BUSH APPOINTEE in Northern District of New York, Deals Right to Dissent a Death Blow! Options

[Livyjr]

"Bush's Judges Already Making Their Mark"

By NANCY BENAC, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Wendy Long, counsel for the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, said that when it comes to the courts, Bush "gets it" in a way that even his father and Reagan did not.

His nominees "understand the problems with the way the Constitution has been interpreted and will go about fixing that in their own decisions," she said.

"Political intimidation is seen in rural court - Berlin town justice says he will fight his removal from bench by state panel"

By BOB GARDINIER, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 4, 2007

BERLIN -- A town justice's alleged meddling in politics during the 2004 elections began an investigation that also uncovered judicial improprieties and led the state Commission on Judicial Conduct to remove him from the bench.

The decision by the 11-member commission, made on the advice of Robert H. Tembeckjian, its administrator and counsel, said Republican Justice John T. Greaney "knowingly produced and filed fraudulent candidate nominating petitions" for Independence and Conservative party members before the primary elections in 2004.

Greaney, 71, was elected in January 2004 and known as a tough law-and-order justice in this town of 1,901 in eastern Rensselaer County.

He recently took a major role in establishing a town curfew.

But Greaney has been known more over the years for his political activity for the Republican Party in the eastern part of the county.

He issued rulings from the bench while town Republican chairman, a position he has held for two decades, and he has long been active in county politics.

Retired during his time on the bench, he had worked at the county Department of Employment and Training.

Before that, he was a state Senate staffer.

Greaney said he was fighting the charges and had not stepped down.

"I have an attorney and cannot discuss it further," Greaney said.

Greaney has 30 days from Dec. 26 to file an appeal of the ruling with the Appellate Divisions of the state Supreme Court.

If he does not file an appeal, he will automatically be removed after that time has elapsed, Tembeckjian said.

Town officials, including Supervisor Sandra Slattery, said they had yet to see the commission's findings and could not comment.

According to the report, around July 2004, Greaney collected signatures on designating petitions for Independence and Conservative party candidates for local office.

Committee officials often try to get the signatures to secure the third-party line for their major party or candidates that party is backing.

The investigation showed some signatures were forged and, in one case, a man named on a ballot was not even aware he was being put up for public office.

Greaney also allegedly filed the fraudulent petitions with the Rensselaer County Board of Elections.

"We got some complaints, but we could not investigate because he is a judge," said county Democratic Elections Commissioner Edward McDonough.

"We had to turn the complaints over to the Commission on Judicial Conduct, and that got their investigation started."

Greaney also refused to cooperate with the commission's investigation by declining to answer questions under oath, saying that doing so might incriminate him, according to the report.

Later that year, according to the report, Greaney attempted to keep Rensselaer County District Attorney Patricia DeAngelis from filing a complaint against him by reminding her he had been Republican town chairman for 20 years and was on a board that provides grants to the district attorney's office and would "not go down lightly."

DeAngelis made a complaint to the commission anyway.

Her office refused to comment on the report.

According to the commission's report, in November 2004, Greaney called former Assistant District Attorney Rebecca Bauscher into a private meeting with him in Town Hall and threatened the district attorney's office.

Greaney "said he knew a lot of 'powerful' people and mentioned his position on the Motor Vehicle Auto Theft and Insurance Fraud Prevention Board, which provides grants to the district attorney's office," the report said.

The report also said that Greaney "failed to effectuate the rights of various defendants, engaged in prohibited ex parte communications and made statements in various cases that compromised his impartiality."

In a written statement, Tembeckjian said, "The numerous acts of egregious misconduct by Judge Greaney, topped by his failure to answer questions or even contest the charges, demonstrated his unfitness to be a judge and compelled his removal from office."

Gardinier can be reached at 454-5696 or by e-mail at bgardinier@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

"Political intimidation is seen in rural court - Berlin town justice says he will fight his removal from bench by state panel"

By BOB GARDINIER, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 4, 2007

BERLIN -- A town justice's alleged meddling in politics during the 2004 elections began an investigation that also uncovered judicial improprieties and led the state Commission on Judicial Conduct to remove him from the bench.

The decision by the 11-member commission, made on the advice of Robert H. Tembeckjian, its administrator and counsel, said Republican Justice John T. Greaney "knowingly produced and filed fraudulent candidate nominating petitions" for Independence and Conservative party members before the primary elections in 2004.

Greaney, 71, was elected in January 2004 and known as a tough law-and-order justice in this town of 1,901 in eastern Rensselaer County.

But Greaney has been known more over the years for his political activity for the Republican Party in the eastern part of the county.

He issued rulings from the bench while town Republican chairman, a position he has held for two decades, and he has long been active in county politics.

According to the report, around July 2004, Greaney collected signatures on designating petitions for Independence and Conservative party candidates for local office.

Committee officials often try to get the signatures to secure the third-party line for their major party or candidates that party is backing.

The investigation showed some signatures were forged and, in one case, a man named on a ballot was not even aware he was being put up for public office.

Greaney also allegedly filed the fraudulent petitions with the Rensselaer County Board of Elections.

"We got some complaints, but we could not investigate because he is a judge," said county Democratic Elections Commissioner Edward McDonough.

"We had to turn the complaints over to the Commission on Judicial Conduct, and that got their investigation started."

There is tremendous POWER that comes to one who holds a JUDGESHIP ....

And there is tremendous POWER that comes to one who has a judge or two or ten .....

In his or her pocket .....

As was alleged to be the case in this matter we are discussing in here .....

The matter involving our PLAINTIFF .....

An allegation by Jeffey Pelletier of Poestenkill .....

The "PROTECTED PERSON" in the Town of Poestenkill in Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....

ACCORDING TO FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AND BUSH-APPOINTEE GARY L. SHARPE OF THE FEDERAL NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

JEFFREY PELLETIER ....

Who assaulted the PLAINTIFF on VIDEOTAPE in August of 2001 .....

And was then able to PROCURE .....

For an alleged DISBURSEMENT .....

Through a lawyer .....

Who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

A FRAUDULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER ......

FOR THE PLAINTIFF .....

THAT DIRECTED THE NEW YORK STATE POLICE ....

TO APPREHEND THE PLAINTIFF ....

AND TO HAUL HIM TO THE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC.'S SAMARITAN HOSPITAL .....

IN TROY, NEW YORK .....

WHERE THE PLAINTIFF HAD ALREADY BEEN "PRE-ADMITTED" .....

BY DR. JOHN CHRISTIAN BRAATEN OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC. .....

THE DOCTOR WHO PROVIDED JEFFREY PELLETIER OF POESTENKILL WITH THE FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

And so .....

In the videotape of the assault ....

Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill ....

Can clearly be heard bragging about his "protection" ......

And on March 31, 2005 .....

In the federal District Court Decision under discussion in here .....

Jeffrey Pelletier's BRAG was shown to be backed up by SUBSTANCE ......

Because Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill was in fact a PROTECTED PERSON in RENSSELAER COUNTY in the State of New York ......

The law did not apply to him .....

And it didn't .....

Nor did the federal Court Rules .....

Which Bush-appointee federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe "exempted" Jeffrey Pelletier from having to comply with .....

While the judge himself acted as attorney for both Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill and REPUBLICAN "ENFORCER" Gary James "JIMMY DAWG" Horton, also of Poestenkill, New York .....

Making motions to dismiss on their behalf ......

And then ....

In his capacity as a federal District Court Judge .....

Granting his own motions .....

And thereby absolving Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill of any responsibility whatsoever for assaulting PLAINTIFF and then having him unlawfully imprisoned at the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York BASED ON THE FRAUDLENT PSYCHIATRIC ARREST ORDER ISSUED BY BRAATEN ON AUGUST 22, 2001 .....

INCREDIBLE POWER .....

AND IMMUNITY FROM THE LAW YOURSELF ....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

"I was reading this post above here, Livyjr ..."

"Which connects the various actors in this case of WITNESS INTIMIDATION AND REMOVAL in the State of New York through the vehicle of a FALSE PSYCHIATRIC ARREST AND IMPRISONMENT in the secure mental facility of the Samaritan Hospital in Troy, New York ..."

"Back to the New York State Business Council ..."

"And just for the sake of curiosity ..."

"To see if another connection could be made in this matter ..."

"I went to the list of members of the New York State Business Council under the letter 'T' ...."

http://www.bcnys.org/inside/membershp/tmembers.htm

"And there I found the GOLD JOHNSON Law Firm listed ...."

"Under its name THUILLEZ, FORD & GOLD JOHNSON ..."

"The Albany, New York law firm that was defending Dr. John Christian Braaten ...."

"The medical doctor in the City of Troy in the State of New York who 'marketed' a FALSE DIAGNOSIS of your PLAINTIFF to Jeffrey Pelletier and the County of Rensselaer on August 22, 2001 ..."

"So they could have your PLAINTIFF FALSELY IMPRISONED in the secure mental facility of Northeast Health, Inc.'s Samaritan Hospital in Troy, New York ..."

"Which CORPORATE ENTITY was also represented by the GOLD JOHNSONS ..."

"And so, Livyjr ...."

In the State of New York, today ....

Right now ....

IF you have the money ....

Money is always important, of course .....

And necessary .....

YOU CAN ENGAGE A LAWYER ....

A MEMBER OF THE BAR IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

And that lawyer can get for you .....

A PSYCHIATIC ARREST ORDER .....

That will allow you ....

To have the New York State Police ....

HAUL OFF TO A SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

FOR INCARCERATION .....

ANYONE YOU WISH TO HAVE INCARCERATED .....

IF YOU HAVE A LAWYER .....

And that is why the New York State Bar Association and its "membership" have been brought into this thread .....

As "parties", so to speak ......

BECAUSE OF THIS "SERVICE" .....

THAT ITS MEMBERS ....

ARE ALLOWED TO "SELL" .....

TO THOSE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC UP HERE ....

WHO HAVE THE MONEY ....

Money being of importance, after all .....

TO PURCHASE THAT KIND OF SERVICE .....

WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW, HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

BUT SO WHAT?

IF YOU HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY .....

THAT YOU CAN GET A LAWYER .....

TO HAVE SOMEONE INCARCERATED IN A SECURE MENTAL FACILITY .....

BECAUSE YOU WANT THEM THERE ....

THERE IS NO "AGAINST THE LAW" FOR YOU .....

YOUR LAWYER SEES TO THAT .....

WHICH IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS ALL ABOUT ....

The "PROTECTION RACKET" in New York State ....

And the role .....

That lawyers and judges play in that "PROTECTION RACKET" .....

Lawyers and judges who are all MEMBERS OF THE BAR ....

And so .....

And so .....

We come forward in time ...

From 1989 .....

When REPUBLICAN Deputy Rensselaer County Attorney Gordon Mayo was openly and publicly slandering PLAINTIFF in New York State Supreme in Albany County with impunity ....

As being irrational due to the imaginary disease of POST-VIET NAM SYNDROME which Mayo had made up out of whole cloth for public consumption ....

In the pages of the Troy RECORD newspaper ...

Which local newspaper was printing this unfounded and totally unsupported trash without any restraint whatosever on the part of the EDITORIAL STAFF as to the decided lack of veracity and lack of evidentiary support for these false and scurrilous charges ....

While affording PLAINTIFF no opportunity whatsoever for rebuttal of anything libelous and slanderous that Mayo and REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive John L. "Johnnie" Buono might have to say about PLAINTIFF and the alleged state of his mental health ....

In the pages of the Troy RECORD newspaper ...

To 2002 ....

When once again ....

Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill ....

The assailant in this matter who bragged on videotape before the Court in this matter of being protected .....

And ended up definitely being so in reality ....

Was able to libel PLAINTIFF in sworn court papers ....

With PLAINTIFF once again being afforded no opprtunity to rebut these false and scurrilous assertions made not only by Jeffrey Pelletier ...

But by his LAWYER, as well .....

An alleged COURTHOUSE FIXER from Rensselaer County named Stephen A. Stasack .....

Who also submitted an affidavit to New York State Supreme Court in Rensselaer County ........

Where Stasack allegedly served as a CLERK to one of the judges ....

This AFFIDAVIT by Stasack was dated and sworn to on February 27, 2003 ....

And therein ....

Stasack .....

An attorney licensed to practice in the State of New York ....

And allegedly subject to the Rules of Practice in the State of New York ...

As well as the Rules of Evidence .....

Openly "SHOPPED" or PROFFERED as EVIDENCE this false instrument unlawfully issued to the New York State Police by John Christian Braaten, M.D. of Northeast Health, Inc. on August 22, 2001 ....

To the New York State Supreme Court Justice in charge of the case .....

As alleged PROOF that PLAINTIFF was supposedly mentally ill and dangerous ....

And so ....

Should not be allowed to bring on any kind of charges against Jeffrey Pelletier in Rensselaer County Supreme Court ...

Which is where any case PLAINTIFF might file against Jeffrey Pelletier for damages stemming from the August 7, 2001 assault in the State of New York would have to be filed as a matter of law in the State of New York ....

And so ....

Close the DOORS OF JUSTICE in PLAINTIFF's face based upon NOTHING MORE THAN FALSE STATEMENTS AND a false instrument unlawfully filed with the New York State Police by Dr. John Christian Braaten, M.D. on August 22, 2001 .....

And JUSTICE for Jeffrey Pelletier will be done ....

And so ....

IT WAS DONE ...

And so ...

STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT - COUNTY OF RENSSELAER

PLAINTIFF v. Town of Poestenkill; Eugene Bechard, Poestenkill Town Code Enforcement Officer; The County of Rensselaer; Roy Champagne, Rensselaer County Director of Environmental Health; Carl Richard Aiken, NYSPE 067805; Kevin Joseph McGrath, NYSLS 049508; and Jeff Pelletier

STEPHEN A. STASACK, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

I am the attorney for respondent jeffrey Pelletier and make this affidavit in support of respondent's DEMAND FOR DISMISSAL of the proceedings and in opposition to cross-motions.

The relief sought is to strike scandalous matter.

The specific matter alleged to be scandalous is contained in Paragraph 12 of respondent Pelletier's ANSWER, which alleges as follows:

"PLAINTIFF, by his own allegations contained in the ORIGINAL PETITION herein, ADMITS TO SUFFERING FROM SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS, AND THEREFORE, LACKS THE NECESSARY JUDGMENT TO COMMENCE PRO SE ACTIONS."

The allegation of illness is not scandalous .....

AND IS BASED UPON PLAINTIFF'S OWN STATEMENTS ....

THAT OTHERS HAVE ALLEGED ....

HE SUFFERS ....

FROM A BI-POLAR DISORDER .....

The entire petition contains statements made by PLAINTIFF referring to allegations of actions by PLAINTIFF that have led others to TAKE ACTION TO HAVE PLAINTIFF INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED FOR MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION.

PLAINTIFF has cross-moved to CONTINUE TO HAVE THOSE PERSONS AS PARTY DEFENDANTS, CLAIMING THEY ARE NECESSARY PARTIES.

PLAINTIFF's pro se action has caused considerable expense to all parties involved.

TO DATE, I have expended approximately 37 hours at an hourly rate of $150.

This is an expense of $5,550 PLUS DISBURSEMENTS, PAYABLE BY PELLETIER - with no end in sight to the volume of papers requiring further time and expense served by PLAINTIFF.

WHEREFORE IT IS REQUESTED ....

THAT THE COURT GRANT AN INJUNCTION ....

BARRING PLAINTIFF ...

FROM COMMENCING ANY FURTHER LITIGATION ....

AGAINST JEFF PELLETIER .....

Sworn to before me this 27th day of February, 2003

IF you are a licensed professional engineer in the State of New York .....

Today ....

Right now as we speak ....

Licensed by the New York State Department of Education ....

And subject to the Rules of Practice in the State of New York ....

As promulgated by the New York State Board of Regents ...

And you have an opportunity to make some money .....

Money is important, after all ....

Signing off on plans that do not meet the requirements of the applicable codes, rules and regulations ....

And certifying projects that were not built in accordance with those applicable codes, rules and regulations .....

All you have to do ....

To get yourself some necessary "cover" .....

Is to secure the "SERVICES" of a lawyer who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

Preferably a lawyer who is also the local judge ....

And even though what you are doing is a violation of the law in the State of New York ...

YOU ARE TROUBLE-FREE ....

Because you have a lawyer who is a member of the bar in the State of New York to "cover your back" ....

To make sure that no witnesses will ever be able to come forward against you ....

To bring on a case in court ....

Or to "make trouble" for you ....

With the Office of Professional Disicipline of the New York State Department of Education .....

And so ....

For those of you who are just arriving at this thread now ...

And are wondering what the topic of discussion is in here .....

Well ...

That above gives you a capsule summary .....

THE "SERVICES" THAT MEMBERS OF THE BAR IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK CAN'T REALLY ADVERTISE ....

AT LEAST TOO OPENLY OR BLATANTLY ....

BUT CAN PROVIDE ....

IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY WITH WHICH TO PROCURE THESE "SERVICES" .....

Money is always important, after all .....

And so ....

"Rules limit ads by lawyers - Intent is to protect the public from aggressive and misleading pitches"

Associated Press

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

ALBANY -- Attorneys practicing in New York won't be allowed to use testimonials from current clients in their advertising as of Feb. 1, state court officials announced Thursday.

The rule is part of sweeping new limits on how attorneys market their services.

Lawyers will also be prevented from using paid endorsements or testimonials in their ads unless they disclose that the person offering the endorsement is being compensated.

To protect victims and their families from "overly aggressive marketing," there will be a 30-day waiting period before lawyers from either side may contact people involved in wrongful death or personal injury incidents.

The state Unified Court System and the New York State Bar Association designed the regulations to protect consumers from inappropriate, aggressive or misleading advertisements.

They were first announced in June and all take effect Feb. 1.

In a statement released Thursday, the president of the state bar association, Mark Alcott, praised the courts for collaborating with the lawyers' organization after draft rules were announced last year.

"We are proud that our association took an active role in initially urging the courts to adopt more stringent advertising rules," Alcott said.

Other amendments to the rules require full disclosure of any ads using actors to re-enact events, and a ban on nicknames or mottos that suggest an ability to obtain results.

Attorneys will also be barred from using Internet pop-up ads on Web sites other than their own or their law firm's.

end quotes

Of course .....

In this case under discussion in here .....

There really is no need for lawyers like "Donnie Bob" Ford of the GOLD JOHNSONS or the "Silver-tongued" Tommy O'Connor to have to do any advertising of their own as to what kind of service they are able to provide to members of the New York State Business Council .....

Of which the GOLD JOHNSON LAW FIRM is a member .....

THIS MARCH 31, 2005 FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT DECISION UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ....

SPEAKS VOLUMES .....

AS TO WHAT KIND OF RESULTS "DONNIE BOB" FORD AND THE GOLD JOHNSON LAW FIRM CAN GUARANTEE .....

If there is a pesky witness who has to be "REMOVED" ....

And so ...

[Livyjr]

And so .....

Up here in the State of New York ...

Where I am ...

Which is close to Albany, New York ...

The capital of the state ...

The "operative saying" ........

If you're looking to "take a walk" ....

Around the law ....

Is .....

"If you have a LAWYER ..."

"For your BAGMAN ....."

"It's not a BRIBE ..."

"It's a DISBURSEMENT ..."

And so ....

"Rules limit ads by lawyers - Intent is to protect the public from aggressive and misleading pitches"

Associated Press

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

ALBANY -- Attorneys practicing in New York won't be allowed to use testimonials from current clients in their advertising as of Feb. 1, state court officials announced Thursday.

The rule is part of sweeping new limits on how attorneys market their services.

The state Unified Court System and the New York State Bar Association designed the regulations to protect consumers from inappropriate, aggressive or misleading advertisements.

In a statement released Thursday, the president of the state bar association, Mark Alcott, praised the courts for collaborating with the lawyers' organization after draft rules were announced last year.

Other amendments to the rules require full disclosure of any ads using actors to re-enact events, and a ban on nicknames or mottos that suggest an ability to obtain results.

end quotes

Of course .....

In this case under discussion in here .....

There really is no need for lawyers like "Donnie Bob" Ford of the GOLD JOHNSONS or the "Silver-tongued" Tommy O'Connor to have to do any advertising of their own as to what kind of service they are able to provide to members of the New York State Business Council .....

Of which the GOLD JOHNSON LAW FIRM is a member .....

THIS MARCH 31, 2005 FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT DECISION UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ....

SPEAKS VOLUMES .....

AS TO WHAT KIND OF RESULTS "DONNIE BOB" FORD AND THE GOLD JOHNSON LAW FIRM CAN GUARANTEE .....

If there is a pesky witness who has to be "REMOVED" ....

And so ...

"ALPHA AND OMEGA, Livyjr ..."

"ALPHA ...."

"And OMEGA ...."

"When you touch the words 'YOUR KIND AREN'T HARMED BY THIS, BECAUSE YOUR KIND HAVE NO RIGHTS, NO RIGHTS AT ALL' ...."

"You are right back at the very beginning ..."

"When defendant Bernadette Rotter Hallam of Northeast Health, Inc. was telling the PLAINTIFF the exact same thing ..."

"And the Office of New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, through Assistant New York State Attorney General Lisa Ullman was defending that stance in New York State Supreme Court for Rensselaer County before Hon. George B. Ceresia, Jr., and so ..."

"It's not RETALIATION, Livyjr ...."

"IF IT DOES NOT HURT ..."

"And there is no sense in RETALIATING ..."

"NOT IF YOU ARE 'THE GOVERNMENT', ANYWAY ...."

"IF IT IS NOT VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE ...."

"BECAUSE IN GOVERNMENT ..."

"OR POLITICS ..."

"RETALIATION ITSELF IS A MESSAGE ..."

"OF INHERENT POWER TO PUNISH ..."

"WITH IMPUNITY ..."

"AND NO SCRUTINY ..."

"OR CENSURE ..."

"ESPECIALLY FROM THE COURTS ...."

"OR THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ..."

"TO ANYONE ELSE WHO MIGHT THINK OF DOING THE SAME THING ..."

"AND RETALIATION SHOULD NOT JUST HURT THE PERSON BEING RETALIATED AGAINST, IF POSSIBLE ..."

"THEIR FAMILIES SHOULD BE HURT, AT THE MINIMUM ...."

"OR AT LEAST THAT IS THE POLICY NOW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"Thanks to the December 2005 federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals SUMMARY ORDER in this matter of your PLAINTIFF up there near Albany, New York ..."

"Thanks for making me aware of this, Livyjr ..."

"As they say ...."

"Forewarned is forearmed ..."

"And so ..."

"As the United States Supreme Court correctly notes, Livyjr ..."

"Public employees like your PLAINTIFF was do occupy trusted positions in society ....."

"Because of their honesty, integrity, forthrightness, diligence and knowledge of the law and their duties to uphold it, to protect the public health and safety, in the face of the government corruption which seems to pervade every level of government here in the United States of America ..."

"And when they speak out, as your PLAINTIFF obviously did on several occasions ..."

"They can and do express views that contravene governmental 'policies' ..."

"When those 'policies' cause the public employees workplace to be nothing more than a criminal enterprise ..."

"As the Rensselaer County Department of Health quite obviously was before and during your PLAINTIFF's tenure there as Associate Public Health Engineer ..."

"And laughingly ..."

"The United States Supreme Court considers people like your PLAINTIFF speaking out publicly about that criminal enterprise as 'impairing the proper performance of governmental functions' ....."

"WHICH IS WHY IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE 'GOVERNMENT' TO BE ABLE TO BREAK PEOPLE LIKE YOUR PLAINTIFF ..."

"And this PSYCHIATRIC TAKE-DOWN based on a FALSE DIAGNOSIS by a compliant doctor is an especially apt way to do that BREAKING ..."

"One, because the 'GOVERNMENT' need fear no repercussions from the Court system ..."

"AS THIS THREAD HAS MORE THAN AMPLY DEMONSTRATED ..."

"And two, because the FALSE DIAGNOSIS of mental illness will never be questioned by the public ..."

"And that FALSE DIAGNOSIS serves the 'GOVERNMENT'S' needs, because it instantly destroys the VICTIM's reputation in the community ..."

"TO BE BRANDED FOREVERMORE AS A DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT ..."

And so ....

It is interesting to note .........

In this Associated Press article above here .....

Entitled "Rules limit ads by lawyers - Intent is to protect the public from aggressive and misleading pitches" ....

First published on Friday, January 5, 2007 ......

That in the State of New York .....

NO EFFORT WAS APPARENTLY MADE ....

By the New York State Bar Association ....

Which serves as the LAWYER'S GUILD, or UNION, up here in the State of New York ....

And the NEW YORK STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM ....

WHICH IS BELIEVED TO BE SOME TYPE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPARATUS .....

