paid and high stakes corruption, KIDS FOR CASH exposes a shocking American secret. In the wake of the shootings at Columbine, a small town celebrates a charismatic judge who is hell-bent on keeping kids in line... until one parent dares to question the motives behind his brand of justice.
Kids for cash scandal (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)
Luzerne County Courthouse in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania
The "kids for cash" scandal unfolded in 2008 over judicial kickbacks at the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. Two judges, President Judge Mark Ciavarella and Senior Judge Michael Conahan, were accused of accepting money from Robert Mericle, builder of two private, for-profit juvenile facilities, in return for contracting with the facilities and imposing harsh sentences on juveniles brought before their courts to increase the number of inmates in the detention centers.
For example, Ciavarella sentenced children to extended stays in juvenile detention for offenses as minimal as mocking a principal on Myspace, trespassing in a vacant building, and shoplifting DVDs from Wal-mart. Ciavarella and Conahan pled guilty on February 13, 2009, pursuant to a plea agreement, to federal charges of honest services fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States (failing to report income to the Internal Revenue Service, known as tax evasion) in connection with receiving $2.6 million in payments from managers at PA Child Care in Pittston Township and its sister company Western PA Child Care in Butler County. The plea agreement was later voided by a federal judge, who was dissatisfied with the post-plea conduct of the defendants, and the two judges charged subsequently withdrew their guilty pleas, raising the possibility of a criminal trial.
A federal grand jury in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania returned a 48 count indictment against Ciavarella and Conahan including racketeering, fraud, money laundering, extortion, bribery and federal tax violations on September 9, 2009. Conahan entered a revised guilty plea to one count of racketeering conspiracy in July 2010. In a verdict reached at the conclusion of a jury trial, Ciavarella was convicted February 18, 2011 on 12 of the 39 counts he faced.
Following the original plea agreement, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ordered an investigation of the cases handled by the judges and following its outcome overturned several hundred convictions of youths in Luzerne County. The Juvenile Law Center filed a class action lawsuit against the judges and numerous other parties, and the state legislature created a commission to investigate the wide-ranging juvenile justice problems in the county.
So the question which is never asked is WHY DID IT TAKE SO LONG FOR SOMEONE TO REACT TO THE VOLUMINOUS REPORTS ABOUT THE CORRUPT JUDGES? The Judicial Conduct Board ignored EVERY complaint and usurped all responsibility to address the judicial crimes. THEY THEN DID NOTHING while the people were terrorized..
THE ANSWER: The law indicates it is not lawful to prosecute a corrupt judge. Not by a lawyer, prosecutor, district attorney or attorney general. Those who must follow Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
The same rule exists in every state. Same name. Same number. Same dead end for the victims of injustice.
DELIBERATE OBSTRUCTION OF REMEDIES FOR THE INJUSTICE
The bigger question is WHY DID THE SHERIFFs who are by constitution and law the Chief Law Enforcement Officers in each County lose their power? It seems that judges and lawyers somehow reduced the Sheriffs responsibilities to prisoner taxi service, foreclosure sales and protection of the judges. Protecting the corrupt as well as the lawful.
The County Sheriff is not required to follow the Rules of Professional Conduct. The Sheriffs could have acted. The Sheriffs could act. The Sheriffs have a responsibility to act. Yet, somehow the Sheriffs have been convinced by the County District Attorneys that the Sheriff has no power.
The Constitutional Challenge, and the sedition it exposed, demonstrates why all of the law enforcement power was not placed under the one branch of government.
In order for the American Bar Association to conceal their sedition of every state government, and their continued protection of corrupt and criminal judges, it was necessary to disenfranchise the Sheriffs from law enforcement. AND THEY DID.
This is not an issue of judicial immunity which can be viewed as occasionally unfair. The issue is deliberate unlawful actions by judges who refuse to address their errors, and the judges who are bound by law to ignore their corruption. Judges who must sacrifice their integrity to conceal the lack of integrity of the corrupt.
Judicial immunity protects judges from prosecution from unintentional errors in judgment. Immunity is a necessity for the courts to function. Judges are permitted to make bad decisions - as long as a judge follows the process and the law, the judge has jurisdiction to act.
When a judge fails to follow the process, the judge does not have jurisdiction to act as The Court. When a judge acts without jurisdiction, they are acting without the protection of judicial immunity. This is why they get multiple opportunities to fix their errors. Reconsideration, appeals, etc... Judge's maintain their immunity even when they just don't want to believe the testimony. So, if the judge doesn't like you, YES THE JUDGE CAN RULE AGAINST YOU... as long as the proper process was followed for a hearing. A HUGE part of the job of being a judge is making certain that the judge has jurisdiction in the matter, otherwise the judge has no authority to order anyone to do anything.
When the court lacks jurisdiction... their actions, when documented and presented to the court, present the case for criminal prosecution against the judge. Any deliberate actions to destroy a litigant in the court subsequent to reports of judicial misconduct and crime are retaliatory and bring disgrace upon the entire judiciary. All the judge must do is follow the process, and then they have immunity for their malice.
For example:
1. When Judge Rhonda Daniele concealed her order in my family court matter for 3 years while it was used to leverage every proceeding against me.
No Hearing. No Jurisdiction. Not Valid.