ASSOCIATED WITH OUR COURT SYSTEM UP HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

TO PLACE ANY LIMITS WHATSOEVER .....

ON THE VERY WIDE RANGE OF "SERVICES" .....

THAT MEMBERS OF THE LAWYERS' GUILD .....

OR NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION .....

CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE .....

TO THOSE WITH THE MONEY .....

AND CONNECTIONS ......

TO PURCHASE THOSE SERVICES .....

Such as the "PROCUREMENT" of FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDERS ....

From CORPORATE MEDICAL DOCTORS .....

WHO ARE DEALING IN THOSE FRAUDULENT INSTRUMENTS .....

WITH THE PROTECTION OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE .....

And the APPROVAL .....

Of the federal District Court .....

For the Northern District of New York .....

And the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

THE ONLY LIMITS ....

THAT WERE PLACED ....

ON THE LAWYERS THEMSELVES .....

WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ......

IS ON WHAT THEY CAN TELL PEOPLE OPENLY .....

IN THE FORM OF AN ADVERTISEMENT .....

Presumably made on the side of a bus .....

Or on a billboard ....

Or on TV ....

Or the radio ....

And so ......

In the State of New York .....

RIGHT NOW, TODAY .....

A lawyer cannot openly advertise about being able to PROCURE for you a FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THAT REALLY MAKE .....

THAT THEY CAN'T OPENLY ADVERTISE THAT THEY REALLY CAN DO THIS .....

WHEN THEY REALLY CAN PERFORM THIS "SERVICE" FOR YOU ......

AND ACTUALLY DID SO, IN THIS CASE UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ......

IN A VERY PUBLIC WAY .....

And so ....

Who exactly is it .....

That is being PROTECTED here .....

By the lawyers not be able to openly advertise this particular "SERVICE" .....

"GETTING RID OF PEOPLE" ......

For you ......

If you have the money and connections .....

To actually be able to secure this "SERVICE" from them .....

WHEN THEY ARE IN FACT PROVIDING THIS SERVICE .....

And people like Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill know about ......

And actually are able to avail themselves of this "SERVICE" ......

TO THE DETRIMENT OF THEIR INTENDED VICTIM .....

WHY ISN'T THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION CONCERNED ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF THESE VICTIMS?

And that answer is very simple .....

CASH FLOW .....

DON'T STEP IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY .....

AND ARE WILLING TO GIVE IT TO A MEMBER OF THE BAR .....

TO HAVE SOMEONE ELSE FALSELY IMPRISONED ...

AS AN ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT .....

IN A CORPORATE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

And so .....

WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEMBER OF THE BAR .....

CAN OPENLY ADVERTISE THAT SERVICE .....

On the side of a bus .....

Or on a billboard ....

Or on the radio .....

Or on TV ....

Calling themselves such things ......

As the "DREAM TEAM" ......

Or the "HEAVY HITTERS" .....

IS REALLY QUITE IMMATERIAL TO US UP HERE ......

WHEN WE KNOW THAT REGARDLESS OF ADVERTSING .....

THE RIGHT LAWYER ......

CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THIS HAPPEN .....

HAVE ONE OF US FALSELY INCARCERATED .....

AS AN ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT .....

IN A CORPORATE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

Because we got in the wrong person's way .....

Or because we went to the Town Planning Board ....

Or the local County Health Department ......

AND ASKED THE WRONG QUESTIONS .....

ABOUT THE WRONG PROTECTED PERSON .....

In the State of New York ...

And so .....

[Livyjr]

EXCERPT FROM PREAMBLE TO LAWYER'S CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK

The continued existence of a free and democratic society depends upon recognition of the concept that justice is based upon the rule of law grounded in respect for the dignity of the individual and the capacity of the individual through reason for enlightened self-government.

Law so grounded makes justice possible, for only through such law does the dignity of the individual attain respect and protection.

Without it, individual rights become subject to unrestrained power, respect for law is destroyed, and rational self-government is impossible.

1937 ......

A time in OUR nation's history ....

And in a lot of ways, a turning point like no other ....

It is said that what is called MODERN AMERICA today grew out of these times in that period .....

There was an America leading up to that point ....

Like a butterfly in a cocoon, perhaps .....

And after, there was another America ...

Like the butterfly emerging ....

SOCIAL LEGISLATION ....

A recognition of responsibility?

And if so, by whom?

And that answer in the State of New York would have had to have been the people of the state itself, since in 1938, the PEOPLE of the State of New York voted on November 8, 1938 to amend the New York State Constitution, the "law of the land" in New York State, by adding Article XVII, entitled "Social Welfare" ....

And section 3 of Article XVII, entitled "Public Health" states in relevant part that:

The protection and promotion of the health of the inhabitants of the state are matters of public concern and provision therefor shall be made by the state and by such of its subdivisions and in such manner, and by such means as the legislature shall from time to time determine.

And EIGHT years later, in 1946, Rensselaer County in the State of New York became the first county in the State of New York to take advantage of the body of law which sprung forth from this Constitutional amendment in 1938 to form itself as a HEALTH DISTRICT, by vote of the PEOPLE of Rensselaer County, so as to be able to provide for THEMSELVES better public health protection in Rensselaer County that the State of New York just could not provide in the rural areas of the state ....

BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE ....

In this case that we are talking about in here, where a licensed professional engineer in the State of New York qualified as an associate public health engineer in the State of New York pursuant to section 3 of Article XVII of the New York State Constitution was first assaulted on a public road in broad daylight on videotape by Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill, New York in August of 2001, to deter him from continuing an investigation into alleged corrupt practices by licensed professionals in Rensselaer County, and then declared, SIGHT UNSEEN, to be "mentally ill and dangerous" by John Christian Braaten, a doctor in the State of New York practicing CORPORATE MEDICINE for Northeast health, Inc. in Troy, New York so as to render his testimony on the subject worthless, what has been stripped from us by these federal court rulings we are talking about in here is the WILL OF THE PEOPLE as expressed in the laws of the State of New York AS WRITTEN .....

Laws which are supposed to bind the federal courts in the State of New York just as they bind the citizens and OUR state government ...

Supposedly, anyway ....

And so ....

"Bush's Judges Already Making Their Mark"

By NANCY BENAC, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Wendy Long, counsel for the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, said that when it comes to the courts, Bush "gets it" in a way that even his father and Reagan did not.

His nominees "understand the problems with the way the Constitution has been interpreted and will go about fixing that in their own decisions," she said.

And as is my habit .....

From time to time ....

In a long thread like this one ......

It is good to go back and try to condense down the issues ......

Under discussion in here ....

And in the course of trying to do that .....

I would say that these three posts above here serve that purpose ....

The post from the PREAMBLE to the New York State Bar Association's Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility ......

WHICH IS ACTUALLY A SHAM DOCUMENT ......

PUT OUT BY THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION .....

TO GULL UNSUSPECTING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC .....

INTO A FALSE BELIEF .....

THAT LAWYERS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

ARE SOMEHOW REGULATED ......

SO THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE LAW .....

AND THE RULES .....

WHEN APPEARING IN COURT .....

JUST AS A COMMON CITIZEN WOULD HAVE TO ....

WHEN SUCH IS NOT THE CASE AT ALL .....

IN THE CASE OF THE LAWYER ....

WHO IS REALLY BOUND BY NO LAWS OR RULES WHATSOEVER .....

UNLIKE THE COMMON CITIZEN ....

WHO BELIEVES IN AND ABIDES BY THE LAW ....

AND WHO MUST ADHERE RIGIDLY ......

TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW ....

WHEN APPEARING IN COURT .....

UNLIKE THE LAWYER .....

WHO IS FREE TO DO AS HE OR SHE WISHES .....

WITH IMPUNITY ....

SINCE THE JUDGE IS A LAWYER AS WELL ....

AND ALL TOO OFTEN ....

IS VERY HOSTILE .....

TO THE COMMON CITIZEN ....

WHO IS NOT A LAWYER ....

BUT DOES KNOW THE LAW .....

AND WISHES IT TO BE ENFORCED EQUALLY ....

WHICH MEANS BY THE LAWYERS ....

As well as the common citizen ....

And so ....

And then ....

There is the post from the New York State Constitution .....

WHICH SETS FORTH THE BASIS FROM WHICH OUR COMPLAINTS IN HERE ARISE ....

AN INABILITY ON OUR PART ....

AS CITIZENS ....

TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE OUR OWN CONSTITUTION ....

And the quotes from this Wendy Long ....

Counsel for the CONSERVATIVE JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION NETWORK .....

WHICH TO US DETAILS THE DISMANTLING OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT .....

BY AND THROUGH JUDGES AND LAWYERS ....

THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING IN HERE ....

All of which are inter-related and intertwined in what is being discussed in this thread .....

WHICH IS CONTEMPT FOR THE LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .......

BY THE LAWYERS AND THE COURTS ....

BOTH OF WHOM HAVE AN ALLEGED DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY .....

TO US, THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE ....

WHO HAVE RESPECT FOR THE LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION OURSELVES ....

BUT NO VOICE .....

OUTSIDE OF THIS FORUM ....

No voice ....

NO VOICE .....

Concerning how lawyers actually conduct themselves in court proceedings involving us and OUR rights ....

NO VOICE ....

With respect to what the judges ...

Who are lawyers, themselves .....

Let the lawyers get away with in court .....

WHEN UP AGAINST A CITIZEN WHO KNOWS AND RESPECTS THE LAW .....

NO VOICE .....

When it comes to who those judges are going to be .....

THAT ARE GOING TO SIT THERE .....

IN THEIR LOFTY SEATS ....

TO MOCK US ....

AND THE LAWS AND CONSTITUTION .....

THAT WE BELIEVE IN .....

AS AMERICAN CITIZENS ....

WHO BELIEVE IN THE RULE OF LAW .....

HERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .....

NO VOICE .....

Outside of this FORUM ....

And with that said .....

Once again, I would take a moment to thank all of you who do stop by here to read these words .....

IT IS BECAUSE OF YOU THAT THIS THREAD HAS BEEN KEPT GOING ....

SO THAT OUR MESSAGE CAN BE GOTTEN OUT TO THE WORLD AT LARGE ......

And here again ...

I would like to give a special thanks ....

To Michael and the COMMONGROUND FORUM .....

For allowing me this time and space ....

Which is very generous, in my estimation ....

As an American citizen .....

AND TIMELY .....

Given that up until the creation of this FORUM .....

Common citizens like us up here .....

Never had a vehicle in which these types of issues could be discussed ....

AT ALL .....

And so .....

[Livyjr]

And here again ...

I would like to give a special thanks ....

To Michael and the COMMONGROUND FORUM .....

For allowing me this time and space ....

Which is very generous, in my estimation ....

As an American citizen .....

AND TIMELY .....

Given that up until the creation of this FORUM .....

Common citizens like us up here .....

Never had a vehicle in which these types of issues could be discussed ....

AT ALL .....

And so .....

IF you are a licensed professional engineer in the State of New York .....

Today ....

Right now as we speak ....

Licensed by the New York State Department of Education ....

And subject to the Rules of Practice in the State of New York ....

As promulgated by the New York State Board of Regents ...

And you have an opportunity to make some money .....

Money is important, after all ....

Signing off on plans that do not meet the requirements of the applicable codes, rules and regulations ....

And certifying projects that were not built in accordance with those applicable codes, rules and regulations .....

All you have to do ....

To get yourself some necessary "cover" .....

Is to secure the "SERVICES" of a lawyer who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

Preferably a lawyer who is also the local judge ....

And even though what you are doing is a violation of the law in the State of New York ...

YOU ARE TROUBLE-FREE ....

Because you have a lawyer who is a member of the bar in the State of New York to "cover your back" ....

To make sure that no witnesses will ever be able to come forward against you ....

To bring on a case in court ....

Or to "make trouble" for you ....

With the Office of Professional Disicipline of the New York State Department of Education .....

And so ....

For those of you who are just arriving at this thread now ...

And are wondering what the topic of discussion is in here .....

Well ...

That above gives you a capsule summary .....

THE "SERVICES" THAT MEMBERS OF THE BAR IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK CAN'T REALLY ADVERTISE ....

AT LEAST TOO OPENLY OR BLATANTLY ....

BUT CAN PROVIDE ....

IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY WITH WHICH TO PROCURE THESE "SERVICES" .....

Money is always important, after all .....

And so ....

There is tremendous POWER that comes to one who holds a JUDGESHIP ....

And there is tremendous POWER that comes to one who has a judge or two or ten .....

In his or her pocket .....

As was alleged to be the case in this matter we are discussing in here .....

The matter involving our PLAINTIFF .....

An allegation by Jeffey Pelletier of Poestenkill .....

The "PROTECTED PERSON" in the Town of Poestenkill in Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....

ACCORDING TO FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AND BUSH-APPOINTEE GARY L. SHARPE OF THE FEDERAL NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

JEFFREY PELLETIER ....

Who assaulted the PLAINTIFF on VIDEOTAPE in August of 2001 .....

And was then able to PROCURE .....

For an alleged DISBURSEMENT .....

Through a lawyer .....

Who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

A FRAUDULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER ......

FOR THE PLAINTIFF .....

THAT DIRECTED THE NEW YORK STATE POLICE ....

TO APPREHEND THE PLAINTIFF ....

AND TO HAUL HIM TO THE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC.'S SAMARITAN HOSPITAL .....

IN TROY, NEW YORK .....

WHERE THE PLAINTIFF HAD ALREADY BEEN "PRE-ADMITTED" .....

BY DR. JOHN CHRISTIAN BRAATEN OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC. .....

THE DOCTOR WHO PROVIDED JEFFREY PELLETIER OF POESTENKILL WITH THE FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

And so .....

In the videotape of the assault ....

Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill ....

Can clearly be heard bragging about his "protection" ......

And on March 31, 2005 .....

In the federal District Court Decision under discussion in here .....

Jeffrey Pelletier's BRAG was shown to be backed up by SUBSTANCE ......

Because Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill was in fact a PROTECTED PERSON in RENSSELAER COUNTY in the State of New York ......

The law did not apply to him .....

And it didn't .....

Nor did the federal Court Rules .....

Which Bush-appointee federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe "exempted" Jeffrey Pelletier from having to comply with .....

While the judge himself acted as attorney for both Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill and REPUBLICAN "ENFORCER" Gary James "JIMMY DAWG" Horton, also of Poestenkill, New York .....

Making motions to dismiss on their behalf ......

And then ....

In his capacity as a federal District Court Judge .....

Granting his own motions .....

And thereby absolving Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill of any responsibility whatsoever for assaulting PLAINTIFF and then having him unlawfully imprisoned at the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York BASED ON THE FRAUDLENT PSYCHIATRIC ARREST ORDER ISSUED BY BRAATEN ON AUGUST 22, 2001 .....

INCREDIBLE POWER .....

AND IMMUNITY FROM THE LAW YOURSELF ....

And so ....

It is interesting to note .........

In this Associated Press article above here .....

Entitled "Rules limit ads by lawyers - Intent is to protect the public from aggressive and misleading pitches" ....

First published on Friday, January 5, 2007 ......

That in the State of New York .....

NO EFFORT WAS APPARENTLY MADE ....

By the New York State Bar Association ....

Which serves as the LAWYER'S GUILD, or UNION, up here in the State of New York ....

And the NEW YORK STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM ....

WHICH IS BELIEVED TO BE SOME TYPE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPARATUS .....

ASSOCIATED WITH OUR COURT SYSTEM UP HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

TO PLACE ANY LIMITS WHATSOEVER .....

ON THE VERY WIDE RANGE OF "SERVICES" .....

THAT MEMBERS OF THE LAWYERS' GUILD .....

OR NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION .....

CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE .....

TO THOSE WITH THE MONEY .....

AND CONNECTIONS ......

TO PURCHASE THOSE SERVICES .....

Such as the "PROCUREMENT" of FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDERS ....

From CORPORATE MEDICAL DOCTORS .....

WHO ARE DEALING IN THOSE FRAUDULENT INSTRUMENTS .....

WITH THE PROTECTION OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE .....

And the APPROVAL .....

Of the federal District Court .....

For the Northern District of New York .....

And the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

THE ONLY LIMITS ....

THAT WERE PLACED ....

ON THE LAWYERS THEMSELVES .....

WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ......

IS ON WHAT THEY CAN TELL PEOPLE OPENLY .....

IN THE FORM OF AN ADVERTISEMENT .....

Presumably made on the side of a bus .....

Or on a billboard ....

Or on TV ....

Or the radio ....

And so ......

In the State of New York .....

RIGHT NOW, TODAY .....

A lawyer cannot openly advertise about being able to PROCURE for you a FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THAT REALLY MAKE .....

THAT THEY CAN'T OPENLY ADVERTISE THAT THEY REALLY CAN DO THIS .....

WHEN THEY REALLY CAN PERFORM THIS "SERVICE" FOR YOU ......

AND ACTUALLY DID SO, IN THIS CASE UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ......

IN A VERY PUBLIC WAY .....

And so ....

Who exactly is it .....

That is being PROTECTED here .....

By the lawyers not be able to openly advertise this particular "SERVICE" .....

"GETTING RID OF PEOPLE" ......

For you ......

If you have the money and connections .....

To actually be able to secure this "SERVICE" from them .....

WHEN THEY ARE IN FACT PROVIDING THIS SERVICE .....

And people like Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill know about ......

And actually are able to avail themselves of this "SERVICE" ......

TO THE DETRIMENT OF THEIR INTENDED VICTIM .....

WHY ISN'T THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION CONCERNED ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF THESE VICTIMS?

And that answer is very simple .....

CASH FLOW .....

DON'T STEP IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY .....

AND ARE WILLING TO GIVE IT TO A MEMBER OF THE BAR .....

TO HAVE SOMEONE ELSE FALSELY IMPRISONED ...

AS AN ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT .....

IN A CORPORATE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

And so .....

WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEMBER OF THE BAR .....

CAN OPENLY ADVERTISE THAT SERVICE .....

On the side of a bus .....

Or on a billboard ....

Or on the radio .....

Or on TV ....

Calling themselves such things ......

As the "DREAM TEAM" ......

Or the "HEAVY HITTERS" .....

IS REALLY QUITE IMMATERIAL TO US UP HERE ......

WHEN WE KNOW THAT REGARDLESS OF ADVERTSING .....

THE RIGHT LAWYER ......

CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THIS HAPPEN .....

HAVE ONE OF US FALSELY INCARCERATED .....

AS AN ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT .....

IN A CORPORATE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

Because we got in the wrong person's way .....

Or because we went to the Town Planning Board ....

Or the local County Health Department ......

AND ASKED THE WRONG QUESTIONS .....

ABOUT THE WRONG PROTECTED PERSON .....

In the State of New York ...

And so .....

"Time for reform - In disciplining a local judge, a state panel exposes flaws in the system"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

So there was Governor Spitzer in his State of the State speech Wednesday, calling for a constitutional amendment that would consolidate New York's two-tier court system.

If the governor had wanted to cite an example of what's wrong with what he accurately called "our Balkanized courts," a case in Rensselaer County would have worked perfectly.

That's where Justice John Greaney has presided, in the town of Berlin.

That's where the state Commission on Judicial Conduct found that he mixed local fiefdom politics with the dispensation of justice.

The commission has begun the process of removing Judge Greaney from the bench after its investigation of him found such appalling conduct as filing false nominating petitions for local political candidates.

The judge can challenge the commission's decision.

But his relatively brief tenure as a town justice seems to underscore Mr. Spitzer's call for the much overdue integration of two vastly different system of justice in New York.

Judge Greaney would never have been able to preside in the court system that serves cities, but not towns and villages.

He's not a lawyer, for one thing.

And presiding in court without giving up his position as the town Republican chairman would have been out of order entirely.

It's only at the lower level of such a fractured court system that town justices like Judge Greaney can wield such power.

Sometimes that means misusing judicial power.

The other transgressions by Judge Greaney cited by the Commission on Judicial Conduct -- like ignoring the rights of criminal defendants, engaging in prohibited ex parte communications involving cases before him and making statements that undermined his impartiality -- are far more frequent than they should be in town and village courts.

A New York Times series in September detailed them across the state.

A commission appointed by Chief Judge Judith Kaye found similar deficiencies.

It's a promising call by Mr. Spitzer for modernization of the courts.

He shouldn't be modest in his push for amending the state constitution.

To settle for anything less than a state takeover of an antiquated local court system would amount to a wasted opportunity.

Only lawyers should be permitted to be judges, and judges must be selected free of electoral politics.

Only then can the people of towns like Berlin have much faith that justice is upheld in the local courts.

[Livyjr]

"Time for reform - In disciplining a local judge, a state panel exposes flaws in the system"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

Only lawyers should be permitted to be judges .......

And as is my habit .....

From time to time ....

In a long thread like this one ......

It is good to go back and try to condense down the issues ......

Under discussion in here ....

And in the course of trying to do that .....

I would say that these three posts above here serve that purpose ....

The post from the PREAMBLE to the New York State Bar Association's Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility ......

WHICH IS ACTUALLY A SHAM DOCUMENT ......

PUT OUT BY THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION .....

TO GULL UNSUSPECTING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC .....

INTO A FALSE BELIEF .....

THAT LAWYERS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

ARE SOMEHOW REGULATED ......

SO THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE LAW .....

AND THE RULES .....

WHEN APPEARING IN COURT .....

JUST AS A COMMON CITIZEN WOULD HAVE TO ....

WHEN SUCH IS NOT THE CASE AT ALL .....

IN THE CASE OF THE LAWYER ....

WHO IS REALLY BOUND BY NO LAWS OR RULES WHATSOEVER .....

UNLIKE THE COMMON CITIZEN ....

WHO BELIEVES IN AND ABIDES BY THE LAW ....

AND WHO MUST ADHERE RIGIDLY ......

TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW ....

WHEN APPEARING IN COURT .....

UNLIKE THE LAWYER .....

WHO IS FREE TO DO AS HE OR SHE WISHES .....

WITH IMPUNITY ....

SINCE THE JUDGE IS A LAWYER AS WELL ....

AND ALL TOO OFTEN ....

IS VERY HOSTILE .....

TO THE COMMON CITIZEN ....

WHO IS NOT A LAWYER ....

BUT DOES KNOW THE LAW .....

AND WISHES IT TO BE ENFORCED EQUALLY ....

WHICH MEANS BY THE LAWYERS ....

As well as the common citizen ....

And so ....

And then ....

There is the post from the New York State Constitution .....

WHICH SETS FORTH THE BASIS FROM WHICH OUR COMPLAINTS IN HERE ARISE ....

AN INABILITY ON OUR PART ....

AS CITIZENS ....

TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE OUR OWN CONSTITUTION ....

And the quotes from this Wendy Long ....

Counsel for the CONSERVATIVE JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION NETWORK .....

WHICH TO US DETAILS THE DISMANTLING OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT .....

BY AND THROUGH JUDGES AND LAWYERS ....

THAT WE ARE DISCUSSING IN HERE ....

All of which are inter-related and intertwined in what is being discussed in this thread .....

WHICH IS CONTEMPT FOR THE LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .......

BY THE LAWYERS AND THE COURTS ....

BOTH OF WHOM HAVE AN ALLEGED DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY .....

TO US, THE PEOPLE OF THIS STATE ....

WHO HAVE RESPECT FOR THE LAW AND THE CONSTITUTION OURSELVES ....

BUT NO VOICE .....

OUTSIDE OF THIS FORUM ....

No voice ....

NO VOICE .....

Concerning how lawyers actually conduct themselves in court proceedings involving us and OUR rights ....

NO VOICE ....

With respect to what the judges ...

Who are lawyers, themselves .....

Let the lawyers get away with in court .....

WHEN UP AGAINST A CITIZEN WHO KNOWS AND RESPECTS THE LAW .....

NO VOICE .....

When it comes to who those judges are going to be .....

THAT ARE GOING TO SIT THERE .....

IN THEIR LOFTY SEATS ....

TO MOCK US ....

AND THE LAWS AND CONSTITUTION .....

THAT WE BELIEVE IN .....

AS AMERICAN CITIZENS ....

WHO BELIEVE IN THE RULE OF LAW .....

HERE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA .....

NO VOICE .....

Outside of this FORUM ....

And with that said .....

Once again, I would take a moment to thank all of you who do stop by here to read these words .....

IT IS BECAUSE OF YOU THAT THIS THREAD HAS BEEN KEPT GOING ....

SO THAT OUR MESSAGE CAN BE GOTTEN OUT TO THE WORLD AT LARGE ......

And here again ...

I would like to give a special thanks ....

To Michael and the COMMONGROUND FORUM .....

For allowing me this time and space ....

Which is very generous, in my estimation ....

As an American citizen .....

AND TIMELY .....

Given that up until the creation of this FORUM .....

Common citizens like us up here .....

Never had a vehicle in which these types of issues could be discussed ....

AT ALL .....

And so .....

"Blogger legions take on Congress - There's an online movement to give elected officials a little more unofficial scrutiny"

By REBECCA CARR, Cox News
First published: Sunday, January 7, 2007

WASHINGTON -- A new online movement is trying to shed light on the murky inner workings of Congress by assigning citizens to watch every congressional committee.

And the idea of making Congress more transparent is gaining traction in high places -- like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office.

John Wonderlich, aka greenreflex on the Daily Kos blog, is leading what he calls the Congressional Committees project.

The idea is simple:

Make Congress more accessible to the public by closely watching the committees where the legislative deals are made.

"What I am really interested in is empowering people," said Wonderlich, a 27-year-old sales manager in a telemarketing firm in Pennsylvania.

Wonderlich came up with the idea on Daily Kos a few days after the November elections.

He wanted to tap into the energy displayed during the election by the Daily Kos community.

He didn't have faith in the media to ask the tough questions and he was tired of complaining about congressional corruption.

Then it dawned on him: why not get the Daily Kos community to watch Congress and advocate change?

After he posted his suggestion and received hundreds of responses, he created a page that links to Daily Kos.

A staffer for Pelosi contacted him after seeing it, he said, and told him that Pelosi is serious about creating a more transparent House.

"We have been collaborating with ways to improve access," Wonderlich said.

Pelosi, who took office on Thursday, has not responded to a request for information about the project.

As Wonderlich was organizing his project, another group had a similar idea.

Enter the Sunlight Foundation, a new nonprofit based in Washington dedicated to using the Internet to engage the public about Congress.

It was planning to launch a project to hold lawmakers more accountable.

Wonderlich is now collaborating with the foundation and Pelosi's office to create a decidedly low-profile project aimed at finding ways to require lawmakers to become more transparent by posting information online.

For example, they will work to publicly release Congressional Research Service reports, reports that are not publicly available by law despite being paid for by taxpayers.

The CRS reports have been kept under wraps to give lawmakers nonpartisan research information about sensitive policies without the pressure of public scrutiny.

And they will prod Congress to post online reports that are difficult to access.

Members are required to disclose campaign receipts and expenditures, personal financial disclosure, trips, gifts and travel.

The foundation wants those reports to be filed electronically every month in a format that the public can easily search.

"There is no question that the public cares about corruption," said Ellen Miller, director of the Sunlight Foundation.

"There is no question that disclosure and greater transparency only breed more accountability."

In addition to working with Wonderlich, the Sunlight foundation wants Congress to agree to:

End secret legislation by identifying the authors of all earmarks, bills and amendments and posting non-emergency legislation online at least 72 hours before a vote.

Require lobbyists to register and disclose legislative contacts, legislation discussed and any contributions made to members, prior government employment and relationship to members of Congress.

[Livyjr]

"Trying to fly under the radar - Contributors find $99 limit to campaign contributions won't always guarantee anonymity"

By RICK KARLIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, October 16, 2006

ALBANY -- The story of the Capital Region's $99 contributors is as much about the state capital's political culture and its spoils system as it is about money.

It's a culture with long memories, and one in which political loyalty can trump competence in the workplace.

"The reality is that the culture in Albany, the political culture, is that we have a rich tradition of retaliation for dissent," said Marcelle.

"Blogger legions take on Congress - There's an online movement to give elected officials a little more unofficial scrutiny"

By REBECCA CARR, Cox News
First published: Sunday, January 7, 2007

WASHINGTON -- "There is no question that the public cares about corruption," said Ellen Miller, director of the Sunlight Foundation.

"There is no question that disclosure and greater transparency only breed more accountability."

"Livyjr, in the light of the past experience that people up there where you are have had with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Office of the United States Attorney, and this Senator Joseph Bruno, and a federal Hobbs Act investigation that was apparently suddenly terminated by the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York when the name of this Senator Joseph Bruno came into it in connection with questionable practices in the Rensselaer county Department of Health which were having an adverse impact on the lives, health and property of the people of Rensselaer County in New York State ....."

"Could you tell us how people up there feel ..."

"When they see this POWERHOUSE DREAM TEAM Rensselaer County lawyer E. Stewart Jones openly and blatantly threatening these federal prosecutors with retaliation against themselves and their employment in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper ..."

"And when they see this Senator Bruno himself, in the pages of the same Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper ..."

"Calling this alleged federal investigation a MEDIA EVENT ..."

"DO PEOPLE UP THERE THINK THAT SOMEONE IS GAMING THE SYSTEM HERE?"

"It's time for New York to lead the nation again by bringing integrity and effective solutions back to state government."

This is quite an interesting comment right above here by the newly sworn-in Attorney General of the State of New York ......

Mr. Andrew Cuomo ....

Who is himself the son of the former Governor of the State of New York, Mario Cuomo .....

Who was the Governor of the State of New York .....

In 1991 ....

Who took it upon himself to ALTER the New York State Mined Land Reclamation Law ......

WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC NOTICE OR REVIEW .....

At the behest of the EMPIRE STATE CONCRETE AND AGGREGATE PRODUCERS' ASSOCIATION .....

A politically powerful "SPECIAL INTEREST" group in the State of New York ....

TO EXCLUDE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE REVIEW PROCESS .....

OF APPLICATIONS ....

BY ESCAPA MEMBERS ....

TO CONDUCT MINERAL EXTRACTION OPERATIONS ....

IN OR PROXIMATE TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

IN VIOLATION OF OUR NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION .....

A move on the part of former-New York State Governor Mario Cuomo .....

In 1991 ....

That went a very long distance towards DESTROYING INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT in the State of New York .....

THE DESTROYED INTEGRITY .....

THAT SON ANDREW .....

NOW NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL .....

SO LOUDLY BEMOANS .....

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION article above here from December 31, 2006 ......

WHICH IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT .....

IN LARGE PART .....

THE DESTRUCTION OF INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT ....

IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

AND THE CRUSHING OF DISSENT .....

BY THOSE WHOM NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW CUOMO WOULD NOW CALL UPON TO BE "WHISTLE-BLOWERS" .....

TO FIGHT CORPORATE FRAUD IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .....

IS ANDREW CUOMO MOCKING US HERE?

"Pact puts Capitol on notice - DA Soares, Cuomo vow to share resources to clean up corruption in state government"

By MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 12, 2007

ALBANY -- In what they touted as a historic pact, Albany County District Attorney David Soares and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo launched a joint effort Thursday to root out corruption in state government.

Their decision to share resources and "cross-designate" attorneys and investigators from Cuomo's office strengthens Soares' 18-month-old Public Integrity Unit, which is staffed by three people.

Soares said it also ensures that his office has the firepower needed, on a case-by-case basis, to probe dozens of tips and leads that have languished for lack of staff.

"This is not the changing of the guard," Cuomo said.

"It's the changing of an era."

When he took office two years ago, Soares said he stood for a single standard of justice, despite what he called an entrenched political machine that had ruled Albany County and the Capitol for decades.

On Thursday, Soares said the district attorneys who served before him had been "very much a part of the local, political establishment."

"I've made an effort to pry this office from the hands of those political influences," he said.

Because of that, he said, he only feels accountability to the taxpayers of Albany County:

"They shouldn't have to foot the bill for prosecutions that involve state agencies."

As the state's top legal official, the attorney general has jurisdiction in civil matters, but only partial jurisdiction in criminal cases.

Most cases the office prosecutes involve violations of Executive Law rather than Penal Law.

But the Criminal Prosecutions Bureau also handles criminal cases when the governor appoints the attorney general to supersede a district attorney.

The alliance with Soares extends the attorney general's reach, impact and power into the criminal realm.

Under the agreement announced Thursday, lawyers in Cuomo's office will now have access to the grand jury.

In New York state, though, it is the county district attorneys who primarily prosecute crime.

And Albany's position as the state capital gives Soares jurisdiction over cases of state government corruption.

To date, Soares' Public Integrity Unit has taken on cases including the scandal that led to the conviction and resignation of state Comptroller Alan Hevesi for using state employees to drive his wife around.

It also handled cases involving the departments of Motor Vehicles and Health, Assemblyman Roger Green, Sen. Ada Smith and a local case of absentee ballot fraud.

In his first two weeks in office, Cuomo has lost no time in putting his reform agenda into place.

Last week, he announced his office will review all $200 million in pork barrel grants known as "member items" doled out by the governor and Legislature each year to see if they're going to public purposes.

"This is a wonderful, strategic alliance that puts together offices that have complementary but different types of jurisdictions, but their goals are the same," said Patty Salkin, associate dean and director of the Government Law Center of Albany Law School.

"It maintains the public trust."

What good is an agency that says, "I wish I could investigate but I just don't have the authority?" Salkin said.

"Both men are making good on their campaign promises."

And, she added, "If everyone in government does what they ought to, no one needs to be nervous."

During their joint news conference at the Albany County Judicial Center, Soares and Cuomo stressed their partnership should not be seen as a witch hunt.

Every effort will be made to exonerate, when appropriate, as well as to prosecute to the full extent of the law, they said.

The deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice of New York University School of Law voiced her approval.

"We are all elated that everybody is really paying attention to reform, and we hope that real reform will take place," said Suzanne Novak.

"The culture has to change."

Neither Soares nor Cuomo would comment on how many cases are awaiting investigation, nor what state agencies could be under scrutiny.

Soares, however, recently said he is looking into allegations of wrongdoing referred by the departments of Education, Health, Insurance, Labor and Motor Vehicles.

Some involve people who work for the agencies, others involve licensees or other people who don't work for the state.

"No sooner would the words be out of my mouth than you'd hear the shredders going on," Soares said.

"I'll just say the cases we couldn't get to sooner we'll get to now."

Bolton can be reached at 434-2403 or by e-mail at mbolton@timesunion.com.

This post has been edited by Livyjr: Jan 12 2007, 06:54 PM

[Livyjr]

October 9, 1990

Hon. Raymond J. Elliott, III
North Greenbush Town Court
2 Douglas St.
Wynantskill, N.Y. 12198

Dear Judge Elliott,

Enclosed herewith, please find a copy of the People's Notice of Appeal from a dismissal in the North Greenbush Town Court on Tuesday, October 2, 1990.

Mr. Jones (one of the defendants in the Federal Civil Rights lawsuit) contacted this office and requested this course of action.

By way of judicial economy, I hereby move to reargue the Motion to Dismiss in order to afford the People an opportunity to be heard on this matter.

The complainant in this case feels that there has been an injustice, and has sought the assistance of this office.

We have agreed to accept the responsibility to represent the People in this case.

My understanding of the events which took place in your court on October 2, 1990 clearly demonstrate that Mr. Jones is not familiar with the criminal justice system!"

Mrs. Jones, while her actions were, without a doubt, inappropriate and arguably contemptuous, I do not believe such actions warrant or give rise to a dismissal.

Furthermore, as PLAINTIFF'S familiarity with the law has been demonstrated in another action pending in your court, I sincerely believe adequate representation of the People's position should be provided by this office!

By copy of this letter to PLAINTIFF, I am making this motion returnable on October 30, 1990, the same date that PLAINTIFF has another motion returnable.

Respectfully submitted, Richard J. McNally, Jr.
Assistant Rensselaer County District Attorney

- O'CONNOR "BIBLE" SUBMITTED TO THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ON BEHALF OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY DEFENDANTS, pp. 118-119

EXCERPTS FROM MARCH 15, 1989 REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF NEW YORK STATE HEALTH COMMISSIONER DR. DAVID AXELROD CONFIRMING PLAINTIFF'S ALLEGATIONS OF MISFEASANCE AND MALFEASANCE IN THE MANAGEMENT OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

Consultants may also have evaded the realty subdivision regulations.

An apparent inappropriate alteration of County Health Department approval for part of Algonquin Estates, Poestenkill (T), occurred recently.

The State Department of Health has referred this matter this matter to both the N.Y.S. Education Department and the Rensselaer County District Attorney.

- Taken from page 93 of the O'Connor BIBLE submitted to the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in this matter on behalf of defendant REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive Kathleen Jimino and her co-defendants, in or about November of 2005

There is tremendous POWER that comes to one who holds a JUDGESHIP ....

And there is tremendous POWER that comes to one who has a judge or two or ten .....

In his or her pocket .....

As was alleged to be the case in this matter we are discussing in here .....

The matter involving our PLAINTIFF .....

An allegation by Jeffey Pelletier of Poestenkill .....

The "PROTECTED PERSON" in the Town of Poestenkill in Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....

ACCORDING TO FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AND BUSH-APPOINTEE GARY L. SHARPE OF THE FEDERAL NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

JEFFREY PELLETIER ....

Who assaulted the PLAINTIFF on VIDEOTAPE in August of 2001 .....

And was then able to PROCURE .....

For an alleged DISBURSEMENT .....

Through a lawyer .....

Who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

A FRAUDULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER ......

FOR THE PLAINTIFF .....

THAT DIRECTED THE NEW YORK STATE POLICE ....

TO APPREHEND THE PLAINTIFF ....

AND TO HAUL HIM TO THE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC.'S SAMARITAN HOSPITAL .....

IN TROY, NEW YORK .....

WHERE THE PLAINTIFF HAD ALREADY BEEN "PRE-ADMITTED" .....

BY DR. JOHN CHRISTIAN BRAATEN OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC. .....

THE DOCTOR WHO PROVIDED JEFFREY PELLETIER OF POESTENKILL WITH THE FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

And so .....

In the videotape of the assault ....

Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill ....

Can clearly be heard bragging about his "protection" ......

And on March 31, 2005 .....

In the federal District Court Decision under discussion in here .....

Jeffrey Pelletier's BRAG was shown to be backed up by SUBSTANCE ......

Because Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill was in fact a PROTECTED PERSON in RENSSELAER COUNTY in the State of New York ......

The law did not apply to him .....

And it didn't .....

Nor did the federal Court Rules .....

Which Bush-appointee federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe "exempted" Jeffrey Pelletier from having to comply with .....

While the judge himself acted as attorney for both Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill and REPUBLICAN "ENFORCER" Gary James "JIMMY DAWG" Horton, also of Poestenkill, New York .....

Making motions to dismiss on their behalf ......

And then ....

In his capacity as a federal District Court Judge .....

Granting his own motions .....

And thereby absolving Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill of any responsibility whatsoever for assaulting PLAINTIFF and then having him unlawfully imprisoned at the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York BASED ON THE FRAUDLENT PSYCHIATRIC ARREST ORDER ISSUED BY BRAATEN ON AUGUST 22, 2001 .....

INCREDIBLE POWER .....

AND IMMUNITY FROM THE LAW YOURSELF ....

And so ....

"Pact puts Capitol on notice - DA Soares, Cuomo vow to share resources to clean up corruption in state government"

By MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 12, 2007

ALBANY -- In what they touted as a historic pact, Albany County District Attorney David Soares and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo launched a joint effort Thursday to root out corruption in state government.

Their decision to share resources and "cross-designate" attorneys and investigators from Cuomo's office strengthens Soares' 18-month-old Public Integrity Unit, which is staffed by three people.

Soares said it also ensures that his office has the firepower needed, on a case-by-case basis, to probe dozens of tips and leads that have languished for lack of staff.

"This is not the changing of the guard," Cuomo said.

"It's the changing of an era."

"The culture has to change."

What we are talking about in here .....

Is not CONJECTURAL ......

It is not HYPOTHETICAL .....

It is not THEORECTICAL .....

It is not an imaginary case study ......

In a law school textbook .....

These things under discussion in here .....

Really did happen ....

And they are a matter of public record .....

With the filing ...

Of what has been called in here .....

The O'CONNOR BIBLE .....

The 600-plus page RECORD .....

That high-powered attorney Tommy O'Connor filed ....

With the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals ....

In New York City ....

On behalf of REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive Kathleen Jimino ....

And her co-defendants in this above matter ....

In or about November 2005 .....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

What is under discussion in here .....

In this thread .....

Has has been going on for almost twenty years now .....

From 1988 ....

When John L. Buono, the politically-powerful REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive .....

Went on TV Channel 13 in Menands, New York .....

And announced to the world ....

On October 12, 1988 ....

That the PLAINTIFF had just been locked out of the Rensselaer County Office Building ....

And that Buono had withdrawn from the PLAINTIFF the protection of law in Rensselaer County .....

That was 6:00 P.M. .....

A little more than an hour before that .....

REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Public Health Director Kenneth Van Praag .....

Had summoned the PLAINTIFF into his office in the Rensselaer County Office Building .....

To tell the PLAINTIFF .....

That he could no longer protect him ....

THAT PLAINTIFF HAD UPSET SOME OF THE MOST POWERFUL MEN IN RENSSELAER COUNTY ....

STARTING WITH NEW YORK STATE SENATOR JOSEPH BRUNO ....

And so ....

"DON'T GO HOME" is what he told the PLAINTIFF ....

The bubbychuckers and goons were coming for the PLAINTIFF, is what he said ...

To have some "SPORT" with him ....

Which is a term up here ....

For VIOLENCE ....

Permitted ....

By the "authorities" ....

As a means of maintaining "discipline" .....

That was October 12 ....

So many weeks prior to that .....

This same Kenneth Van Praag had sent PLAINTIFF out to an ambush ....

In the Town of Sand Lake in Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....

Where a back-hoe operator almost decapitated him .....

And that was all covered up, Mr. A.B. ......

THE FIRST ASSAULT .....

And these are not just idle statements, Mr. A.B. ....

There are now literally hundreds if not thousands of pages of documentation on this one case .....

The F.B.I. records themselves are in the hundreds of pages ....

Page 90 of the "O'Connor BIBLE" which was before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in this case, states as follows:

"The investigators found poor documentation of field inspections, a lack of written procedures, questionable plan review practices and County failure to follow the County Sanitary Code and guidance adopted by the Board of Health."

"We conclude that there has been inadequate oversight by the County Board of Health, inadequate supervision by the County Director of Public Health, insufficient support by the County Executive, AND FAILURES OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIRECTORS TO ENFORCE AND FOLLOW THE COUNTY SANITARY CODE DURING THE TIME PERIOD STUDIED."

"THE STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT ALSO DID NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE OVERSIGHT OF THE REALTY SUBDIVISION AND PRIVATE WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL PROGRAMS WHICH ARE SUPPORTED IN PART BY STATE LOCAL ASSISTANCE FUNDS."

That was March 15, 1989, Mr. A.B., 1989 .....

By then, the PLAINTIFF had had his pay cut off .....

He was locked out of the Rensselaer County Office Building .....

John Buono had used TV Channel 13 and WGY Radio 810 as his private vehicles .....

To denounce the PLAINTIFF to the public as being mentally ill, and dangerous and a threat to women, etc, etc, etc .....

And never did the PLAINTIFF get an opportunity to rebut any of this that was being said .....

The PLAINTIFF was REDUCED to being an object .....

Like a beer can, or toilet paper, to be used as one would, before discarding ....

And somewhere in there .....

The afternoon of February 2, 1989 .....

According to the F.B.I. records at page 149 of the "O'Connor BIBLE" that was before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in this matter ....

The F.B.I. sent one of theirs out to PLAINTIFF'S house ....

To confront him with what he knew of public corruption in Rensselaer County .....

And out came the evidence .....

And you know what, Mr. A.B. .....

That only made the hole that much deeper .....

Because as PLAINTIFF was to find out, the F.B.I. has no integrity, either ....

Nor did the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, which buried this matter as deep as it could ...

And this is not idle speculation, either ..

F.B.I records at page 160 of the "O'Connor BIBLE" before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in this matter:

"Assistant United States Attorney Barbara Cottrell advised on 2/27/89 that rather than converting this matter to full investigation at this time, she would prefer to read the FD-302 which is being prepared of the PLAINTIFF interview and which will set forth PLAINTIFF''s experiences as the Rensselaer County Director of Environmental Health, chronologically."

"In the next thirty day period, Albany will also conduct interviews of people identified by PLAINTIFF as having information relating to corruption in the Rensselaer County Health Department and on the part of developers operating in Rensselaer County."

"After reviewing results of these interviews, AUSA Cottrell will render a prosecutive opinion that will assist the F.B.I. in deciding whether to convert the investigation to a full investigation, extend the preliminary inquiry, or close the investigation."

Well, Mr. A.B., what happened was that this AUSA Cottrell buried the investigation ......

And that is a matter of record in the records of the "O'Connor BIBLE" which was before the United States Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City in this matter, at the time they issued their SUMMARY ORDER burying this matter once again ....

And PLAINTIFF had this right from the mouth of the F.B.I. agent himself, down in front of the Federal Building in Albany, New York, on Broadway, where the F.B.I. was then located .....

"Get out of town" is what he told PLAINTIFF, Mr. A.B.

"YOU HAVE POWERFUL ENEMIES" is what he told PLAINTIFF ....

"It was out of his hands" is what he told PLAINTIFF ...

He himself had been ordered to get his *** out of Rensselaer County and to stay out, and he was going to heed that order, because he wanted to keep his job ..

An unbroken chain of documented corruption in the New York State Health Department and Rensselaer County Health Department goes back to around 1977, or so, and then comes forward to this time, and that unbroken chain included, front and center, such REPUBLICAN notables in the State of New York as State Senate "BOSS" Joseph "BIG JOE the HAMMER" Bruno, who is himself a land developer in Rensselaer County who was cited by PLAINTIFF for willfully violating the New York State Public Health Law in 1988 ....

And so, Mr. A.B., and so .....

"Palm Beach trip probed - Vacation, including a visit to a strip club, part of the Bruno-Abbruzzese inquiry"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, January 14, 2007

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- New York's legislative leaders had been in session only a few days last year when Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno quietly left town for a vacation in Florida.

It was Jan. 11, a Wednesday, and a bitter political debate over sexual offender laws was unfolding as Bruno boarded the private jet of his friend, Jared E. Abbruzzese, a Loudonville multimillionaire.

The two-day excursion included an expensive round of golf at an exclusive course, The Medalist, designed by Australian golf legend Greg Norman.

The day would end with Abbruzzese bankrolling the senator's visit to a strip club.

The trip, the Times Union has learned, has become one of many events being scrutinized by federal authorities in an ongoing criminal investigation of the unusual relationship between the senator and the businessman.

For his close friends at Loudonville's tony Schuyler Meadows Country Club, the fact Abbruzzese was picking up the tab was not unusual.

Abbruzzese, an avid golfer and self-made businessman, has routinely loaded his buddies on private jets and whisked them to famous destinations.

With Bruno on the Palm Beach trip were Abbruzzese, a physician who has treated Bruno, and an unidentified fourth man.

They were hoping to cheer up the senator at a time when he was battling prostate cancer and his wife was suffering from a condition that causes dementia, according to a knowledgeable source familiar with the outing.

On the drive back from the golf course, the men pulled into Rachel's, a high-class strip club and steakhouse in the heart of West Palm Beach.

There, patrons are greeted by overly polite valets who spend much of their time parking Range Rovers and customized BMWs driven by an almost exclusively male clientele.

A source who spoke to the Times Union about the trip said Bruno had no idea what was in store, although a sign outside indicates the club offers "adult entertainment."

Inside, $40 steaks and $90 bottles of wine are delivered by bow-tied waiters in a darkened four-star atmosphere.

On two stages in the center of the club, female performers, some fully nude, move fluidly under pulsing strobe lights while tunes from rockers such as Tom Petty and Jimi Hendrix pierce the air.

For those seeking a closer encounter, the women, many resembling Playboy centerfolds, offer private lap dances -- at a $20 minimum -- on a leather-covered bench near a secluded spot in the back.

Bruno's two-day vacation, including the night at Rachel's, was bankrolled by Abbruzzese, sources told the Times Union.

While many of Bruno's excursions aboard Abbruzzese's private jets are reflected in documents handed over in response to recent subpoenas from the state Lobbying Commission, the Florida trip is one of a few trips not reflected.

A federal grand jury has subpoenaed the files of the Lobbying Commission, which is investigating whether Abbruzzese is an unregistered lobbyist.

Abbruzzese is challenging the commission and contends he has not tried to influence state government.

As part of their probes, both federal authorities and the Lobbying Commission have subpoenaed flight records of Richmor Aviation, a private company that has managed and piloted Abbruzzese's aircraft.

Richmor officials disclosed information to the state panel regarding several flights Bruno took in 2005.

But the commission did not ask Richmor for its flight records in 2006, when Bruno flew to Florida.

Federal authorities won't discuss their subpoenaed records, but a source in the case said FBI agents are examining all of Bruno's flights with Abbruzzese.

The Palm Beach outing is among the issues the FBI, and a federal grand jury, are said to be exploring as they try to determine where Abbruzzese's and Bruno's friendship ended and their many business relationships began.

Federal agents are sifting through a maze of state grants and private business dealings as they probe Bruno's ties with Abbruzzese.

The purpose, a source briefed on the case said, is to determine whether Bruno's powerful influence was for sale.

Bruno, 77, declined repeated requests for comment on the Palm Beach trip.

His staffers said he considers the vacation a private matter and no one's business.

However, Bruno's private life has been heavily scrutinized after the senator disclosed last month that his personal business records have been subpoenaed by the grand jury.

The panel also has subpoenaed Abbruzzese's financial records, including those of companies and ventures in which the two men have had mutual interests.

Abbruzzese, according to a source close to him, disputes any assertion he was trying to buy Bruno's influence.

"I have a deep love for the man," Abbruzzese has said in describing their relationship, according to a knowledgeable source.

The nexus of that bond began in the late 1990s, when Bruno and Abbruzzese first met during a golf outing at Bruno's home course, the Troy Country Club.

They had mutual interests in horses -- Abbruzzese owns thoroughbreds and has sought a cut of the state's lucrative racing contract -- and telecommunications, in which both have extensive business experience.

E. Stewart Jones, a Troy attorney who spoke for Abbruzzese in an interview with the Times Union last month, described the fallout of Bruno's disclosure, and the ongoing federal investigation, as creating a "lynch mob mentality."

"They are good friends and have been good friends, and remain good friends," Jones said.

"The families are good friends; it's not simply Mr. Abbruzzese and Mr. Bruno."

"The families are close friends and have been."

Abbruzzese and his children helped Bruno build a fence at his Brunswick horse farm, according to a source close to Abbruzzese.

Bruno, whom Abbruzzese's children call "Uncle Joe" or "Senator Bruno," also helped Abbruzzese's older son learn to ride a horse.

But the relationship is not only personal.

Abbruzzese has hosted lucrative Republican fundraisers at his Loudonville mansion for Bruno, and others including former Gov. George Pataki.

In balance, Abbruzzese also has donated to the campaigns of Democrats, including Gov. Eliot Spitzer and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver; and privately donated tens of thousands of dollars to charitable causes, including recovery efforts for Hurricane Katrina and the 2004 tsunami, sources said.

Still, it's clear that Abbruzzese has a vested interest in Bruno's decision-making powers and he has been gracious with his wealth toward the senator.

In addition to off-the-record flights, Abbruzzese's jets have flown Bruno on political missions to places like Washington, D.C., as well as to Kentucky horse country in late 2005, where a fundraiser was staged to raise $200,000 for Bruno, primarily from thoroughbred horse racing supporters.

A for-profit Troy technology company Abbruzzese has a 10 percent financial stake in received $500,000 in grants, authorized by Bruno, between 2002 and 2004.

Abbruzzese, who declined comment for this report on the advice of his attorneys, also contributed at least $50,000 to a horse racing consortium that sought to redefine the beleaguered sport.

In another venture, he funded and joined a group, Empire Racing, that is competing for the state's lucrative horse racing franchise, including operation of its racetracks.

That effort came at a time when some experts believe video lottery terminals and casino plans are threatening to ruin the storied thoroughbred industry's chances of survival in New York.

But in that area, Abbruzzese is one of only numerous individuals who have tried to position themselves -- including through campaign contributions to politicians -- to get consideration from state leaders for control of horse racing.

At a chamber of commerce luncheon last week, Bruno again said he is not a target of a criminal investigation.

A source with intimate knowledge of the case would not say whether anyone will be charged with a crime, only that a criminal investigation is ongoing.

Bruno has declined to divulge details about his private consulting business, or why Abbruzzese allegedly paid the consulting firm several hundred thousand dollars.

Those payments are said to be a primary focus of the probe.

Sometime after the investigation began, according to sources involved in the case, Bruno placed several telephone calls to U.S. Attorney Glenn T. Suddaby, the top federal prosecutor in New York's Northern District.

The investigation is being headed by Suddaby's office and the FBI.

Bruno's spokesman disputes that account of the calls.

"Senator Bruno made one call to the U.S. Attorney's office when he was informed that they were conducting an inquiry," said John McArdle, director of communications for Senate Republicans.

"He did so to offer his complete and total cooperation."

"He did not call anyone repeatedly."

Suddaby declined comment, citing a policy not to discuss pending investigations.

Despite the stigma of the investigation, Bruno won unanimous re-election to his Senate leadership post two weeks ago, with one colleague abstaining.

He said state lawmakers are part-time legislators who have a right to engage in outside business interests, and insisted he has done nothing wrong.

Abbruzzese, 52, has not fared as well as a result of Bruno's disclosure of the investigation last month during a hastily called news conference.

A source said he has lost standing on corporate boards and significant revenue from the disclosure.

"It's tough to recover a reputation once it's been damaged," said Jones, also the attorney for Abbruzzese's wife, Sherrie, and several of the couple's private corporations.

"Even though there's no substance to the investigation people will forget that if they are absolved ... and what they remember are the inferences and speculation that everybody engages in in the beginning."

Brendan J. Lyons can be reached at 454-5547 or by e-mail at blyons@timesunion.com.

This post has been edited by Livyjr: Jan 14 2007, 08:58 AM

[Livyjr]

SO!

2/13/89!

And there we all were .....

Crowded into a smallish conference room ......

In the Rensselaer County Office Building ......

For what was being billed by the land developers in Rensselaer County .....

As the "TRIAL OF THE CENTURY" ......

And before it all was to be over .....

Which was really March 31, 2005 .....

In Federal District Court for the Northern District of New York .....

In Albany, New York .....

It ended up being quite a marathon, indeed ....

Although up until now .....

It was a story only a veritable handful of people even know transpired .....

Involving such "GIANTS" .....

In New York State, anyway .....

As Dr. David Axelrod ....

The controversial State Health Commissioner ....

Appointed by Democrat Mario Cuomo ....

Versus .....

Joseph "Big Joe" Bruno .....

A powerful New York State Senator from Rensselaer County ....

Who directly opposed ....

Dr. Axelrod's efforts .....

To clean out the corruption ....

In the Rensselaer County Department of Health .....

And who further had the CLOUT .....

To blow Dr. Axelrod "right out of the saddle" .....

And to thereby make him into an OBJECT OF DERISION in Rensselaer County .....

AS A GRAPHIC DEMONSTRATION .....

OF "BIG JOE" BRUNO'S POWER ....

Which was to happen on March 16, 1989 .....

But that was in OUR future yet .....

As of February 13, 1989 .....

When We, THE PEOPLE ....

And the FBI ....

And all the press and media for quite a distance around Troy, New York ....

Were crammed in that conference room .....

Listening raptly .....

As the TRIAL OF THE CENTURY began .....

SHADES OF 1989 .....

The Office of the United States Attorney comes forward and says, "well, how about that, we took a really, really hard look, but there was nothing there ...."

That is what people are expecting, actually .....

Some with GLEE ....

Joe Bruno's PARTISANS ....

And they are many, actually ....

And this brings us to what many see as F. Stewart Jones' TRUMP CARD ......

Which is the fact that in December of 2005 .....

Just a short year ago .....

The federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

PUT ITS SEAL OF APPROVAL .....

ON THE GRANTING OF "PROTECTED PERSON" STATUS HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

BY ELECTED OFFICIALS UP HERE IN RENSSELAER COUNTY ....

WHICH IS JOE BRUNO'S COUNTY .....

AND IF JOE BRUNO IS IN FACT DOLING OUT FAVORS AND PROTECTION HERE .....

IT IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HAS ALREADY APPROVED ...

CONDUCT THAT THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ITSELF HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH BACK IN AUGUST OF 2001 .....

And so ....

GIVEN ALL OF THAT PRIOR HISTORY ....

PEOPLE UP HERE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO FAITH OR TRUST WHATSOEVER .....

IN EITHER THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ....

OR THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK .....

And if people up here saw F. Stewart Jones returning from Washington, D.C. with an apologetic Alberto Gonzales in tow .....

To personally apologize to Joe Bruno .....

I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A SOUL UP HERE WHO WOULD BE SURPRISED ...

And I actually think that many are expecting exactly that .....

STARTING WITH THE PARTISANS OF JOE BRUNO ....

Who are many ....

And very powerfull .....

And so .....

"Feds follow cash trail - Authorities examine whether payments to Bruno's consulting firm were bid to gain influence"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, December 22, 2006

ALBANY -- A federal grand jury investigation of Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno is focusing on hundreds of thousands of dollars funneled by a wealthy businessman into the senator's private consulting company to allegedly influence the powerful Republican lawmaker, the Times Union has learned.

FBI agents have used federal grand jury subpoenas to sift through the business records of Bruno and his associate, Jared E. Abbruzzese, a Loudonville resident and the senator's close friend.

F. Stewart Jones, an attorney for Abbruzzese and his wife, Sherrie, confirmed Thursday that Abbruzzese paid money to Bruno's consulting company.

Bruno has refused to reveal his consulting clients or his consulting income.

The disclosure of the Albany FBI probe has been hurtful to Abbruzzese and Bruno, Jones said.

"Mr. Abbruzzese's and Sen. Bruno's rights have been trampled on here," Jones said.

"That could have adverse consequences for those responsible when this investigation runs its course."

"Bruno defends his dealings - 'We've followed the letter of the law,' says Senate GOP majority leader"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Saturday, December 23, 2006

ALBANY -- Bruno framed the situation differently, calling the investigation "more a media event."

"Livyjr, in the light of the past experience that people up there where you are have had with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Office of the United States Attorney, and this Senator Joseph Bruno, and a federal Hobbs Act investigation that was apparently suddenly terminated by the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York when the name of this Senator Joseph Bruno came into it in connection with questionable practices in the Rensselaer county Department of Health which were having an adverse impact on the lives, health and property of the people of Rensselaer County in New York State ....."

"Could you tell us how people up there feel ..."

"When they see this Rensselaer County lawyer F. Stewart Jones openly and blatantly threatening these federal prosecutors with retaliation against themselves and their employment in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper ..."

"And when they see this Senator Bruno himself, in the pages of the same Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper ..."

"Calling this alleged federal investigation a MEDIA EVENT ..."

"DO PEOPLE UP THERE THINK THAT SOMEONE IS GAMING THE SYSTEM HERE?"

"Palm Beach trip probed - Vacation, including a visit to a strip club, part of the Bruno-Abbruzzese inquiry"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, January 14, 2007

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Sometime after the investigation began, according to sources involved in the case, Bruno placed several telephone calls to U.S. Attorney Glenn T. Suddaby, the top federal prosecutor in New York's Northern District.

The investigation is being headed by Suddaby's office and the FBI.

Bruno's spokesman disputes that account of the calls.

"Senator Bruno made one call to the U.S. Attorney's office when he was informed that they were conducting an inquiry," said John McArdle, director of communications for Senate Republicans.

"He did so to offer his complete and total cooperation."

"He did not call anyone repeatedly."

Suddaby declined comment, citing a policy not to discuss pending investigations.

To people up here in the State of New York ......

This alleged telephone call ....

From New York State Senator Joseph "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

To this Glenn Suddaby .....

The TOP FEDERAL PROSECUTOR in the federal NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

Concerning this alleged GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION .....

Of "BIG JOE" Bruno's business dealings here in the State of New York .....

HAS BEEN EXPECTED .....

As it is believed up here that this Glenn Suddaby actually serves at the pleasure of "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

And news of this alleged telephone call ....

From "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

To this TOP FEDERAL PROSECUTOR GLEN SUDDABY .....

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION ......

Coming on the heels as it does .....

Of "BIG JOE" Bruno's own claim in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION ....

That this federal investigation is really nothing more than a MEDIA EVENT ...

Brings us all right back to the spring of 1989 .....

When it is alleged that "BIG JOE" Bruno did the same exact thing .....

Call the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern district of New York .....

To have them get the FBI back out of Rensselaer County in the State of New York ......

AND WHETHER OR NOT "BIG JOE" BRUNO ACTUALLY DID MAKE THAT CALL BACK IN 1989 .....

THE FACT IS, AND REMAINS .....

That the FBI did get out of Rensselaer County ......

LIKE A WHIPPED DOG ....

WITH ITS TAIL BETWEEN ITS LEGS .....

YIPPING AND KI-YIYING ......

ALL THE WAY BACK TO ALBANY .....

AND THAT WAS VERY OBVIOUS ......

TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE UP HERE BACK THEN .....

TO SOME ....

The supporters and partisans of "BIG JOE" Bruno ...

WITH GLEE ....

At this demonstration ....

Of "BIG JOE" Bruno's very considerable POWER .....

And with TREPIDATION .....

By the rest of us .....

Those of us who were for the law as it was written in the State of New York .....

BUT NOT ENFORCED .....

And so .....

With this news of this alleged telephone call .....

From "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

To this U.S. Attorney Glenn Suddaby ......

Simply "hanging" out there .....

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION .....

People are once again understandably concerned .....

THAT "BIG JOE" BRUNO .....

IS GOING TO SQUASH ANOTHER FEDERAL INVESTIGATION .....

PUBLICLY .....

RIGHT IN OUR FACES ....

TO ONCE AGAIN DEMONSTRATE TO ALL OF US UP HERE ...

JUST HOW MUCH POWER IT IS ...

THAT HE WIELDS OVER US ....

WITH THE PERMISSION ....

OF THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

AND THE AQUIESCENCE ....

Of the federal District Court for the Northern District of New York .....

And the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

BOTH OF WHICH HAVE GIVEN THEIR TACIT APPROVAL .....

TO THE "MARKETING" OF PROTECTION ....

BY ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

TO THOSE WITH THE CONNECTIONS AND CLOUT TO ENABLE THEM TO "SECURE" THIS "PROTECTION" .....

And so ....

That is where we are in this thread right now ......

For any one just stopping by .....

And wondering ....

And so .....

[Livyjr]

"Livyjr, I have been tallying up my notes here ..."

"And I don't believe that this thread is quite yet complete ..."

"According to my notes, here ...."

"There are still two issues kind of hanging out there ....."

"Not really stated ...."

"And certainly not resolved ...."

"And not by a long shot ...."

"And they are these ...."

"One issue, of course, has to do with what we shall call the 'size, shape and complexion' of the SUA SPONTE that the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals has granted to Bush-judge Gary L. Sharpe in this matter ...."

"A SUA SPONTE that allows Bush-judge Gary L. Sharpe, himself only a federal district court judge, to have APPELLATE CAPACITY over federal district court judge David Hurd ..."

"And further allows Bush-judge Gary L. Sharpe to exercise that APPELLATE CAPACITY to REVOKE PLAINTIFF's STANDING ..."

"WHICH IS TO SAY, REVERSE JUDGE HURD ON THE QUESTION OF STANDING ...."

"WHICH GOES DIRECTLY TO THE HEART OF WHAT RIGHTS THIS LEAVES YOUR PLAINTIFF, IF ANY ..."

"And that takes us to the SECOND ISSUE ..."

"WHICH IS NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPIZER'S VERY PUBLIC REPUDIATION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY THAT HE PERSONALLY HAS AS NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO DEFEND THE FINDINGS OF THE NEW YORK STATE WORKER'S COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD IN THE CASE OF PLAINTIFF'S DISABLING AT THE HANDS OF RENSSELAER COUNTY IN 1988 ..."

"I have been reviewing some papers associated with that case, a MEMORANDUM OF LAW submitted to the New York State Worker's Compensation Review Board on behalf of the PLAINTIFF in this matter ...."

"AND I NOTICE THAT IN TERMS OF PRECEDENT SETTING LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"THAT THE STIPULATION BETWEEN YOUR PLAINTIFF AND THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER WAS BASED UPON PRECEDENT-SETTING LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WHICH ESTABLISHED AS A CLASS OF INJURY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK THOSE CAUSED BY THE INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS ON THE EMPLOYEE BY THE EMPLOYER ....."

"AS WHEN AN EMPLOYER TRIES TO BREAK SOMEONE LIKE YOUR PLAINTIFF ..."

"And that is what makes New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's open repudiation of this STIPULATION so disturbing ...."

"BECAUSE WHAT NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPITZER IS REALLY DOING ..."

"IS REPUDIATING THAT CLASS OF INJURY ..."

"WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"PURSUANT TO THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION ..."

"BY THE NEW YORK STATE WORKER'S COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD ..."

"WHICH DECISION WAS UPHELD BY THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT ..."

"And so ..."

And for anyone just stopping by ....

What we have been talking about in here ....

Stems from an action taken by a medical doctor in the City of Troy, New York ....

On August 22, 2001 ....

When this medical doctor "ISSUED" a FALSE DIAGNOSIS of the person that we call the PLAINTIFF in here ....

A FALSE DIAGNOSIS that described this person, the PLAINTIFF, as an alleged dangerous mental patient who needed to be immediately incarcerated in the secure mental facility of the Samaritan Hospital run by the CORPORATION Northeast Health, Inc. in the City of Troy, New York ........

Now, why exactly this doctor issued this FALSE DIAGNOSIS in this case remains unknown to this day ....

BECAUSE THE DOCTOR NEVER HAD TO ACCOUNT FOR HIS ACTIONS ....

TO ANYONE ....

AND ESPECIALLY TO THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN NEW YORK CITY ...

THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ....

WHICH LICENSED THIS INDIVIDUAL TO BE A MEDICAL DOCTOR IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

OR THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ....

WHICH STATE AGENCY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR "POLICING" THE CONDUCT OF MEDICAL DOCTORS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

We know, of course, that the DIAGNOSIS WAS FALSE ....

Because the doctor, one John Christian Braaten ....

NEVER SAW THE PLAINTIFF ....

BEFORE HE ISSUED THIS FALSE DIAGNOSIS .....

NEVER EXAMINED THE PLAINTIFF ...

BEFORE HE ISSUED THIS FALSE DIAGNOSIS .....

DID NOT EVEN KNOW THE PLAINTIFF ...

BEFORE HE ISSUED THIS FALSE DIAGNOSIS .....

AND DID NOT HAVE ANY MEDICAL EVIDENCE ....

OF ANY SORT ...

TO SUPPORT THIS FALSE DIAGNOSIS ....

BEFORE HE ISSUED THIS FALSE DIAGNOSIS .....

And so ....

PROTECTION ...

And the PROTECTION RACKET ....

As it exists in the State of New York ....

WITH THE ARM OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FIRMLY WRAPPED AROUND IT ....

AND THE STRONG ARM OF NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPITZER, AS WELL ....

And so ....

That is what this thread has been about ....

HOW THAT PROTECTION RACKET UP HERE REALLY DOES OPERATE ...

TO OUR DETRIMENT ....

AS CITIZENS FOR LAW AND ORDER ...

AND FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY ....

AS OPPOSED TO A MOCKERY THEREOF ...

HERE IN THE CORRUPT STATE OF NEW YORK ....

And so ....

"The combination of a GENERALLY OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT and a specific triggering event causing psychiatric disability HAS LONG BEEN RECOGNIZED AS A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR A FINDING OF ACCIDENT UNDER THE (NEW YORK STATE) WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW."

- LEGAL BRIEF filed with the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department of the State of New York by the OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ROBERT ABRAMS on behalf of NEW YORK STATE WORKER'S COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD in MATTER OF THE CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION UNDER THE WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW MADE BY NICHOLAS VELAZQUEZ v. TRIBOROUGH BRIDGE AND TUNNEL AUTHORITY, EMPLOYER, AND HOME INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER on September 15, 1989 ....

Jane Lauer Barker, Assistant Attorney General in Charge ....

Theresa E. Wolinski, Assistant Attorney General of Counsel ...

"So, Livyjr ..."

"PANDERING TO THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL BEHIND CLOSED DOORS, INDEED ..."

"TO STRIP NEW YORK STATE CITIZENS OF THE PROTECTION OF LAW ..."

"SO AS TO MAKE NEW YORK STATE THE BEST PLACE TO DO BUSINESS IN THE WORLD ..."

"A REAL CAPITALIST'S PARADISE ..."

"WITH WORKERS THAT YOU CAN USE UP ..."

"AND THEN THROW AWAY ..."

"JUST AS IT WAS ..."

"BACK IN THE 'GOOD OLD DAYS' ....."

"OF THE TRIANGLE SHIRTWAIST COMPANY ..."

"WITH NO FEAR AT ALL OF ANY GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT ..."

"OR INTERVENTION ..."

"AND WHAT IT APPEARS LIKE, BASED ON WHERE THIS THREAD HAS GOTTEN TO, IN TERMS OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED TO DATE ..."

"IS THAT IN THIS FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS PROCEEDING UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ..."

"NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPITZER WAS AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY ..."

"FIRST IN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ..."

"AND THEN IN THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN NEW YORK CITY ..."

"TO TAKE A SET OF 'PRUNING SHEARS', AS IT WERE ..."

"WITH THE FEDERAL COURT'S CONNIVANCE ..."

"TO DO SOME LIMBING AND PRUNING OF THE BODY OF LAW THAT HAS DEVELOPED IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC HEALTH PROTECTION AND THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT OF WORKERS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO A SAFE WORK ENVIRONMENT ...."

"AND HE HAS HACKED AND CUT THAT BODY OF LAW TO PIECES ..."

"AND IT LOOKS LIKE IN REFUSING TO SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF PLAINTIFF'S WORKER'S COMPENSATION STIPULATION IN THIS FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS MATTER ..."

"THAT BOTH NEW YORK STATE GOVERNOR-ELECT ELIOT SPITZER ..."

"AND THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN NEW YORK CITY ..."

"ALONG WITH THE UNITED STATES COURT OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE ..."

"HAVE SCORED A HUGE VICTORY ..."

"FOR BUSINESS ..."

"TO BRING BACK GENERALLY OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENTS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"SWEAT SHOP CONDITIONS IN REALITY ..."

"DESPITE THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"AND ITS CONSTITUTION ..."

"SINCE ELIOT SPITZER AND THE NEW YORK STATE BUSINESS COUNCIL ..."

"VIEW THESE LAWS ..."

"AND THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION ...."

"AS IMPEDIMENTS ..."

"TO NEW YORK STATE ..."

"BEING THE 'BEST PLACE TO DO BUSINESS IN THE WORLD' ...."

And so ....

In the world of "LAW" .....

As it is defined over here .....

In the United States of America .....

And more specifically ....

The State of New York .....

BEFORE one can obtain a hearing .....

For REDRESS OF GRIEVANCE .....

There must in fact be a GRIEVANCE .....

And it must be discernable .....

QUANTIFIABLE ......

And so ......

We up here have been waiting ....

And watching ....

FOR WHAT THE NEXT STEP IN THIS DRAMA BEING PLAYED OUT UP HERE .....

BETWEEN THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER .....

AND THE PLAINTIFF IN THIS MATTER .....

WAS GOING TO BE .....

HOW WOULD THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

AND THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER ....

USE THIS MARCH 31, 2005 FEDERAL COURT DECISION UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ....

AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF ....

BEYOND USING IT TO ISOLATE HIM .....

AND TO KEEP HIM QUIET .....

THROUGH THE INTIMIDATION VALUE OF THIS MARCH 31, 2005 FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT DECISION .....

And more importantly .....

Would the PLAINTIFF be afforded a venue in the State of New York .....

IN WHICH TO CHALLENGE THE CONSTITUTIONALITY .......

Of this March 31, 2005 federal district court decision .....

In the State of New York ....

PURSUANT TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS ....

IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .....

And that opportunity .....

Looks as if it might be arising .....

As we were informed today .....

By the PLAINTIFF ......

THAT IT WOULD APPEAR THAT RENSSELAER COUNTY .....

IS MOVING TO VIOLATE ITS OWN STIPULATION ....

BY TERMINATING PLAINTIFF'S WORKER'S COMPENSATION PAYMENTS ....

BASED UPON THE FAILURE OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO DEFEND PLAINTIFF'S WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECISION BASED UPON THAT STIPULATION IN THE FEDERAL COURT PROCEEDINGS THAT LED UP TO THE MARCH 31, 2005 FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT UNDER DISCUSSION IN THIS THREAD .......

This, of course, amounts to STARVATION TACTICS on the part of the COUNTY OF RENSSELAER ....

CUTTING OFF THE PLAINTIFF'S STIPULATED WORKER'S COMPENSATION BENEFITS ....

IN THE DEAD OF THE WINTER UP HERE ......

And so it goes ....

As we just got word of this today ......

It is a bit too soon to determine what direction this matter will go in now ....

But the initial indications are that PLAINTIFF is going to do his best to bring this matter to the attention of the New York State Worker's Compensation Review Board .....

As intentional harassment .....

On the part of the County of Rensselaer ....

And the Attorney General of the State of New York .....

REPUDIATING THE PLAINTIFF'S WORKER'S COMPENSATION STIPULATION .....

In the federal District Court for the Northern District of New York .....

And so .....

[Livyjr]

And for anyone just joining in here, who is wondering at what is going on, we are talking about a NOTICE OF DECISION issued by newly-appointed BUSH CONSERVATIVE Federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe in the Northern District of New York on March 31, 2005 that has as its practical effect, two things:

a) The ruling creates a "class" of people in the Northern District of New York WHO ARE IMMUNE from the operation of the state laws of the State of New York, on them, the "PRIVILEGED CLASS"; and

b) The ruling creates a second "class" of persons, the OUTCAST CLASS, in the Northern District of New York who are OUTSIDE THE PROTECTION of the state and federal law in the Northern District of New York, which is us, the citizens who are writing this thread as OUR epitaph, or more properly, the epitaph of OUR rights under the laws and Constitutions of the United States, where we are all natural born citizens, and the State of New York, where we all reside.

Simply stated, on August 22, 2001, "8-22", as we call it up here, a doctor in the City of Troy, New York, on alleged demand from REPUBLICAN politicians in the Town of Poestenkill, and the County of Rensselaer in the State of New York, and allegedly for payment, made out a completely fraudulent mental health involuntary commitment order for the PLAINTIFF in this matter, a New York State licensed professional engineer, and associate level public health engineer, and that commitment order (1) caused the PLAINTIFF to be incarcerated as a dangerous mental patient, and (2) has left him now "BRANDED" as a dangerous mental patient, so that his services as an "expert witness" on engineering matters and enforcement of the provisions of the New York State Public Health Law and Education Law as it pertains to professional practice of engineers in the State of New York are no longer available to us, the citizens of New York State who reside in the County of Rensselaer in the State of New York.

Without an expert witness to testify on OUR behalf, we are effectively "out of court" when it comes to challenging on-going corruption in OUR county health department that has the effect of depriving us of the equal protection of the New York State Public Health Law, which in OUR opinion, renders us as a form of "outcast", without access to due process of law in OUR own nation, and state, here in America.

What makes this March 31, 2005 FEDERAL Notice of Decision particularly odious to us, and shocking to OUR sense of "fair play", as well, is the latitude and "discretion" that it appears to give to New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer to be able to "remove" at will at any time, BASED ON NOTHING, and through the "vehicle" of the blatantly unlawful and illegal "PSYCHIATRIC TAKE-DOWN", any other professional engineers, who like this one, decide to take on the representation of citizens like us in matters involving corruption in state agencies such as the New York State Department of Health and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

At a time when he is allegedly "TAKING MONEY" from the housing "industry" in the State of New York, Attorney General Spitzer has allegedly "engineered" the "removal" of an expert witness AGAINST the housing "industry" THROUGH UNLAWFUL AND FRAUDULENT MEANS, and Federal Court for the Northern District of New York appears to have just turned a blind eye to that as "politics as usual", with the BRANDING of OUR expert witness as an alleged dangerous mental patient by Eliot Spitzer, allegedly on behalf of the "housing industry", from who he is allegedly "taking money", according to public newpspaer accounts in our area.

So far as we are able to discern, this FRAUDULENT CERTIFICATION of our expert as an alleged "DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT" by this POLITICAL doctor in Troy, New York has now been filed in various computer systems, including those used by the New York State Police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation, so that this individual now has been put into a class of people that are "suspect", always, such a convicted child molestors, rapists, etc.

Obviously, besides destroying this person's life, and everything that this person worked to achieve in life in terms of professional credibility, this BRANDING, along with this JUDICIAL IMPRIMATUR on this fraud, renders this person absolutely worthless as an expert witness, especially against the State of New York, which is always defended in court by the New York State Attorney General, which is Eliot Spitzer.

According to this March 31, 2005 Federal Court decision that we are discussing in here, IF our witness were to try and give testimony in a court of law against the state on behalf of citizens harmed by corrupt actions of the state, he would have to "disclose" this BOGUS "FACT" that he had this psychiatric commitment order issued against him, which then would immediately destroy his credibility in any such proceeding, and with disastrous consequences for all involved, EXCEPT ELIOT SPITZER, of course, and the State of New York, and the housing "industry", who have allegedly been giving money to Eliot Spitzer for "undisclosed services rendered"!

As for us, we are a group of people relatively small in number, and of modest means, as many are elderly, and had hoped to live out their lives in some degree of security, within the law, and we are without clout, and so WE ARE LOSERS in the eyes of the rich, famous and powerful, here in America, and we must finally admit that, to ourselves, first, and then, to the candid world, especially in the light of this shocking loss, which has left us bereft and without hope for the first time in over twenty years of continuous struggle against the forces of corruption in the State of New York.

Hence this thread!

Thank you for your interest .....

"Feeding off taxpayers no crime, lawyer says - Cronyism, big spending called usual government practice at Strevell trial"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 18, 2007

ALBANY -- A defense lawyer for the Rensselaer County entrepreneur whose organization got more than $1 million in member item grants directed by Sen. Joseph L. Bruno is arguing in federal court that dishonesty isn't necessarily a federal offense.

William P. Fanciullo, lawyer for J. Felix Strevell, the former director of the now-defunct Institute for Entrepreneurship, also said that Strevell's actions, including putting relatives on the state payroll, were normal practices in government.

Fanciullo asserted that the U.S. attorney's case against Strevell is full of allegations that should not be classified as federal crimes.

In his motion to dismiss the federal case, he suggested that by the prosecution's logic, state employees could be hauled to court for taking a sick day to play golf.

"According to the indictment it has become a felony to have a conflict of interest," says Fanciullo.

"Any 'dishonesty,' any state law violation, connected to employment, coupled with mailing or wire, becomes a federal felony."

Strevell is charged with nine counts of mail fraud and six counts of wire fraud.

The case before U.S. District Court Justice Gary L. Sharpe centers on Strevell's lavish spending on himself and on parties that honored lawmakers who helped him get public money.

Among its funding sources, the institute received two $500,000 discretionary grants, known as member items, through Bruno in 1999 and 2001.

Strevell allegedly misused some of the $8 million in mostly taxpayer funds raised by the institute during his reign from 1998 to 2001, when he and his brother, Chauncey, the former chief operating officer, abruptly quit.

While at the institute, Strevell hired friends, relatives of powerful Republicans, his daughter and his daughter's boyfriend.

He also used institute funds to purchase clothing and trips for himself and family members.

The institute's activities, revealed by the Times Union, became an embarrassment for Republican leaders who had supported it, including Bruno, R-Brunswick, Gov. George Pataki and his administration, and former U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park.

Prosecutors say Strevell, a former state bureaucrat, manipulated the system to set up the nonprofit institute as an offshoot of state government.

He worked to improperly enrich himself and his family, the indictment says, receiving a base salary of $225,000 plus $24,000 for a housing stipend, trips for family members and merchandise for his personal use, including a $64,000 recreational vehicle.

Strevell also allegedly doctored the record of a board vote that resulted in his pay rising by $95,000.

Fanciullo said Strevell's management of the institute followed normal and accepted practices of government, including the hiring of kin, and that the salary vote was legitimate.

In his motion to dismiss, Fanciullo attached a deposition from Chauncey Strevell saying he and two other members of the board, Jeffrey Pfiel and Georgette Mosbacher, voted to approve the raise.

He said the other two board members, including another Strevell brother, Felix, and Joseph Magno, abstained.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Sara Lord, in her response to the court, said Fanciullo used "wildly hypothetical" situations to demonstrate unsuitable prosecutions.

She added that mail fraud is a legitimate charge because Strevell used the mail to conduct his alleged frauds.

M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

"Feeding off taxpayers no crime, lawyer says - Cronyism, big spending called usual government practice at Strevell trial"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 18, 2007

ALBANY -- A defense lawyer for the Rensselaer County entrepreneur whose organization got more than $1 million in member item grants directed by Sen. Joseph L. Bruno is arguing in federal court that dishonesty isn't necessarily a federal offense.

William P. Fanciullo, lawyer for J. Felix Strevell, the former director of the now-defunct Institute for Entrepreneurship, also said that Strevell's actions, including putting relatives on the state payroll, were normal practices in government.

Fanciullo asserted that the U.S. attorney's case against Strevell is full of allegations that should not be classified as federal crimes.

The case before U.S. District Court Justice Gary L. Sharpe centers on Strevell's lavish spending on himself and on parties that honored lawmakers who helped him get public money.

Among its funding sources, the institute received two $500,000 discretionary grants, known as member items, through Bruno in 1999 and 2001.

Strevell allegedly misused some of the $8 million in mostly taxpayer funds raised by the institute during his reign from 1998 to 2001, when he and his brother, Chauncey, the former chief operating officer, abruptly quit.

While at the institute, Strevell hired friends, relatives of powerful Republicans, his daughter and his daughter's boyfriend.

He also used institute funds to purchase clothing and trips for himself and family members.

The institute's activities, revealed by the Times Union, became an embarrassment for Republican leaders who had supported it, including Bruno, R-Brunswick, Gov. George Pataki and his administration, and former U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park.

Prosecutors say Strevell, a former state bureaucrat, manipulated the system to set up the nonprofit institute as an offshoot of state government.

He worked to improperly enrich himself and his family, the indictment says, receiving a base salary of $225,000 plus $24,000 for a housing stipend, trips for family members and merchandise for his personal use, including a $64,000 recreational vehicle.

Strevell also allegedly doctored the record of a board vote that resulted in his pay rising by $95,000.

Fanciullo said Strevell's management of the institute followed normal and accepted practices of government, including the hiring of kin, and that the salary vote was legitimate.

NEW YORK STATE EXECUTIVE LAW - ARTICLE 5 - DEPARTMENT OF LAW

S 71. Attorney-general to appear in cases involving the constitutionality of an act of the legislature.

Whenever the constitutionality of a statute is brought into question upon the trial or hearing of any action or proceeding, civil or criminal, in any court of record of original or appellate jurisdiction, the court or justice before whom such action or proceeding is pending, may make an order, directing the party desiring to raise such question, to serve notice thereof on the attorney-general and that the attorney-general be permitted to appear at any such trial or hearing in support of the constitutionality of such statute.

The court or justice before whom any such action or proceeding is pending may also make such order upon the application of any party thereto, and the court shall make such order in any such action or proceeding upon motion of the attorney-general.

When such order has been made in any manner herein mentioned it shall be the duty of the attorney-general to appear in such action or proceeding in support of the constitutionality of such statute.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/nycodes/c39/a8.html

I'm always interested in "juxtaposition", the setting of things side-by-side, so to speak ....

Which is why I bring this story into this thread .....

For one, it is related to this case that we have been talking about in here, as it involves the same Mental Hygiene Law .....

Except this is happening in State Court in New York State, as opposed to federal court ...

And the other interesting thing is the fact that in this case, one of the State's own "creations" is providing the legal services, for free ....

In this case here, the same New York State Mental Health Legal Services, upon hearing the details, and who was involved, declined to involve itself in the matter involving our PLAINTIFF .....

No reasons given, of course ...

Just "the conversation is now over ....."

"Release of sex offenders appealed - 12 convicted criminals to stay in custody as governor contests ruling"

By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press
First published: Saturday, November 19, 2005

ALBANY -- A dozen sex criminals who won their conditional release in court after being ordered held in a psychiatric hospital by Gov. George Pataki will instead remain in custody as the state appeals the court decision, the governor said Friday.

State Supreme Court Justice Jacqueline Silbermann on Tuesday ordered the release of the prisoners -- whose crimes include the rape and sodomy of boys and girls -- pending examinations of each inmate by two court-appointed psychiatrists.

Pataki appealed that decision Friday, leading to a temporary stay on the judge's order, Pataki's office said.

The convicted sex offenders had been ordered held by Pataki.

After years of failing to secure a law that would allow civil confinement of some sex offenders when their sentences end, Pataki decided to "push the envelope" of the law by ordering them held in a psychiatric hospital.

Pataki used the state's involuntary commitment law, which normally deals with the noncriminal mentally ill, to win extended confinement of the sex offenders.

Lawyers for the prisoners petitioned the court for their release, arguing their clients' detentions were illegal because the state violated the law that governs the transfer of apparently mentally ill prisoners to hospitals.

"We feel very strongly that the state has to comply with the corrections law, which it simply didn't do," said Stephen Harkavy, deputy director of Mental Health Legal Services.

He represented the 12 defendants.

Harkavy said he will try to get the stay lifted by an appellate court.

The case will probably be argued early next week, he said.

"The 'KEY SILENCES', indeed, Livyjr ....."

"Which brings me to a question that I have been pondering for some time now ..."

"And that has to do with this MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES that federal District Court Judge Hurd is discussing in Ruhlmann above here ...."

"I have been going back and forth through this thread, and I have not found any mention at all of this MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES ...."

"It would seem based on Judge Hurd's Decision in Ruhlmann that this MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES should have some role to play here ..."

"And yet I see no mention of them ..."

"Have I missed something, Livyjr?"

NO ......

You did not miss anything .....

And MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES got lost between the cracks in here, so to speak .....

And I am glad that you have brought them up at this time .....

BECAUSE THEY ARE INDEED ONE OF THE "KEY SILENCES" IN THIS MATTER .....

HAVING BEEN CONTACTED BY THE PLAINTIFF AFTER HE WAS RELEASED FROM HIS UNLAWFUL INCARCERATION IN THE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY OF THE STRATTON VA HOSPITAL ON AUGUST 22, 2001 .....

And that brings us over to a question that has never been adequately addressed in this matter up here .....

Which is this ......

WHO EXACTLY IS THIS MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES, AND TO WHOM ARE THEY RESPONSIBLE?

The answer to that question, so far as we have ever been able to discern it, is that MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES was created by the State of New York AS A CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARD .......

SO THAT WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE COULD NOT HAPPEN .....

THAT PEOPLE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK COULD NOT BE UNLAWFULLY INCARCERATED AS ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENTS BY DOCTORS WHO ARE "MARKETING" THAT "SERVICE" TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH THE FINANCIAL MEANS TO PROCURE THAT "SERVICE" .....

AND YET .....

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT DID HAPPEN ......

AND IN THIS CASE .......

MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES WENT MISSING ......

AFTER THE PLAINTIFF CONTACTED THEM AND INFORMED THEM OF WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED IN THIS MATTER .....

And that is all we know of the matter, any of us up here ......

We were present when the telephone conversation took place between the PLAINTIFF and what was alleged to be the chief attorney for this Mental Health Legal Services shortly after PLAINTIFF had been released from custody at the Stratton VA Hospital......

Which telephone number had been provided to the PLAINTIFF by the same Albany, New York Police Officer who had intervened in the matter on August 22, 2001 at the Stratton VA Hospital .....

And we heard PLAINTIFF explain in some great detail exactly who he was, and what had transpired in the matter, just as it is explained in great detail in the federal civil rights lawsuit that was tossed out by federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe on March 31, 2005 .....

AND THEN .....

WE NEVER HEARD ANOTHER WORD FROM MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES ......

NOTHING .....

"A POLITICAL HIT ....."

"POWERFUL MEN ..."

"STAY OUT OF IT ...."

And so .....

"KEY SILENCES", indeed .....

And MENTAL HEALTH LEGAL SERVICES in the State of New York is one of them .....

And so ....

"It's time for New York to lead the nation again by bringing integrity and effective solutions back to state government."

This is quite an interesting comment right above here by the newly sworn-in Attorney General of the State of New York ......

Mr. Andrew Cuomo ....

Who is himself the son of the former Governor of the State of New York, Mario Cuomo .....

Who was the Governor of the State of New York .....

In 1991 ....

Who took it upon himself to ALTER the New York State Mined Land Reclamation Law ......

WITHOUT ANY PUBLIC NOTICE OR REVIEW .....

At the behest of the EMPIRE STATE CONCRETE AND AGGREGATE PRODUCERS' ASSOCIATION .....

A politically powerful "SPECIAL INTEREST" group in the State of New York ....

TO EXCLUDE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN THE REVIEW PROCESS .....

OF APPLICATIONS ....

BY ESCAPA MEMBERS ....

TO CONDUCT MINERAL EXTRACTION OPERATIONS ....

IN OR PROXIMATE TO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

IN VIOLATION OF OUR NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION .....

A move on the part of former-New York State Governor Mario Cuomo .....

In 1991 ....

That went a very long distance towards DESTROYING INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT in the State of New York .....

THE DESTROYED INTEGRITY .....

THAT SON ANDREW .....

NOW NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL .....

SO LOUDLY BEMOANS .....

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION article above here from December 31, 2006 ......

WHICH IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT .....

IN LARGE PART .....

THE DESTRUCTION OF INTEGRITY IN GOVERNMENT ....

IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

AND THE CRUSHING OF DISSENT .....

BY THOSE WHOM NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ANDREW CUOMO WOULD NOW CALL UPON TO BE "WHISTLE-BLOWERS" .....

TO FIGHT CORPORATE FRAUD IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .....

IS ANDREW CUOMO MOCKING US HERE?

That is the question that is on the minds of the citizens of the State of New York up here in the Albany, New York area .....

Who have been witnessing this DECLINE .....

This INTENTIONAL TRASHING of INTEGRITY in government ......

BY THE "GOVERNMENT" OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ITSELF ......

BEGINNING BACK IN 1988 .....

WHEN THEN-NEW YORK STATE GOVERNOR MARIO CUOMO'S NEW YORK STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT STOOD IDLY BY ......

AS A HEALTH OFFICER IN RENSSELAER COUNTY IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK HAD HIS PROFESSIONAL REPUTATION DESTROYED .....

ALONG WITH HIS HEALTH AND WELL-BEING .....

AFTER THE RENSSELAER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL .....

OFFERED REPUBLICAN RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE JOHN L. BUONO $80,000 .....

IN THE SPRING OF 1988 .....

IN THE PRESENCE OF A "REPRESENTATIVE" OF THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ....

TO "GET RID" OF THIS HEALTH OFFICER ....

BECAUSE HE WAS ACTING WITH INTEGRITY .....

AND THEY DID NOT WANT THAT ...

And so .....

There is tremendous POWER that comes to one who holds a JUDGESHIP ....

And there is tremendous POWER that comes to one who has a judge or two or ten .....

In his or her pocket .....

As was alleged to be the case in this matter we are discussing in here .....

The matter involving our PLAINTIFF .....

An allegation by Jeffey Pelletier of Poestenkill .....

The "PROTECTED PERSON" in the Town of Poestenkill in Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....

ACCORDING TO FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE AND BUSH-APPOINTEE GARY L. SHARPE OF THE FEDERAL NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

JEFFREY PELLETIER ....

Who assaulted the PLAINTIFF on VIDEOTAPE in August of 2001 .....

And was then able to PROCURE .....

For an alleged DISBURSEMENT .....

Through a lawyer .....

Who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

A FRAUDULENT INVOLUNTARY PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER ......

FOR THE PLAINTIFF .....

THAT DIRECTED THE NEW YORK STATE POLICE ....

TO APPREHEND THE PLAINTIFF ....

AND TO HAUL HIM TO THE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC.'S SAMARITAN HOSPITAL .....

IN TROY, NEW YORK .....

WHERE THE PLAINTIFF HAD ALREADY BEEN "PRE-ADMITTED" .....

BY DR. JOHN CHRISTIAN BRAATEN OF NORTHEAST HEALTH, INC. .....

THE DOCTOR WHO PROVIDED JEFFREY PELLETIER OF POESTENKILL WITH THE FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

And so .....

In the videotape of the assault ....

Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill ....

Can clearly be heard bragging about his "protection" ......

And on March 31, 2005 .....

In the federal District Court Decision under discussion in here .....

Jeffrey Pelletier's BRAG was shown to be backed up by SUBSTANCE ......

Because Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill was in fact a PROTECTED PERSON in RENSSELAER COUNTY in the State of New York ......

The law did not apply to him .....

And it didn't .....

Nor did the federal Court Rules .....

Which Bush-appointee federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe "exempted" Jeffrey Pelletier from having to comply with .....

While the judge himself acted as attorney for both Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill and REPUBLICAN "ENFORCER" Gary James "JIMMY DAWG" Horton, also of Poestenkill, New York .....

Making motions to dismiss on their behalf ......

And then ....

In his capacity as a federal District Court Judge .....

Granting his own motions .....

And thereby absolving Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill of any responsibility whatsoever for assaulting PLAINTIFF and then having him unlawfully imprisoned at the Stratton VA Hospital in Albany, New York BASED ON THE FRAUDLENT PSYCHIATRIC ARREST ORDER ISSUED BY BRAATEN ON AUGUST 22, 2001 .....

INCREDIBLE POWER .....

AND IMMUNITY FROM THE LAW YOURSELF ....

And so ....

"Wow, Livyjr ..."

"I hadn't thought too much about a TIMELINE approach to digesting the contents of this thread ..."

"But when you apply that concept to the above ..."

"IT IS READILY APPARENT ..."

"THAT IN THAT OCTOBER 13, 1988 LETTER TO DR. IAN LOUDON, THE MEDICAL DOCTOR IN CHARGE AT THAT TIME OF THE ALBANY REGIONAL OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ..."

"RENSSELAER COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DIRECTOR KENNETH VAN PRAAG WAS IN FACT OPENLY ADVOCATING AND DISCUSSING WHAT COULD BE CALLED A 'CLASSIC TEXT-BOOK EXAMPLE' OF AN INCREMENTALLY-INCREASING 'OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT' FOR YOUR PLAINTIFF ..."

"AND THIS MEDICAL DOCTOR FOR THE NEW YORK STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT DOES NOT EVEN BAT AN EYE AT THAT ..."

"DESPITE THE APPARENT EXISTENCE OF LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO THE CONTRARY ..."

"LAW IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK WHICH DEFINES THAT CONDUCT AS THE BASIS OF AN ACTIONABLE 'ACCIDENT' FOR WHICH THE VICTIM CAN CLAIM COMPENSATION FROM THE PERPETRATOR ..."

"IN THIS CASE, THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER ..."

"BY STIPULATION ..."

"OR AT LEAST, TO DATE, YOU HAVE PUBLISHED NO OBJECTIONS BY THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH TO THIS INFLICTION OF AN OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT ON YOUR PLAINTIFF BY THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER ..."

"EVEN THOUGH ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1989 ..."

"ABOUT ONE YEAR THEREAFTER ...."

"THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS SUCCESSFULLY ARGUING IN THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT THAT:"

"The combination of a GENERALLY OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT and a specific triggering event causing psychiatric disability HAS LONG BEEN RECOGNIZED AS A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR A FINDING OF ACCIDENT UNDER THE (NEW YORK STATE) WORKER'S COMPENSATION LAW."

"HAS LONG BEEN RECOGNIZED ..."

"AND YET, JUST ONE YEAR EARLIER, IN 1988, THE STATE OF NEW YORK ITSELF WAS DIRECTLY INSTRUMENTAL IN CAUSING AN OPPRESSIVE WORK ENVIRONMENT TO BE IMPOSED ON YOUR PLAINTIFF ..."

"APPARENTLY TO BREAK HIM ..."

"BECAUSE HE WOULD NOT BETRAY HIS PUBLIC TRUST ..."

"AND ON JUNE 30, 1989 ...."

"JUST THREE MONTHS BEFORE THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL WAS TO ARGUE THAT POINT SUCCESSFULLY IN THE APPELLATE DIVISION OF THE NEW YORK STATE SUPREME COURT ON BEHALF OF THE NEW YORK STATE WORKER'S COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD AND THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..."

"SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN WELL AWARE OF ALL OF THIS ..."

"AND APPARENTLY TOOK NO ISSUE WITH IT ..."

"OR AT LEAST THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DID NOT LOOK ASKANCE AT THIS INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND PSYCHOLOGICAL HARASSMENT OF YOUR PLAINTIFF BY THE COUNTY FO RENSSELAER ..."

"And so, Livyjr ..."

"If nothing else, this thread has been very revealing ..."

"As to how what is purported to be 'our' government functions ..."

"TO DEPRIVE US OF THE PROTECTIONS OF THE LAWS WHICH HAVE BEEN ENACTED PURSUANT TO OUR CONSTITUTIONS TO PROTECT AND SAFEGUARD OUR LIVES AND HEALTH AND PROPERTY ..."

"WHICH LEADS TO THE DIRECT CONCLUSION ..."

"THAT THE BEST WAY TO SUBVERT OUR AMERICAN SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT ..."

"IS THROUGH LAWYERS ..."

"AND THE COURTS ..."

And so ....

"So, Livyjr ...."

"After reviewing this series of posts above here about PROTECTION in the State of New York ..."

"And especially the 'KEY SILENCES' that are necessary for corruption to flourish in the State of New York ..."

"It would seem ...."

"From where I am sitting here, out in the country, so to speak ...."

"That perhaps federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe's March 31, 2005 DECISION in this matter involving your PLAINTIFF has come back before him in the form of a MOTION TO DISMISS federal criminal charges in the case of this J. Felix Strevell from Rensselaer County in the State of New York ....."

"The ARGUMENT that J. Felix Strevell should not be held to a different standard than REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Kathleen Jimino in the case of your PLAINTIFF, for example ...."

"AND AS YOU YOURSELF HAVE NOTED, YOUR HONOR, IN YOUR MARCH 31, 2005 DECISION HERE INVOLVING RENSSELAER COUNTY EXECUTIVE KATHLEEN JIMINO ..."

"IN THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK, IT IS WITHIN THE LAW, AS YOUR HONOR HAS CLEARLY NOTED, FOR A PUBLIC OFFICIAL IN THE COUNTY OF RENSSELAER IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO CONFER 'PROTECTED' STATUS ON AN INDIVIDUAL SUCH AS JEFFREY PELLETIER OF POESTENKILL ..."

"AND WE HOLD THAT SAME STANDARD SHOULD APPLY HERE TO MR. J. FELIX STREVELL ..."

"And it is NOTABLE, Livyjr ...."

"That it is the lawyer for this J. Felix Strevell who is making this argument in federal court ....."

"AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTES PERMISSABLE OR ACCEPTABLE GOVERNMENTAL PRACTICES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"Before this federal District court Judge Gary L. Sharpe ..."

"Who has previously approved or accepted 'PROTECTED PERSON' status for Jeffrey Pelletier in the County of Rensselaer in the State of New York ..."

"With no public official from the State of New York ..."

"AND HERE I AM THINKING OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ..."

"THERE TO REBUT WHAT THIS STREVELL LAWYER IS CALLING STANDARD GOVERNMENT PRACTICE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"And here I am thinking of the language of section 71 of the New York State Executive Law wherein is stated:"

..... and that the attorney-general be permitted to appear at any such trial or hearing in support of the constitutionality of such statute.

The court or justice before whom any such action or proceeding is pending may also make such order upon the application of any party thereto, and the court shall make such order in any such action or proceeding upon motion of the attorney-general.

"Clearly, Livyjr, it would seem that the Office of the New York State Attorney General could and should make a motion to appear in this matter involving this J. Felix Strevell in the federal District Court for the Northen District of New York where the question of what constitutes LAWFUL and therefore constitutionally permissable governmental practices in the State of New York is at issue ........"

"TO DEFEND THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO GOOD, RESPONSIBLE, LAW-ABIDING GOVERNMENT ..."

"And yet, it seems that that OFFICE is NOTABLY MISSING in this matter of J. Felix Strevell ...."

"And as that was on my mind ...."

"I just wanted to get that said ..."

"As it seems quite troubling ..."

"What the outcome of this decision by federal District Court Judge Gary L. Sharpe just might be ..."

"IF HE ACCEPTS THIS LOGIC ..."

"And dismisses these federal criminal charges against this J. Felix Strevell ...."

"WITH THE TACIT APPROVAL OF THE OFFICE OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ..."

And so, indeed .....

Yes .....

That is very much on our minds, up here, as well .....

And so ....

[Livyjr]

"Time for reform - In disciplining a local judge, a state panel exposes flaws in the system"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

Only lawyers should be permitted to be judges ......

"Duke lacrosse prosecutor hires lawyers"

29 minutes ago

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. - The prosecutor who removed himself from the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case has hired a well-known law firm to defend him against ethics charges before the North Carolina State Bar.

Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong has retained Winston-Salem lawyers David Freedman and Dudley Witt, law partners known for defending lawyers facing professional misconduct charges.

"Years ago, I just started helping out lawyers who got in trouble for various things," said Freedman, a 1982 graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's law school.

"I have a firm belief that you look out for your own."

The state bar filed ethics charges against Nifong in December, accusing him of violating rules of professional conduct.

The bar said Nifong made misleading and inflammatory remarks to the media about the lacrosse players.

The punishment for ethics violations can range from admonishment to disbarment.

Nifong filed rape charges against three lacrosse players in March, when a woman hired to perform as a stripper at a team party said she was raped.

He has since dropped the rape charges after the accuser changed a key detail in her account.

The three players still face sexual offense and kidnapping charges.

All three strongly maintain their innocence.

The bar's complaint cited dozens of remarks Nifong made to the media in the early days of the case that it said amounted to "improper commentary about the character, credibility and reputation of the accused."

In one comment, Nifong referred to the defendants as "a bunch of hooligans."

[Livyjr]

"Feeding off taxpayers no crime, lawyer says - Cronyism, big spending called usual government practice at Strevell trial"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 18, 2007

ALBANY -- A defense lawyer for the Rensselaer County entrepreneur whose organization got more than $1 million in member item grants directed by Sen. Joseph L. Bruno is arguing in federal court that dishonesty isn't necessarily a federal offense.

William P. Fanciullo, lawyer for J. Felix Strevell, the former director of the now-defunct Institute for Entrepreneurship, also said that Strevell's actions, including putting relatives on the state payroll, were normal practices in government.

Fanciullo asserted that the U.S. attorney's case against Strevell is full of allegations that should not be classified as federal crimes.

"According to the indictment it has become a felony to have a conflict of interest," says Fanciullo.

"Any 'dishonesty,' any state law violation, connected to employment, coupled with mailing or wire, becomes a federal felony."

Strevell is charged with nine counts of mail fraud and six counts of wire fraud.

The case before U.S. District Court Justice Gary L. Sharpe centers on Strevell's lavish spending on himself and on parties that honored lawmakers who helped him get public money.

Among its funding sources, the institute received two $500,000 discretionary grants, known as member items, through Bruno in 1999 and 2001.

Strevell allegedly misused some of the $8 million in mostly taxpayer funds raised by the institute during his reign from 1998 to 2001, when he and his brother, Chauncey, the former chief operating officer, abruptly quit.

While at the institute, Strevell hired friends, relatives of powerful Republicans, his daughter and his daughter's boyfriend.

He also used institute funds to purchase clothing and trips for himself and family members.

"Well, Livyjr ..."

"One more time ...."

"You have brought us around a circle in here ....."

"BUT ..."

"This time ..."

"What you have done, by doing so ..."

"Is to make a solid connection ..."

"Between what occurred in the State of New York back in 1986 ..."

"AND WHAT IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF MONTHS ..."

"WHEN NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPITZER BECOMES GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ..."

"WITH THE POWER TO APPOINT JUDGES ON THE NEW YORK STATE COURT OF APPEALS ..."

"WHICH COURT HELD IN 1996 ...."

"In Ricky Brown et al. v. State of New York, 89 NY2d 172 (Ct. of Appeals 1996) ..."

"THAT:"

"Constitutions assign rights to individuals and impose duties on the government to regulate the government's actions to protect them."

"AND ..."

"It is the failure to fulfill a stated constitutional duty which may support a claim for damages in a constitutional tort action."

"AND ..."

"Implicit in this reasoning is the premise that the Constitution is a source of positive law, not merely a set of limitations on government."

"ALL OF WHICH WAS REPUDIATED BY NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ELIOT SPITZER IN THIS MATTER UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE IN 2005, FIRST IN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ..."

"AND THEN IN THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IN NEW YORK CITY IN NOVEMBER OF 2005 ...."

"SO THAT WHEN THE NEW YORK SUN STATES THAT THE GOVERNOR-ELECT HAS MADE HIS VIEWS ON THE LAW AND CONSTITUTION CLEAR ..."

"THANKS TO THIS THREAD ..."

"WE CITIZENS OUT HERE IN AMERICA WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT SUCH MATTERS ..."

"CAN REALLY SEE EXACTLY WHAT THAT STATEMENT MEANS ..."

"AND WHAT IT IS LIKELY TO MEAN WHEN ELIOT SPITZER DOES BECOME GOVERNOR ..."

"AND DOES APPOINT JUDGES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO IMPOSE HIS VIEWS ON WHAT A CONSTITUTION SHOULD MEAN ON THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK THROUGH THAT HIGH COURT'S FUTURE DECISIONS ..."

"AND IT IS NOT AT ALL ENCOURAGING, LIVYJR ..."

"BECAUSE BY REPUDIATING RICKY BROWN IN THESE FEDERAL COURT PROCEEDINGS ..."

"WHAT THE GOVERNOR-ELECT OF NEW YORK IS SAYING ...."

"AND WHAT THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS IS UPHOLDING ..."

"IS THAT CONSTITUTIONS ARE NOT REALLY SOURCES OF POSITIVE LAW, ANYMORE ..."

"AND CONSTITUTIONS DO NOT ASSIGN RIGHTS TO INDIVIDUALS, ANY LONGER ..."

"NOR DO CONSTITUTIONS IMPOSE DUTIES ON THE GOVERNMENT TO REGULATE THE GOVERNMENT'S ACTIONS TO PROTECT THOSE RIGHTS ..."

"WHICH EFFECTIVELY IS AN ABANDONMENT ...."

"BY THE 'STATE' ..."

"OF THE RULE OF LAW ..."

"WITH THE CONSENT OF THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ..."

"AND FURTHER ..."

"IT EFFECTIVELY IS A DISMANTLING OF CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT ..."

"AGAIN WITH THE CONSENT OF THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ..."

"AND IF A FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT IS GOING TO ALLOW THE STATE OF NEW YORK TO ABANDON THE RULE OF LAW ...."

"AND TO DISMANTLE ITS CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT ...."

"BY THE 'EXPEDIENT' OF SELECTING JUDGES ...."

"TO RE-DEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTIONS REALLY DO STAND FOR ..."

"THEN EVERY OTHER STATE IN THE UNITED STATES WILL SIMILARLY HAVE THAT 'RIGHT' TO DO THE SAME ..."

"AND BUT FOR THIS FORUM ..."

"WHICH HAS ALLOWED THIS THREAD TO KEEP RUNNING SO THAT WHAT IS REALLY AT STAKE HERE COULD BE DEMONSTRATED WITH EXTERNAL 'PROOFS" ...."

"WE WOULD NOT EVEN KNOW ANY OF THIS WAS HAPPENING ..."

"EVEN AS IT IS ..."

"WHICH IS TO OUR DETRIMENT AS AMERICAN CITIZENS ..."

"EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US ..."

"ALL OF WHOM COULD BE THE NEXT TO FALL VICTIM TO A SCHEME SUCH AS OCCURRED TO THE PLAINTIFF IN THIS MATTER ..."

"WHERE A POLITICALLY-CONNECTED MEDICAL DOCTOR CAN SIMPLY CERTIFY ANYONE NOW ..."

"THANKS TO THIS FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT DECISION IN THIS MATTER ..."

"AS BEING IN NEED OF IMMEDIATE INCARCERATION IN A SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ..."

"WITHOUT THE DOCTOR EVER HAVING TO SEE THE PERSON ..."

"OR TO EXAMINE THE PERSON ..."

"OR TO HAVE ANY EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO JUSTIFY HIS ACTIONS ..."

And so ....

The New York Sun

"Spitzer Will Have Chance To Reshape State's Highest Court"

By MARK JOHNSON, Associated Press

November 27, 2006

ALBANY — Within a few months of taking office, Governor-elect Spitzer will have a chance to help shape the state's highest court, a tribunal that has decided key spending and social issues for New Yorkers but that critics say has grown timid in recent years.

Albany Law School professor Vincent Bonventre said the seven-member court lost some of its stature after Republican Governor Pataki stacked it with judges who "seemed to be governed by ideology and politics."

http://www.nysun.com/article/44102

IF you are a licensed professional engineer in the State of New York .....

Today ....

Right now as we speak ....

Licensed by the New York State Department of Education ....

And subject to the Rules of Practice in the State of New York ....

As promulgated by the New York State Board of Regents ...

And you have an opportunity to make some money .....

Money is important, after all ....

Signing off on plans that do not meet the requirements of the applicable codes, rules and regulations ....

And certifying projects that were not built in accordance with those applicable codes, rules and regulations .....

All you have to do ....

To get yourself some necessary "cover" .....

Is to secure the "SERVICES" of a lawyer who is a member of the bar in the State of New York ....

Preferably a lawyer who is also the local judge ....

And even though what you are doing is a violation of the law in the State of New York ...

YOU ARE TROUBLE-FREE ....

Because you have a lawyer who is a member of the bar in the State of New York to "cover your back" ....

To make sure that no witnesses will ever be able to come forward against you ....

To bring on a case in court ....

Or to "make trouble" for you ....

With the Office of Professional Disicipline of the New York State Department of Education .....

And so ....

For those of you who are just arriving at this thread now ...

And are wondering what the topic of discussion is in here .....

Well ...

That above gives you a capsule summary .....

THE "SERVICES" THAT MEMBERS OF THE BAR IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK CAN'T REALLY ADVERTISE ....

AT LEAST TOO OPENLY OR BLATANTLY ....

BUT CAN PROVIDE ....

IF YOU HAVE THE MONEY WITH WHICH TO PROCURE THESE "SERVICES" .....

Money is always important, after all .....

And so ....

"Duke lacrosse prosecutor hires lawyers"

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. - The prosecutor who removed himself from the Duke lacrosse sexual assault case has hired a well-known law firm to defend him against ethics charges before the North Carolina State Bar.

Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong has retained Winston-Salem lawyers David Freedman and Dudley Witt, law partners known for defending lawyers facing professional misconduct charges.

"Years ago, I just started helping out lawyers who got in trouble for various things," said Freedman, a 1982 graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's law school.

"I have a firm belief that you look out for your own."

The state bar filed ethics charges against Nifong in December, accusing him of violating rules of professional conduct.

"Time for reform - In disciplining a local judge, a state panel exposes flaws in the system"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

So there was Governor Spitzer in his State of the State speech Wednesday, calling for a constitutional amendment that would consolidate New York's two-tier court system.

Only lawyers should be permitted to be judges .....

"Judge choices sent to Spitzer - Governor gets names of 7 qualified candidates to be state's top jurist"

By MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, January 18, 2007

ALBANY -- The names of seven people qualified to serve as the state's top judge were sent to Gov. Eliot Spitzer on Wednesday, including that of incumbent Judith S. Kaye.

In a letter to the governor, John F. O'Mara, chairman of the state Commission on Judicial Nomination, termed all the candidates "well-qualified" by their character, temperament, professional aptitude, experience, qualifications and fitness for office.

Each candidate was personally interviewed and filed a required financial statement.

Once Spitzer makes his selection for the $151,000 position, the state Senate has 30 days to approve it.

A leading judicial reformer on the state Court of Appeals, Kaye, a Sullivan County native now living in Manhattan, has made it clear she wants to remain on the bench after her current 14-year term ends in March.

She is the state's first female chief judge.

If reappointed, Kaye, 68, could serve until 2008, when she reaches the mandatory retirement age.

Besides Kaye, the recommendations include:

George F. Carpinello, 56, a partner in the Albany law firm of Boies, Schiller & Flexner.

He's a graduate of Princeton University and Yale Law School.

Thomas E. Mercure, 66, a justice of the state Appellate Division, Third Department, in Albany.

He graduated from St. Michael's College and Georgetown University Law Center.

Richard T. Andrias, 66, a justice of the state Appellate Division, First Department, in New York City.

He graduated from Bowdoin College and Columbia Law School.

Steven C. Krane, 50, partner in the law firm of Proskauer Rose LLP in New York City.

He graduated from the State University of New York at Stony Brook and New York University School of Law.

Jeh C. Johnson, 50, partner in the Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison law firm in New York City.

He graduated from Morehouse College and Columbia Law School.

David A. Schulz, 55, is a partner at Levine Sullivan Koch & Schulz in New York City.

He received his bachelor of arts degree from Knox College, a master's degree in economics from Yale University and a law degree from Yale Law School.

On Sunday, Spitzer nominated state Supreme Court Justice Theodore Jones Jr., an African-American whose presence will diversify the seven-judge panel following the retirement last fall of George Bundy Smith.

Johnson, who recently worked on Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's transition committee, also is black.

Michele Morgan Bolton can be reached at 434-2403 or by e-mail at mbolton@timesunion.com.

This post has been edited by Livyjr: Jan 21 2007, 05:07 PM

[Livyjr]

"Livyjr, in the light of the past experience that people up there where you are have had with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Office of the United States Attorney, and this Senator Joseph Bruno, and a federal Hobbs Act investigation that was apparently suddenly terminated by the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York when the name of this Senator Joseph Bruno came into it in connection with questionable practices in the Rensselaer county Department of Health which were having an adverse impact on the lives, health and property of the people of Rensselaer County in New York State ....."

"Could you tell us how people up there feel ..."

"When they see this Rensselaer County lawyer E. Stewart Jones openly and blatantly threatening these federal prosecutors with retaliation against themselves and their employment in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper ..."

"And when they see this Senator Bruno himself, in the pages of the same Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper ..."

"Calling this alleged federal investigation a MEDIA EVENT ..."

"DO PEOPLE UP THERE THINK THAT SOMEONE IS GAMING THE SYSTEM HERE?"

HHHhhhmmmm .....

GAMING THE SYSTEM .....

Joe Bruno calls a BIG press conference ...

BIG FBI INVESTIGATION, FOLKS .....

BUT IT'S NOTHING .....

And then ....

SHADES OF 1989 .....

The Office of the United States Attorney comes forward and says, "well, how about that, we took a really, really hard look, but there was nothing there ...."

That is what people are expecting, actually .....

Some with GLEE ....

Joe Bruno's PARTISANS ....

And they are many, actually ....

And the rest .....

Well ...

I would say with TREPIDATION .....

And this brings us to what many see as F. Stewart Jones' TRUMP CARD ......

Which is the fact that in December of 2005 .....

Just a short year ago .....

The federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

PUT ITS SEAL OF APPROVAL .....

ON THE GRANTING OF "PROTECTED PERSON" STATUS HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

BY ELECTED OFFICIALS UP HERE IN RENSSELAER COUNTY ....

WHICH IS JOE BRUNO'S COUNTY .....

AND IF JOE BRUNO IS IN FACT DOLING OUT FAVORS AND PROTECTION HERE .....

IT IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS HAS ALREADY APPROVED ...

CONDUCT THAT THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ITSELF HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH BACK IN AUGUST OF 2001 .....

THAT BEING THE INTIMIDATION AND REMOVAL OF WITNESSES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

BY THE "STATE" ITSELF ....

ON BEHALF OF ITS "PROTECTED PERSONS" .....

WHO GET THAT WAY .....

BY PROCURING PROTECTION .....

FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS IN NEW YORK STATE ...

And so ....

GIVEN ALL OF THAT PRIOR HISTORY ....

PEOPLE UP HERE HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO FAITH OR TRUST WHATSOEVER .....

IN EITHER THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ....

OR THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK .....

And if people up here saw F. Stewart Jones returning from Washington, D.C. with an apologetic Alberto Gonzales in tow .....

To personally apologize to Joe Bruno .....

I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A SOUL UP HERE WHO WOULD BE SURPRISED ...

And I actually think that many are expecting exactly that .....

STARTING WITH THE PARTISANS OF JOE BRUNO ....

Who are many ....

And very powerfull .....

And so .....

"Palm Beach trip probed - Vacation, including a visit to a strip club, part of the Bruno-Abbruzzese inquiry"

By BRENDAN J. LYONS Senior writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, January 14, 2007

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- At a chamber of commerce luncheon last week, Bruno again said he is not a target of a criminal investigation.

A source with intimate knowledge of the case would not say whether anyone will be charged with a crime, only that a criminal investigation is ongoing.

Bruno has declined to divulge details about his private consulting business, or why Abbruzzese allegedly paid the consulting firm several hundred thousand dollars.

Those payments are said to be a primary focus of the probe.

Sometime after the investigation began, according to sources involved in the case, Bruno placed several telephone calls to U.S. Attorney Glenn T. Suddaby, the top federal prosecutor in New York's Northern District.

The investigation is being headed by Suddaby's office and the FBI.

To people up here in the State of New York ......

This alleged telephone call ....

From New York State Senator Joseph "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

To this Glenn Suddaby .....

The TOP FEDERAL PROSECUTOR in the federal NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

Concerning this alleged GRAND JURY INVESTIGATION .....

Of "BIG JOE" Bruno's business dealings here in the State of New York .....

HAS BEEN EXPECTED .....

As it is believed up here that this Glenn Suddaby actually serves at the pleasure of "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

And news of this alleged telephone call ....

From "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

To this TOP FEDERAL PROSECUTOR GLEN SUDDABY .....

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION ......

Coming on the heels as it does .....

Of "BIG JOE" Bruno's own claim in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION ....

That this federal investigation is really nothing more than a MEDIA EVENT ...

Brings us all right back to the spring of 1989 .....

When it is alleged that "BIG JOE" Bruno did the same exact thing .....

Call the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern district of New York .....

To have them get the FBI back out of Rensselaer County in the State of New York ......

AND WHETHER OR NOT "BIG JOE" BRUNO ACTUALLY DID MAKE THAT CALL BACK IN 1989 .....

THE FACT IS, AND REMAINS .....

That the FBI did get out of Rensselaer County ......

LIKE A WHIPPED DOG ....

WITH ITS TAIL BETWEEN ITS LEGS .....

YIPPING AND KI-YIYING ......

ALL THE WAY BACK TO ALBANY .....

AND THAT WAS VERY OBVIOUS ......

TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE UP HERE BACK THEN .....

TO SOME ....

The supporters and partisans of "BIG JOE" Bruno ...

WITH GLEE ....

At this demonstration ....

Of "BIG JOE" Bruno's very considerable POWER .....

And with TREPIDATION .....

By the rest of us .....

Those of us who were for the law as it was written in the State of New York .....

BUT NOT ENFORCED .....

And so .....

With this news of this alleged telephone call .....

From "BIG JOE" Bruno .....

To this U.S. Attorney Glenn Suddaby ......

Simply "hanging" out there .....

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION .....

People are once again understandably concerned .....

THAT "BIG JOE" BRUNO .....

IS GOING TO SQUASH ANOTHER FEDERAL INVESTIGATION .....

PUBLICLY .....

RIGHT IN OUR FACES ....

TO ONCE AGAIN DEMONSTRATE TO ALL OF US UP HERE ...

JUST HOW MUCH POWER IT IS ...

THAT HE WIELDS OVER US ....

WITH THE PERMISSION ....

OF THE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ....

AND THE AQUIESCENCE ....

Of the federal District Court for the Northern District of New York .....

And the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

BOTH OF WHICH HAVE GIVEN THEIR TACIT APPROVAL .....

TO THE "MARKETING" OF PROTECTION ....

BY ELECTED OFFICIALS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ...

TO THOSE WITH THE CONNECTIONS AND CLOUT TO ENABLE THEM TO "SECURE" THIS "PROTECTION" .....

And so ....

That is where we are in this thread right now ......

For any one just stopping by .....

And wondering ....

And so .....

And for all of you who have been coming by this thread over the time that it has been running .....

I once again want to voice my appreciation .....

For without you .....

This thread could not have survived for this period of time .....

And I want to take a moment to say in here that the thread is not yet over .....

Nor is it complete .....

HOWEVER .....

An ABSOLUTE SILENCE seems to have descended up here .....

With respect to many things, actually .....

Starting with this alleged federal grand jury investigation of Joeseph Bruno .....

Which he himself termed a "MEDIA EVENT" ......

In the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper .....

Itself a member of the New York State Business Council .....

And this is since the reportage of his alleged telephone call to this GLENN SUDDABY ......

The TOP FEDERAL PROSECUTOR in the federal NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ......

Again in the pages of the Albany, New York TIMES UNION newspaper .....

Right now .....

Up here .....

It is as if nothing had ever happened ......

A HUSH has descended .....

And so .....

Partly because of that .....

I have been idle in here .....

WAITING .....

The PLAINTIFF did report today that he had hand-delivered a signed document to the agents for RENSSELAER COUNTY who were threatening to terminate his STIPULATED NEW YORK STATE WORKER'S COMPENSATION SETTLEMENT .....

Informing them therein to stop intimidating and harassing him on behalf of the County of Rensselaer ......

So that is where that matter presently stands .....

And in the meantime .....

Some of what has been discussed in here .....

Starting with the BILL MESSAGE from then-New York State Governor Mario Cuomo in 1986 concerning ENTERPRISE CORRUPTION in the State of New York .....

Has caused a new thread to open up in this forum ....

Entitled "The 'PORK' in New York" ......

And it will be in that thread ....

At this following address ....

Where I will be carrying on some of that discussion .....

Which is directly related to what transpired in this thread .....

BUT IS ALSO A SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION, IN AND OF ITSELF .....

Regardless of the ultimate fate of the PLAINTIFF in this matter under discussion in here .....

And so ....

In closing ....

Thank you for your continuing patience with me ...

In getting this story out in the open .....

So it can be told .....

INSTEAD OF BEING BURIED .....

Along with the PLAINTIFF ....

And so .....

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...mp;#entry678411

[Livyjr]

"Time for reform - In disciplining a local judge, a state panel exposes flaws in the system"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, January 5, 2007

Only lawyers should be permitted to be judges .....

It is interesting to note .........

In this Associated Press article above here .....

Entitled "Rules limit ads by lawyers - Intent is to protect the public from aggressive and misleading pitches" ....

First published on Friday, January 5, 2007 ......

That in the State of New York .....

NO EFFORT WAS APPARENTLY MADE ....

By the New York State Bar Association ....

Which serves as the LAWYER'S GUILD, or UNION, up here in the State of New York ....

And the NEW YORK STATE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM ....

WHICH IS BELIEVED TO BE SOME TYPE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPARATUS .....

ASSOCIATED WITH OUR COURT SYSTEM UP HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK ....

TO PLACE ANY LIMITS WHATSOEVER .....

ON THE VERY WIDE RANGE OF "SERVICES" .....

THAT MEMBERS OF THE LAWYERS' GUILD .....

OR NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION .....

CAN ACTUALLY PROVIDE .....

TO THOSE WITH THE MONEY .....

AND CONNECTIONS ......

TO PURCHASE THOSE SERVICES .....

Such as the "PROCUREMENT" of FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDERS ....

From CORPORATE MEDICAL DOCTORS .....

WHO ARE DEALING IN THOSE FRAUDULENT INSTRUMENTS .....

WITH THE PROTECTION OF THE NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE .....

And the APPROVAL .....

Of the federal District Court .....

For the Northern District of New York .....

And the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City .....

THE ONLY LIMITS ....

THAT WERE PLACED ....

ON THE LAWYERS THEMSELVES .....

WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION ......

IS ON WHAT THEY CAN TELL PEOPLE OPENLY .....

IN THE FORM OF AN ADVERTISEMENT .....

Presumably made on the side of a bus .....

Or on a billboard ....

Or on TV ....

Or the radio ....

And so ......

In the State of New York .....

RIGHT NOW, TODAY .....

A lawyer cannot openly advertise about being able to PROCURE for you a FRAUDULENT PSYCHIATRIC COMMITMENT ORDER .....

BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THAT REALLY MAKE .....

THAT THEY CAN'T OPENLY ADVERTISE THAT THEY REALLY CAN DO THIS .....

WHEN THEY REALLY CAN PERFORM THIS "SERVICE" FOR YOU ......

AND ACTUALLY DID SO, IN THIS CASE UNDER DISCUSSION IN HERE ......

IN A VERY PUBLIC WAY .....

And so ....

Who exactly is it .....

That is being PROTECTED here .....

By the lawyers not be able to openly advertise this particular "SERVICE" .....

"GETTING RID OF PEOPLE" ......

For you ......

If you have the money and connections .....

To actually be able to secure this "SERVICE" from them .....

WHEN THEY ARE IN FACT PROVIDING THIS SERVICE .....

And people like Jeffrey Pelletier of Poestenkill know about ......

And actually are able to avail themselves of this "SERVICE" ......

TO THE DETRIMENT OF THEIR INTENDED VICTIM .....

WHY ISN'T THE NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION CONCERNED ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF THESE VICTIMS?

And that answer is very simple .....

CASH FLOW .....

DON'T STEP IN THE WAY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY .....

AND ARE WILLING TO GIVE IT TO A MEMBER OF THE BAR .....

TO HAVE SOMEONE ELSE FALSELY IMPRISONED ...

AS AN ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT .....

IN A CORPORATE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

And so .....

WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEMBER OF THE BAR .....

CAN OPENLY ADVERTISE THAT SERVICE .....

On the side of a bus .....

Or on a billboard ....

Or on the radio .....

Or on TV ....

Calling themselves such things ......

As the "DREAM TEAM" ......

Or the "HEAVY HITTERS" .....

IS REALLY QUITE IMMATERIAL TO US UP HERE ......

WHEN WE KNOW THAT REGARDLESS OF ADVERTSING .....

THE RIGHT LAWYER ......

CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THIS HAPPEN .....

HAVE ONE OF US FALSELY INCARCERATED .....

AS AN ALLEGED DANGEROUS MENTAL PATIENT .....

IN A CORPORATE SECURE MENTAL FACILITY ....

Because we got in the wrong person's way .....

Or because we went to the Town Planning Board ....

Or the local County Health Department ......

AND ASKED THE WRONG QUESTIONS .....

ABOUT THE WRONG PROTECTED PERSON .....

In the State of New York ...

And so .....

"State's lawyers suggest constitutional amendment - Merit selection of judges expected by 2009"

By MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

Last updated: 12:26 p.m., Tuesday, January 23, 2007

ALBANY - The 72,000-member New York State Bar Association revealed a legislative package today intended to amend the state Constitution to allow for the merit selection of state judges.

It follows a federal decision last year that the current politically based system of nominating conventions, conducted largely behind closed doors, is unconstitutional.

The three-judge panel in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals called for a new system to be in place before the next election.

Both the state Senate and Assembly have held recent public hearings on the matter.

The bar group today called for a constitutional amendment, in hand with Gov. Eliot Spitzer's support for merit selection, as well as a bill that emphasizes the focus on "competence, independence, temperament and diversity.''

Included in the plan is a requirement that nominating commissions contain men and women who reflect "the cultural, racial and ethnic diversity of the areas from which they were drawn, and that they nominate judicial candidates who reflect the diversity of the community.''

The bar wants an interim judicial selection plan to take effect over the next three years while a merit-selection constitutional amendment is being approved.

Law requires that an amendment be supported by two successive legislatures and then by voters.

Officials said the interim bill reflects proposals made by a number of good government and other judicial groups, including the New York State Commission to Promote Public Confidence in Judicial Elections.

In announcing the plan, bar president Mark H. Alcott said changes must be enacted together with a sunset provision that forces the interim plan to expire by 2009.

"In this way, we will ensure that the momentum for merit selection continues and that the merit selection plan remains front and center until adopted,'' he said.

[Livyjr]

PREAMBLE to the New York State Constitution:

WE THE PEOPLE of the State of New York, grateful to Almighty God for OUR freedom, in order to secure its blessings, DO ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION

"State's lawyers suggest constitutional amendment - Merit selection of judges expected by 2009"

By MICHELE MORGAN BOLTON, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

Last updated: 12:26 p.m., Tuesday, January 23, 2007

ALBANY - The 72,000-member New York State Bar Association revealed a legislative package today intended to amend the state Constitution to allow for the merit selection of state judges.

It follows a federal decision last year that the current politically based system of nominating conventions, conducted largely behind closed doors, is unconstitutional.

The bar wants an interim judicial selection plan to take effect over the next three years while a merit-selection constitutional amendment is being approved.

In announcing the plan, bar president Mark H. Alcott said changes must be enacted together with a sunset provision that forces the interim plan to expire by 2009.

"In this way, we will ensure that the momentum for merit selection continues and that the merit selection plan remains front and center until adopted,'' he said.

And speaking of OUR New York State constitution ....

Which is intended to secure FOR US, the PEOPLE of this State .....

The BLESSINGS of FREEDOM ....

That the 72,000 member New York State Bar Association wants to amend .....

TO REMOVE FROM US THE POWER TO ELECT WHO ARE TO BE OUR JUDGES ....

We have ...

NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE VI

Judiciary

Section 1. a. There shall be a unified court system for the state.

The state-wide courts shall consist of the court of appeals, the supreme court including the appellate divisions thereof, the court of claims, the county court, the surrogate's court and the family court, as hereinafter provided.

The legislature shall establish in and for the city of New York, as part of the unified court system for the state, a single, city-wide court of civil jurisdiction and a single, city-wide court of criminal jurisdiction, as hereinafter provided, and may upon the request of the mayor and the local legislative body of the city of New York, merge the two courts into one city-wide court of both civil and criminal jurisdiction.

The unified court system for the state shall also include the district, town, city and village courts outside the city of New York, as hereinafter provided.

b. The court of appeals, the supreme court including the appellate divisions thereof, the court of claims, the county court, the surrogate's court, the family court, the courts or court of civil and criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York, and such other courts as the legislature may determine shall be courts of record.

c. All processes, warrants and other mandates of the court of appeals, the supreme court including the appellate divisions thereof, the court of claims, the county court, the surrogate's court and the family court may be served and executed in any part of the state.

All processes, warrants and other mandates of the courts or court of civil and criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York may, subject to such limitation as may be prescribed by the legislature, be served and executed in any part of the state.

The legislature may provide that processes, warrants and other mandates of the district court may be served and executed in any part of the state and that
processes, warrants and other mandates of town, village and city courts outside the city of New York may be served and executed in any part of the county in which such courts are located or in any part of any adjoining county.

§ 2. a. The court of appeals is continued.

It shall consist of the chief judge and the six elected associate judges now in office, who shall hold their offices until the expiration of their respective terms, and their successors, and such justices of the supreme court as may be designated for service in said court as hereinafter provided.

The official terms of the chief judge and the six associate judges shall be fourteen years.

Five members of the court shall constitute a quorum, and the concurrence of four shall be necessary to a decision; but no more than seven judges shall sit in any case.

In case of the temporary absence or inability to act of any judge of the court of appeals, the court may designate any justice of the supreme court to serve as associate judge of the court during such absence or inability to act.

The court shall have power to appoint and to remove its clerk.

The powers and jurisdiction of the court shall not be suspended for want of appointment when the number of judges is sufficient to constitute a quorum.

b. Whenever and as often as the court of appeals shall certify to the governor that the court is unable, by reason of the accumulation of causes pending therein, to hear and dispose of the same with reasonable speed, the governor shall designate such number of justices of the supreme court as may be so certified to be necessary, but not more than four, to serve as associate judges of the court of appeals.

The justices so designated shall be relieved, while so serving, from their duties as justices of the supreme court, and shall serve as associate judges of the court of appeals until the court shall certify that the need for the services of any such justices no longer exists, whereupon they shall return to the supreme court.

The governor may fill vacancies among such designated judges.

No such justices shall serve as associate judge of the court of appeals except while holding the office of justice of the supreme court.

The designation of a justice of the supreme court as an associate judge of the court of appeals shall not be deemed to affect his or her existing office any longer than until the expiration of his or her designation as such associate judge, nor to create a vacancy.

c. There shall be a commission on judicial nomination to evaluate the qualifications of candidates for appointment to the court of appeals and to prepare a written report and recommend to the governor those persons who by their character, temperament, professional aptitude and experience are well qualified to hold such judicial office.

The legislature shall provide by law for the organization and procedure of the judicial nominating commission.

d. (1) The commission on judicial nomination shall consist of twelve members of whom four shall be appointed by the governor, four by the chief judge of the court of appeals, and one each by the speaker of the assembly, the temporary president of the senate, the minority leader of the senate, and the minority leader of the assembly.

Of the four members appointed by the governor, no more than two shall be enrolled in the same political party, two shall be members of the bar of the state, and two shall not be members of the bar of the state.

Of the four members appointed by the chief judge of the court of appeals, no more than two shall be enrolled in the same political party, two shall be members of the bar of the state, and two shall not be members of the bar of the state.

No member of the commission shall hold or have held any judicial office or hold any elected public office for which he or she receives compensation during his or her period of service, except that the governor and the chief judge may each appoint no more than one former judge or justice of the unified court system to such commission.

No member of the commission shall hold any office in any political party.

No member of the judicial nominating commission shall be eligible for appointment to judicial office in any court of the state during the member's period of service or within one year thereafter.

(2) The members first appointed by the governor shall have respectively one, two, three and four year terms as the governor shall designate.

The members first appointed by the chief judge of the court of appeals shall have respectively one, two, three and four year terms as the chief judge shall designate.

The member first appointed by the temporary president of the senate shall have a one-year term.

The member first appointed by the minority leader of the senate shall have a two-year term.

The member first appointed by the speaker of the assembly shall have a four-year term.

The member first appointed by the minority leader of the assembly shall have a three-year term.

Each subsequent appointment shall be for a term of four years.

(3) The commission shall designate one of their number to serve as chairperson.

(4) The commission shall consider the qualifications of candidates for appointment to the offices of judge and chief judge of the court of appeals and, whenever a vacancy in those offices occurs, shall prepare a written report and recommend to the governor persons who are well qualified for those judicial offices.

e. The governor shall appoint, with the advice and consent of the senate, from among those recommended by the judicial nominating commission, a person to fill the office of chief judge or associate judge, as the case may be, whenever a vacancy occurs in the court of appeals; provided, however, that no person may be appointed a judge of the court of appeals unless such person is a resident of the state and has been admitted to the practice of law in this state for at least ten years.

The governor shall transmit to the senate the written report of the commission on judicial nomination relating to the nominee.

f. When a vacancy occurs in the office of chief judge or associate judge of the court of appeals and the senate is not in session to give its advice and consent to an appointment to fill the vacancy, the governor shall fill the vacancy by interim appointment upon the recommendation of a commission on judicial nomination as provided in this section.

An interim appointment shall continue until the senate shall pass upon the governor's selection.

If the senate confirms an appointment, the judge shall serve a term as provided in subdivision a of this section commencing from the date of his or her interim appointment.

If the senate rejects an appointment, a vacancy in the office shall occur sixty days after such rejection.

If an interim appointment to the court of appeals be made from among the justices of the supreme court or the appellate divisions thereof, that appointment shall not affect the justice's existing office, nor create a vacancy in the supreme court, or the appellate division thereof, unless such appointment is confirmed by the senate and the appointee shall assume such office.

If an interim appointment of chief judge of the court of appeals be made from among the associate judges, an interim appointment of associate judge shall be made in like manner; in such case, the appointment as chief judge shall not affect the existing office of associate judge, unless such appointment as chief judge is confirmed by the senate and the appointee shall assume such office.

g. The provisions of subdivisions c, d, e and f of this section shall not apply to temporary designations or assignments of judges or justices.

§ 3. a. The jurisdiction of the court of appeals shall be limited to the review of questions of law except where the judgment is of death, or where the appellate division, on reversing or modifying a final or interlocutory judgment in an action or a final or interlocutory order in a special proceeding, finds new facts and a final judgment or a final order pursuant thereto is entered; but the right to appeal shall not depend upon the amount involved.

b. Appeals to the court of appeals may be taken in the classes of cases hereafter enumerated in this section; In criminal cases, directly from a court of original jurisdiction where the judgment is of death, and in other criminal cases from an appellate division or otherwise as the legislature may from time to time provide.

In civil cases and proceedings as follows:

(1) As of right, from a judgment or order entered upon the decision of an appellate division of the supreme court which finally determines an action or special proceeding wherein is directly involved the construction of the constitution of the state or of the United States, or where one or more of the justices of the appellate division dissents from the decision of the court, or where the judgment or order is one of reversal or modification.

(2) As of right, from a judgment or order of a court of record of original jurisdiction which finally determines an action or special proceeding where the only question involved on the appeal is the validity of a statutory provision of the state or of the United States under the constitution of the state or of the United States; and on any such appeal only the constitutional question shall be considered and determined by the court.

(3) As of right, from an order of the appellate division granting a new trial in an action or a new hearing in a special proceeding where the appellant stipulates that, upon affirmance, judgment absolute or final order shall be rendered against him or her.

(4) From a determination of the appellate division of the supreme court in any department, other than a judgment or order which finally determines an action or special proceeding, where the appellate division allows the same and certifies that one or more questions of law have arisen which, in its opinion, ought to be reviewed by the court of appeals, but in such case the appeal shall bring up for review only the question or questions so certified; and the court of appeals shall certify to the appellate division its determination upon such question or questions.

(5) From an order of the appellate division of the supreme court in any department, in a proceeding instituted by or against one or more public officers or a board, commission or other body of public officers or a court or tribunal, other than an order which finally determines such proceeding, where the court of appeals shall allow the same upon the ground that, in its opinion, a question of law is involved which ought to be reviewed by it, and without regard to the availability of appeal by stipulation for final order absolute.

(6) From a judgment or order entered upon the decision of an appellate division of the supreme court which finally determines an action or special proceeding but which is not appealable under paragraph (1) of this subdivision where the appellate division or the court of appeals shall certify that in its opinion a question of law is involved which ought to be reviewed by the court of appeals.

Such an appeal may be allowed upon application (a) to the appellate division, and in case of refusal, to the court of appeals, or (b) directly to the court of appeals.

Such an appeal shall be allowed when required in the interest of substantial justice.

(7) No appeal shall be taken to the court of appeals from a judgment or order entered upon the decision of an appellate division of the supreme court in any civil case or proceeding where the appeal to the appellate division was from a judgment or order entered in an appeal from another court, including an appellate or special term of the supreme court, unless the construction of the constitution of the state or of the United States is directly involved therein, or unless the appellate division of the supreme court shall certify that in its opinion a question of law is involved which ought to be reviewed by the court of appeals.

(8) The legislature may abolish an appeal to the court of appeals as of right in any or all of the cases or classes of cases specified in paragraph (1) of this subdivision wherein no question involving the construction of the constitution of the state or of the United States is directly involved, provided, however, that appeals in any such case or class of cases shall thereupon be governed by paragraph (6) of this subdivision.

(9) The court of appeals shall adopt and from time to time may amend a rule to permit the court to answer questions of New York law certified to it by the Supreme Court of the United States, a court of appeals of the United States or an appellate court of last resort of another state, which may be determinative of the cause then pending in the certifying court and which in the opinion of the certifying court are not controlled by precedent in the decisions of the courts of New York.

§ 4. a. The state shall be divided into four judicial departments.

The first department shall consist of the counties within the first judicial district of the state.

The second department shall consist of the counties within the second, ninth, tenth and eleventh judicial districts of the state.

The third department shall consist of the counties within the third, fourth and sixth judicial districts of the state.

The fourth department shall consist of the counties within the fifth, seventh and eighth judicial districts of the state.

Each department shall be bounded by the lines of judicial districts.

Once every ten years the legislature may alter the boundaries of the judicial departments, but without changing the number thereof.

b. The appellate divisions of the supreme court are continued, and shall consist of seven justices of the supreme court in each of the first and second departments, and five justices in each of the other departments.

In each appellate division, four justices shall constitute a quorum, and the concurrence of three shall be necessary to a decision.

No more than five justices shall sit in any case.

c. The governor shall designate the presiding justice of each appellate division, who shall act as such during his or her term of office and shall be a resident of the department.

The other justices of the appellate divisions shall be designated by the governor, from all the justices elected to the supreme court, for terms of five years or the unexpired portions of their respective terms of office, if less than five years.

d. The justices heretofore designated shall continue to sit in the appellate divisions until the terms of their respective designations shall expire.

From time to time as the terms of the designations expire, or vacancies occur, the governor shall make new designations.

The governor may also, on request of any appellate division, make temporary designations in case of the absence or inability to act of any justice in such appellate division, for service only during such absence or inability to act.

e. In case any appellate division shall certify to the governor that one or more additional justices are needed for the speedy disposition of the business before it, the governor may designate an additional justice or additional justices; but when the need for such additional justice or justices shall no longer exist, the appellate division shall so certify to the governor, and thereupon service under such designation or designations shall cease.

f. A majority of the justices designated to sit in any appellate division shall at all times be residents of the department.

g. Whenever the appellate division in any department shall be unable to dispose of its business within a reasonable time, a majority of the presiding justices of the several departments, at a meeting called by the presiding justice of the department in arrears, may transfer any pending appeals from such department to any other department for hearing and determination.

h. A justice of the appellate division of the supreme court in any department may be temporarily designated by the presiding justice of his or her department to the appellate division in another judicial department upon agreement by the presiding justices of the appellate division of the departments concerned.

i. In the event that the disqualification, absence or inability to act of justices in any appellate division prevents there being a quorum of justices qualified to hear an appeal, the justices qualified to hear the appeal may transfer it to the appellate division in another department for hearing and determination.

In the event that the justices in any appellate division qualified to hear an appeal are equally divided, said justices may transfer the appeal to the appellate division in another department for hearing and determination.

Each appellate division shall have power to appoint and remove its clerk.

j. No justice of the appellate division shall, within the department to which he or she may be designated to perform the duties of an appellate justice, exercise any of the powers of a justice of the supreme court, other than those of a justice out of court, and those pertaining to the appellate division, except that the justice may decide causes or proceedings theretofore submitted, or hear and decide motions submitted by consent of counsel, but any such justice, when not actually engaged in performing the duties of such appellate justice in the department to which he or she is designated, may hold any term of the supreme court and exercise any of the powers of a justice of the supreme court in any judicial district in any other department of the state.

k. The appellate divisions of the supreme court shall have all the jurisdiction possessed by them on the effective date of this article and such additional jurisdiction as may be prescribed by law, provided, however, that the right to appeal to the appellate divisions from a judgment or order which does not finally determine an action or special proceeding may be limited or conditioned by law.

§ 5. a. Upon an appeal from a judgment or an order, any appellate court to which the appeal is taken which is authorized to review such judgment or order may reverse or affirm, wholly or in part, or may modify the judgment or order appealed from, and each interlocutory judgment or intermediate or other order which it is authorized to review, and as to any or all of the parties.

It shall thereupon render judgment of affirmance, judgment of reversal and final judgment upon the right of any or all of the parties, or judgment of modification thereon according to law, except where it may be necessary or proper to grant a new trial or hearing, when it may grant a new trial or hearing.

b. If any appeal is taken to an appellate court which is not authorized to review such judgment or order, the court shall transfer the appeal to an appellate court which is authorized to review such judgment or order.

§ 6. a. The state shall be divided into eleven judicial districts.

The first judicial district shall consist of the counties of Bronx and New York.

The second judicial district shall consist of the counties of Kings and Richmond.

The third judicial district shall consist of the counties of Albany, Columbia, Greene, Rensselaer, Schoharie, Sullivan, and Ulster.

The fourth judicial district shall consist of the counties of Clinton, Essex, Franklin, Fulton, Hamilton, Montgomery, St. Lawrence, Saratoga, Schenectady, Warren and Washington.

The fifth judicial district shall consist of the counties of Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Oneida, Onondaga, and Oswego.

The sixth judicial district shall consist of the counties of Broome, Chemung, Chenango, Cortland, Delaware, Madison, Otsego, Schuyler, Tioga and Tompkins.

The seventh judicial district shall consist of the counties of Cayuga, Livingston, Monroe, Ontario, Seneca, Steuben, Wayne and Yates.

The eighth judicial district shall consist of the counties of Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie, Genesee, Niagara, Orleans and Wyoming.

The ninth judicial district shall consist of the counties of Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland and Westchester.

The tenth judicial district shall consist of the counties of Nassau and Suffolk.

The eleventh judicial district shall consist of the county of Queens.

b. Once every ten years the legislature may increase or decrease the number of judicial districts or alter the composition of judicial districts and thereupon re-apportion the justices to be thereafter elected in the judicial districts so altered.

Each judicial district shall be bounded by county lines.

c. The justices of the supreme court shall be chosen by the electors of the judicial district in which they are to serve.

The terms of justices of the supreme court shall be fourteen years from and including the first day of January next after their election.

d. The supreme court is continued.

It shall consist of the number of justices of the supreme court including the justices designated to the appellate divisions of the supreme court, judges of the county court of the counties of Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond and judges of the court of general sessions of the county of New York authorized by law on the thirty-first day of August next after the approval and ratification of this amendment by the people, all of whom shall be justices of the supreme court for the remainder of their terms.

The legislature may increase the number of justices of the supreme court in any judicial district, except that the number in any district shall not be increased to exceed one justice for fifty thousand, or fraction over thirty thousand, of the population thereof as shown by the last federal census or state enumeration.

The legislature may decrease the number of justices of the supreme court in any judicial district, except that the number in any district shall not be less than the number of justices of the supreme court authorized by law on the effective date of this article.

e. The clerks of the several counties shall be clerks of the supreme court, with such powers and duties as shall be prescribed by law.

§ 7. a. The supreme court shall have general original jurisdiction in law and equity and the appellate jurisdiction herein provided.

In the city of New York, it shall have exclusive jurisdiction over crimes prosecuted by indictment, provided, however, that the legislature may grant to the city-wide court of criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York jurisdiction over misdemeanors prosecuted by indictment and to the family court in the city of New York jurisdiction over crimes and offenses by or against minors or between spouses or between parent and child or between members of the same family or household.

b. If the legislature shall create new classes of actions and proceedings, the supreme court shall have jurisdiction over such classes of actions and proceedings, but the legislature may provide that another court or other courts shall also have jurisdiction and that actions and proceedings of such classes may be originated in such other court or courts.

§ 8. a. The appellate division of the supreme court in each judicial department may establish an appellate term in and for such department or in and for a judicial district or districts or in and for a county or counties within such department.

Such an appellate term shall be composed of not less than three nor more than five justices of the supreme court who shall be designated from time to time by the chief administrator of the courts with the approval of the presiding justice of the appropriate appellate division, and who shall be residents of the department or of the judicial district or districts as the case may be and the chief administrator of the courts shall designate the place or places where such appellate terms shall be held.

b. Any such appellate term may be discontinued and re-established as the appellate division of the supreme court in each department shall determine from time to time and any designation to service therein may be revoked by the chief administrator of the courts with the approval of the presiding justice of the appropriate appellate division.

c. In each appellate term no more than three justices assigned thereto shall sit in any action or proceeding.

Two of such justices shall constitute a quorum and the concurrence of two shall be necessary to a decision.

d. If so directed by the appellate division of the supreme court establishing an appellate term, an appellate term shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals now or hereafter authorized by law to be taken to the supreme court or to the appellate division other than appeals from the supreme court, a surrogate's court, the family court or appeals in criminal cases prosecuted by indictment or by information as provided in section six of article one.

e. As may be provided by law, an appellate term shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from the district court or a town, village or city court outside the city of New York.

§ 9. The court of claims is continued.

It shall consist of the eight judges now authorized by law, but the legislature may increase such number and may reduce such number to six or seven.

The judges shall be appointed by the governor by and with the advice and consent of the senate and their terms of office shall be nine years.

The court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine claims against the state or by the state against the claimant or between conflicting claimants as the legislature may provide.

§ 10. a. The county court is continued in each county outside the city of New York.

There shall be at least one judge of the county court in each county and such number of additional judges in each county as may be provided by law.

The judges shall be residents of the county and shall be chosen by the electors of the county.

b. The terms of the judges of the county court shall be ten years from and including the first day of January next after their election.

§ 11. a. The county court shall have jurisdiction over the following classes of actions and proceedings which shall be originated in such county court in the manner provided by law, except that actions and proceedings within the jurisdiction of the district court or a town, village or city court outside the city of New York may, as provided by law, be originated therein: actions and proceedings for the recovery of money, actions and proceedings for the recovery of chattels and actions and proceedings for the foreclosure of mechanics liens and liens on personal property where the amount sought to be recovered or the value of the property does not exceed twenty-five thousand dollars exclusive of interest and costs; over all crimes and other violations of law; over summary proceedings to recover possession of real property and to remove tenants therefrom; and over such other actions and proceedings, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court, as may be provided by law.

b. The county court shall exercise such equity jurisdiction as may be provided by law and its jurisdiction to enter judgment upon a counterclaim for the recovery of money only shall be unlimited.

c. The county court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine all appeals arising in the county in the following actions and proceedings: as of right, from a judgment or order of the district court or a town, village or city court which finally determines an action or proceeding and, as may be provided by law, from a judgment or order of any such court which does not finally determine an action or proceeding.

The legislature may provide, in accordance with the provisions of section eight of this article, that any or all of such appeals be taken to an appellate term of the supreme court instead of the county court.

d. The provisions of this section shall in no way limit or impair the jurisdiction of the supreme court as set forth in section seven of this article.

§ 12. a. The surrogate's court is continued in each county in the state.

There shall be at least one judge of the surrogate's court in each county and such number of additional judges of the surrogate's court as may be provided by law.

b. The judges of the surrogate's court shall be residents of the county and shall be chosen by the electors of the county.

c. The terms of the judges of the surrogate's court in the city of New York shall be fourteen years, and in other counties ten years, from and including the first day of January next after their election.

d. The surrogate's court shall have jurisdiction over all actions and proceedings relating to the affairs of decedents, probate of wills, administration of estates and actions and proceedings arising thereunder or pertaining thereto, guardianship of the property of minors, and such other actions and proceedings, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court, as may be provided by law.

e. The surrogate's court shall exercise such equity jurisdiction as may be provided by law.

f. The provisions of this section shall in no way limit or impair the jurisdiction of the supreme court as set forth in section seven of this article.

§ 13. a. The family court of the state of New York is hereby established.

It shall consist of at least one judge in each county outside the city of New York and such number of additional judges for such counties as may be provided by law.

Within the city of New York it shall consist of such number of judges as may be provided by law.

The judges of the family court within the city of New York shall be residents of such city and shall be appointed by the mayor of the city of New York for terms of ten years.

The judges of the family court outside the city of New York, shall be chosen by the electors of the counties wherein they reside for terms of ten years.

b. The family court shall have jurisdiction over the following classes of actions and proceedings which shall be originated in such family court in the manner provided by law:

(1) the protection, treatment, correction and commitment of those minors who are in need of the exercise of the authority of the court because of circumstances of neglect, delinquency or dependency, as the legislature may determine;

(2) the custody of minors except for custody incidental to actions and proceedings for marital separation, divorce, annulment of marriage and dissolution of marriage;

(3) the adoption of persons;

(4) the support of dependents except for support incidental to actions and proceedings in this state for marital separation, divorce, annulment of marriage or dissolution of marriage;

(5) the establishment of paternity;

(6) proceedings for conciliation of spouses; and

(7) as may be provided by law: the guardianship of the person of minors and, in conformity with the provisions of section seven of this article, crimes and offenses by or against minors or between spouses or between parent and child or between members of the same family or household.

Nothing in this section shall be construed to abridge the authority or jurisdiction of courts to appoint guardians in cases originating in those courts.

c. The family court shall also have jurisdiction to determine, with the same powers possessed by the supreme court, the following matters when referred to the family court from the supreme court: habeas corpus proceedings for the determination of the custody of minors; and in actions and proceedings for marital separation, divorce, annulment of marriage and dissolution of marriage, applications to fix temporary or permanent support and custody, or applications to enforce judgments and orders of support and of custody, or applications to modify judgments and orders of support and of custody which may be granted only upon the showing to the family court that there has been a subsequent change of circumstances and that modification is required.

d. The provisions of this section shall in no way limit or impair the jurisdiction of the supreme court as set forth in section seven of this article.

§ 14. The legislature may at any time provide that outside the city of New York the same person may act and discharge the duties of county judge and surrogate or of judge of the family court and surrogate, or of county judge and judge of the family court, or of all three positions in any county.

§ 15. a. The legislature shall by law establish a single court of city-wide civil jurisdiction and a single court of city-wide criminal jurisdiction in and for the city of New York and the legislature may, upon the request of the mayor and the local legislative body of the city of New York, merge the two courts into one city-wide court of both civil and criminal jurisdiction.

The said city-wide courts shall consist of such number of judges as may be provided by law.

The judges of the court of city-wide civil jurisdiction shall be residents of such city and shall be chosen for terms of ten years by the electors of the counties included within the city of New York from districts within such counties established by law.

The judges of the court of city-wide criminal jurisdiction shall be residents of such city and shall be appointed for terms of ten years by the mayor of the city of New York.

b. The court of city-wide civil jurisdiction of the city of New York shall have jurisdiction over the following classes of actions and proceedings which shall be originated in such court in the manner provided by law: actions and proceedings for the recovery of money, actions and proceedings for the recovery of chattels and actions and proceedings for the foreclosure of mechanics liens and liens on personal property where the amount sought to be recovered or the value of the property does not exceed twenty-five thousand dollars exclusive of interest and costs, or such smaller amount as may be fixed by law; over summary proceedings to recover possession of real property and to remove tenants therefrom and over such other actions and proceedings, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court, as may be provided by law.

The court of city-wide civil jurisdiction shall further exercise such equity jurisdiction as may be provided by law and its jurisdiction to enter judgment upon a counterclaim for the recovery of money only shall be unlimited.

c. The court of city-wide criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York shall have jurisdiction over crimes and other violations of law, other than those prosecuted by indictment, provided, however, that the legislature may grant to said court jurisdiction over misdemeanors prosecuted by indictment; and over such other actions and proceedings, not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme court, as may be provided by law.

d. The provisions of this section shall in no way limit or impair the jurisdiction of the supreme court as set forth in section seven of this article.

§ 16. a. The district court of Nassau county may be continued under existing law and the legislature may, at the request of the board of supervisors or other elective governing body of any county outside the city of New York, establish the district court for the entire area of such county or for a portion of such county consisting of one or more cities, or one or more towns which are contiguous, or of a combination of such cities and such towns provided at least one of such cities is contiguous to one of such towns.

b. No law establishing the district court for an entire county shall become effective unless approved at a general election on the question of the approval of such law by a majority of the votes cast thereon by the electors within the area of any cities in the county considered as one unit and by a majority of the votes cast thereon by the electors within the area outside of cities in the county considered as one unit.

c. No law establishing the district court for a portion of a county shall become effective unless approved at a general election on the question of the approval of such law by a majority of the votes cast thereon by the electors within the area of any cities included in such portion of the county considered as one unit and by a majority of the votes cast thereon by the electors within the area outside of cities included in such portion of the county considered as one unit.

d. The district court shall have such jurisdiction as may be provided by law, but not in any respect greater than the jurisdiction of the courts for the city of New York as provided in section fifteen of this article, provided, however, that in actions and proceedings for the recovery of money, actions and proceedings for the recovery of chattels and actions and proceedings for the foreclosure of mechanics liens and liens on personal property, the amount sought to be recovered or the value of the property shall not exceed fifteen thousand dollars exclusive of interest and costs.

e. The legislature may create districts of the district court which shall consist of an entire county or of an area less than a county.

f. There shall be at least one judge of the district court for each district and such number of additional judges in each district as may be provided by law.

g. The judges of the district court shall be apportioned among the districts as may be provided by law, and to the extent practicable, in accordance with the population and the volume of judicial business.

h. The judges shall be residents of the district and shall be chosen by the electors of the district.

Their terms shall be six years from and including the first day of January next after their election.

i. The legislature may regulate and discontinue the district court in any county or portion thereof.

§ 17. a. Courts for towns, villages and cities outside the city of New York are continued and shall have the jurisdiction prescribed by the legislature but not in any respect greater than the jurisdiction of the district court as provided in section sixteen of this article.

b. The legislature may regulate such courts, establish uniform jurisdiction, practice and procedure for city courts outside the city of New York and may discontinue any village or city court outside the city of New York existing on the effective date of this article.

The legislature may discontinue any town court existing on the effective date of this article only with the approval of a majority of the total votes cast at a general election on the question of a proposed discontinuance of the court in each such town affected thereby.

c. The legislature may abolish the legislative functions on town boards of justices of the peace and provide that town councilmen be elected in their stead.

d. The number of the judges of each of such town, village and city courts and the classification and duties of the judges shall be prescribed by the legislature.

The terms, method of selection and method of filling vacancies for the judges of such courts shall be prescribed by the legislature, provided, however, that the justices of town courts shall be chosen by the electors of the town for terms of four years from and including the first day of January next after their election.

§ 18. a. Trial by jury is guaranteed as provided in article one of this constitution.

The legislature may provide that in any court of original jurisdiction a jury shall be composed of six or of twelve persons and may authorize any court which shall have jurisdiction over crimes and other violations of law, other than crimes prosecuted by indictment, to try such matters without a jury, provided, however, that crimes prosecuted by indictment shall be tried by a jury composed of twelve persons, unless a jury trial has been waived as provided in section two of article one of this constitution.

b. The legislature may provide for the manner of trial of actions and proceedings involving claims against the state.

§ 19. a. The supreme court may transfer any action or proceeding, except one over which it shall have exclusive jurisdiction which does not depend upon the monetary amount sought, to any other court having jurisdiction of the subject matter within the judicial department provided that such other court has jurisdiction over the classes of persons named as parties.

As may be provided by law, the supreme court may transfer to itself any action or proceeding originated or pending in another court within the judicial department other than the court of claims upon a finding that such a transfer will promote the administration of justice.

b. The county court shall transfer to the supreme court or surrogate's court or family court any action or proceeding which has not been transferred to it from the supreme court or surrogate's court or family court and over which the county court has no jurisdiction.

The county court may transfer any action or proceeding, except a criminal action or proceeding involving a felony prosecuted by indictment or an action or proceeding required by this article to be dealt with in the surrogate's court or family court, to any court, other than the supreme court, having jurisdiction of the subject matter within the county provided that such other court has jurisdiction over the classes of persons named as parties.

c. As may be provided by law, the supreme court or the county court may transfer to the county court any action or proceeding originated or pending in the district court or a town, village or city court outside the city of New York upon a finding that such a transfer will promote the administration of justice.

d. The surrogate's court shall transfer to the supreme court or the county court or the family court or the courts for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article any action or proceeding which has not been transferred to it from any of said courts and over which the surrogate's court has no jurisdiction.

e. The family court shall transfer to the supreme court or the surrogate's court or the county court or the courts for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article any action or proceeding which has not been transferred to it from any of said courts and over which the family court has no jurisdiction.

f. The courts for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article shall transfer to the supreme court or the surrogate's court or the family court any action or proceeding which has not been transferred to them from any of said courts and over which the said courts for the city of New York have no jurisdiction.

g. As may be provided by law, the supreme court shall transfer any action or proceeding to any other court having jurisdiction of the subject matter in any other judicial district or county provided that such other court has jurisdiction over the classes of persons named as parties.

h. As may be provided by law, the county court, the surrogate's court, the family court and the courts for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article may transfer any action or proceeding, other than one which has previously been transferred to it, to any other court, except the supreme court, having jurisdiction of the subject matter in any other judicial district or county provided that such other court has jurisdiction over the classes of persons named as parties.

i. As may be provided by law, the district court or a town, village or city court outside the city of New York may transfer any action or proceeding, other than one which has previously been transferred to it, to any court, other than the county court or the surrogate's court or the family court or the supreme court, having jurisdiction of the subject matter in the same or an adjoining county provided that such other court has jurisdiction over the classes of persons named as parties.

j. Each court shall exercise jurisdiction over any action or proceeding transferred to it pursuant to this section.

k. The legislature may provide that the verdict or judgment in actions and proceedings so transferred shall not be subject to the limitation of monetary jurisdiction of the court to which the actions and proceedings are transferred if that limitation be lower than that of the court in which the actions and proceedings were originated.

§ 20. a. No person, other than one who holds such office at the effective date of this article, may assume the office of judge of the court of appeals, justice of the supreme court, or judge of the court of claims unless he or she has been admitted to practice law in this state at least ten years.

No person, other than one who holds such office at the effective date of this article, may assume the office of judge of the county court, surrogate's court, family court, a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article, district court or city court outside the city of New York unless he or she has been admitted to practice law in this state at least five years or such greater number of years as the legislature may determine.

b. A judge of the court of appeals, justice of the supreme court, judge of the court of claims, judge of a county court, judge of the surrogate's court, judge of the family court or judge of a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article who is elected or appointed after the effective date of this article may not:

(1) hold any other public office or trust except an office in relation to the administration of the courts, member of a constitutional convention or member of the armed forces of the United States or of the state of New York in which latter event the legislature may enact such legislation as it deems appropriate to provide for a temporary judge or justice to serve during the period of the absence of such judge or justice in the armed forces;

(2) be eligible to be a candidate for any public office other than judicial office or member of a constitutional convention, unless he or she resigns from judicial office; in the event a judge or justice does not so resign from judicial office within ten days after his or her acceptance of the nomination of such other office, his or her judicial office shall become vacant and the vacancy shall be filled in the manner provided in this article;

(3) hold any office or assume the duties or exercise the powers of any office of any political organization or be a member of any governing or executive agency thereof;

(4) engage in the practice of law, act as an arbitrator, referee or compensated mediator in any action or proceeding or matter or engage in the conduct of any other profession or business which interferes with the performance of his or her judicial duties.

Judges and justices of the courts specified in this subdivision shall also be subject to such rules of conduct as may be promulgated by the chief administrator of the courts with the approval of the court of appeals.

c. Qualifications for and restrictions upon the judges of district, town, village or city courts outside the city of New York, other than such qualifications and restrictions specifically set forth in subdivision a of this section, shall be prescribed by the legislature, provided, however, that the legislature shall require a course of training and education to be completed by justices of town and village courts selected after the effective date of this article who have not been admitted to practice law in this state.

Judges of such courts shall also be subject to such rules of conduct not inconsistent with laws as may be promulgated by the chief administrator of the courts with the approval of the court of appeals.

§ 21. a. When a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term, in the office of justice of the supreme court, of judge of the county court, of judge of the surrogate's court or judge of the family court outside the city of New York, it shall be filled for a full term at the next general election held not less than three months after such vacancy occurs and, until the vacancy shall be so filled, the governor by and with the advice and consent of the senate, if the senate shall be in session, or, if the senate not be in session, the governor may fill such vacancy by an appointment which shall continue until and including the last day of December next after the election at which the vacancy shall be filled.

b. When a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term, in the office of judge of the court of claims, it shall be filled for the unexpired term in the same manner as an original appointment.

c. When a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term, in the office of judge elected to the city-wide court of civil jurisdiction of the city of New York, it shall be filled for a full term at the next general election held not less than three months after such vacancy occurs and, until the vacancy shall be so filled, the mayor of the city of New York may fill such vacancy by an appointment which shall continue until and including the last day of December next after the election at which the vacancy shall be filled.

When a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term on the last day of December of any year, in the office of judge appointed to the family court within the city of New York or the city-wide court of criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York, the mayor of the city of New York shall fill such vacancy by an appointment for the unexpired term.

d. When a vacancy shall occur, otherwise than by expiration of term, in the office of judge of the district court, it shall be filled for a full term at the next general election held not less than three months after such vacancy occurs and, until the vacancy shall be so filled, the board of supervisors or the supervisor or supervisors of the affected district if such district consists of a portion of a county or, in counties with an elected county executive officer, such county executive officer may, subject to confirmation by the board of supervisors or the supervisor or supervisors of such district, fill such vacancy by an appointment which shall continue until and including the last day of December next after the election at which the vacancy shall be filled.

§ 22. a. There shall be a commission on judicial conduct.

The commission on judicial conduct shall receive, initiate, investigate and hear complaints with respect to the conduct, qualifications, fitness to perform or performance of official duties of any judge or justice of the unified court system, in the manner provided by law; and, in accordance with subdivision d of this section, may determine that a judge or justice be admonished, censured or removed from office for cause, including, but not limited to, misconduct in office, persistent failure to perform his or her duties, habitual intemperance, and conduct, on or off the bench, prejudicial to the administration of justice, or that a judge or justice be retired for mental or physical disability preventing the proper performance of his or her judicial duties.

The commission shall transmit an* such determination to the chief judge of the court of appeals who shall cause written notice of such determination to be given to the judge or justice involved.

Such judge or justice may either accept the commission's determination or make written request to the chief judge, within thirty days after receipt of such notice, for a review of such determination by the court of appeals.

* So in original. ("an" should be "any".)

[color="red"][size=3]b. (1) The commission on judicial conduct shall consist of eleven members, of whom four shall be appointed by the governor, one by the temporary president of the senate, one by the minority leader of the senate, one by the speaker of the assembly, one by the minority leader of the assembly and three by the chief judge of the court of appeals.

Of the members appoint

[Livyjr]

NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION ARTICLE VI

Judiciary(continued)

b. (1) The commission on judicial conduct shall consist of eleven members, of whom four shall be appointed by the governor, one by the temporary president of the senate, one by the minority leader of the senate, one by the speaker of the assembly, one by the minority leader of the assembly and three by the chief judge of the court of appeals.

Of the members appointed by the governor one person shall be a member of the bar of the state but not a judge or justice, two shall not be members of the bar, justices or judges or retired justices or judges of the unified court system, and one shall be a judge or justice of the unified court system.

Of the members appointed by the chief judge one person shall be a justice of the appellate division of the supreme court and two shall be judges or justices of a court or courts other than the court of appeals or appellate divisions.

None of the persons to be appointed by the legislative leaders shall be justices or judges or retired justices or judges.

(2) The persons first appointed by the governor shall have respectively one, two, three, and four-year terms as the governor shall designate.

The persons first appointed by the chief judge of the court of appeals shall have respectively two, three, and four-year terms as the governor shall designate.

The person first appointed by the temporary president of the senate shall have a one-year term.

The person first appointed by the minority leader of the senate shall have a two-year term.

The person first appointed by the speaker of the assembly shall have a four-year term.

The person first appointed by the minority leader of the assembly shall have a three-year term.

Each member of the commission shall be appointed thereafter for a term of four years.

Commission membership of a judge or justice appointed by the governor or the chief judge shall terminate if such member ceases to hold the judicial position which qualified him or her for such appointment.

Membership shall also terminate if a member attains a position which would have rendered him or her ineligible for appointment at the time of appointment.

A vacancy shall be filled by the appointing officer for the remainder of the term.

c. The organization and procedure of the commission on judicial conduct shall be as provided by law.

The commission on judicial conduct may establish its own rules and procedures not inconsistent with law.

Unless the legislature shall provide otherwise, the commission shall be empowered to designate one of its members or any other person as a referee to hear and report concerning any matter before the commission.

d. In reviewing a determination of the commission on judicial conduct, the court of appeals may admonish, censure, remove or retire, for the reasons set forth in subdivision a of this section, any judge of the unified court system.

In reviewing a determination of the commission on judicial conduct, the court of appeals shall review the commission's findings of fact and conclusions of law on the record of the proceedings upon which the commission's determination was based.

The court of appeals may impose a less or more severe sanction prescribed by this section than the one determined by the commission, or impose no sanction.

e. The court of appeals may suspend a judge or justice from exercising the powers of his or her office while there is pending a determination by the commission on judicial conduct for his or her removal or retirement, or while the judge or justice is charged in this state with a felony by an indictment or an information filed pursuant to section six of article one.

The suspension shall continue upon conviction and, if the conviction becomes final, the judge or justice shall be removed from office.

The suspension shall be terminated upon reversal of the conviction and dismissal of the accusatory instrument.

Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent the commission on judicial conduct from determining that a judge or justice be admonished, censured, removed, or retired pursuant to subdivision a of this section.

f. Upon the recommendation of the commission on judicial conduct or on its own motion, the court of appeals may suspend a judge or justice from office when he or she is charged with a crime punishable as a felony under the laws of this state, or any other crime which involves moral turpitude.

The suspension shall continue upon conviction and, if the conviction becomes final, the judge or justice shall be removed from office.

The suspension shall be terminated upon reversal of the conviction and dismissal of the accusatory instrument.

Nothing in this subdivision shall prevent the commission on judicial conduct from determining that a judge or justice be admonished, censured, removed, or retired pursuant to subdivision a of this section.

g. A judge or justice who is suspended from office by the court of appeals shall receive his or her judicial salary during such period of suspension, unless the court directs otherwise.

If the court has so directed and such suspension is thereafter terminated, the court may direct that the judge or justice shall be paid his or her salary for such period of suspension.

h. A judge or justice retired by the court of appeals shall be considered to have retired voluntarily.

A judge or justice removed by the court of appeals shall be ineligible to hold other judicial office.

i. Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, the legislature may provide by law for review of determinations of the commission on judicial conduct with respect to justices of town and village courts by an appellate division of the supreme court.

In such event, all references in this section to the court of appeals and the chief judge thereof shall be deemed references to an appellate division and the presiding justice thereof, respectively.

j. If a court on the judiciary shall have been convened before the effective date of this section and the proceeding shall not be concluded by that date, the court on the judiciary shall have continuing jurisdiction beyond the effective date of this section to conclude the proceeding.

All matters pending before the former commission on judicial conduct on the effective date of this section shall be disposed of in such manner as shall be provided by law.

§ 23. a. Judges of the court of appeals and justices of the supreme court may be removed by concurrent resolution of both houses of the legislature, if two-thirds of all the members elected to each house concur therein.

b. Judges of the court of claims, the county court, the surrogate's court, the family court, the courts for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article, the district court and such other courts as the legislature may determine may be removed by the senate, on the recommendation of the governor, if two-thirds of all the members elected to the senate concur therein.

c. No judge or justice shall be removed by virtue of this section except for cause, which shall be entered on the journals, nor unless he or she shall have been served with a statement of the cause alleged, and shall have had an opportunity to be heard.

On the question of removal, the yeas and nays shall be entered on the journal.

§ 24. The assembly shall have the power of impeachment by a vote of a majority of all the members elected thereto.

The court for the trial of impeachments shall be composed of the president of the senate, the senators, or the major part of them, and the judges of the court of appeals, or the major part of them.

On the trial of