2. When Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio issued a deliberately defective and void order as a divorce decree. When raised to her immediate attention that she lacked jurisdiction to issue the order, she ignored it and issued another order compounding the error. When presented to the court, she again ignored the defect. When appealed to the Superior Court, she acknowledged the Appeal ordering a list of the errors involved in her order. She then prevented the appeal from being transmitted to the Superior Court.
No process. No Jurisdiction. Not valid.
3. When Judge Richard Haas was asked to conduct a penalty for a contempt that did not occur, he was set up to not have jurisdiction in that, AS WELL AS the penalty being part of a void order based on a void order based on a void order based on a defective order. Judge Haas never scheduled the hearing.
The only way to save the judge's integrity was to do nothing.
4. When Judge Garrett Page conducted that hearing with the knowledge that jurisdication for the matter was with the Superior Court which was awaiting the Appeal paperwork, Judge Page ignored the pending Appeal. Judge Page ignored the nested void orders. Judge Page ignored the defective orders and the evidence on the court record and documented in testimony in his courtroom. Judge Page issued a contempt penalty without a finding of contempt. That penalty was over $300,000.00. This was done with deliberate intent. When a person fails to pay a contempt fine, they can be incarcerated until the amount is satisfied. Contempt penalties are unlike other monetary judgements.
No law. No process. No Jurisdication. Not valid.
5. When the Superior Court of Pennsylvania went to hear the appeal on Judge Page's absurd order, Montgomery County did not send the exhibits or the documents for the matter.
No law. No process. No power to compel the Lower Court. Not valid.
6. Judge Garrett Page contacts Court Reporters to prevent transcripts from being produced and delivered. Judge Page cancelled the permission granted to proceed In FORMA PAUPERIS. All done without hearings, without explanations, without any regard for justice. All done to conceal the criminal actions of the 17 judges before him on the matter.. as the clear criminal actions by Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio effectively voided all judicial immunity.
No Law. No process. Not valid.
7. When Judge Carolyn Tornetta Carluccio sent the sheriff to execute her void and defective order, the judge was expanding the liability for her criminal action to include the Sheriff's department.
Actions by other parties based on void orders are subject to prosecution.
Those following a judge's orders are responsible for making certain the orders are proper. THAT SIMPLY DOESN'T HAPPEN. No on ever confirms the jurisdiction or authority of a judge. Even when presented with the errors and defects, they ignore and act. It's not a courtesy to ignore a judge's corruption. It's becomes a conspiracy.
There is a considerable amount of intimidation involved when it comes to concealing judicial corruption. Even the Montgomery County Employee Ethics rules immorally and unethically require silence. It is unlawful to be a whistleblower in Montgomery County.
For these reasons many counties have begun electing and appointing lawyers to the row officer and county management positions. Clerk of Courts, Controller, Coroner, District Attorney, Jury Commissioners, Prothonotary, Recorder of Deeds, Register of Wills, Sheriff, Treasurer, Court Administration, Domestic Relations. Where a Row officer is a lawyer, they must follow Rule 1.6 and must take no action to expose the corruption and crimes of the court.
The Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6 of the Rules of Professional Conduct demonstrate the loss of civil rights and liberties. That was the primary issue. It was the information from Pennsylvania Attorney General Kathleen Kane which exposed the law improperly enacted by the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Their own act of judicial misconduct was immediately impossible to lawfully address - as they would expose their misconduct if they took action.
The conspiracy involved to get away with denying peoples rights has been very elaborate. Right in front of a distracted American Public, the American Bar Association - the lawyers and the judges - executed a plan which resulted in the loss of rights for American Citizens. They wrote themselves into a corner they could not lawfully escape.
1. Rule 1.6 is unconstitutional.
2. A Sheriff is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the County, NOT THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY. The reason for that is very clear. The reason everyone was convinced otherwise shows the extent of the conspiracy to avoid prosecution.
After Operation Graylord, the best way to protect the judiciary from losing their integrity was to have a judiciary with integrity... NOT to make it impossible to prosecute the corrupt judges. That is plain stupid and wrong on every level.
When you remove Rule 1.6 all of the other laws and aspects of immunities work. It's how the system was designed.
Judges who commit crimes by not following due process, court procedures and the Law, are deliberately acting without jurisdiction and MUST be prosecuted.
The American Bar Association is the biggest and most corrupt racketeering organization ever to exist in the US. Their sedition and treason must be addressed. They deliberately destroyed the integrity of the judiciary nationwide. There is no excusing their crime.
The law is for the protection of the people...
Every American is just one act of injustice away from lawfully losing their constitutional rights and protection of the law. Once triggered sacrificing the integrity of the judiciary and the reputation of lawyers. Injustice is leveraged for further injustice with no escape. Ever. RULE 1.6 Confidentiality is the cause - improperly enacted in EVERY state. Profiting from injustice... the authors of the rule... The American Bar Association and it's members.
Sunday, November 17, 2013
KIDS FOR CASH (in Theaters February 2014)
Labels:
Appeal,
Attorney,
Bar,
Carolyn Tornetta,
CASH,
Court,
Hearing,
involved,
Judge,
KIDS,
lawyer,
matter,
Montgomery,
No Jurisdication,
No Jurisdiction,
No Law,
order,
Pennsylvania,
Professional Conduct
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment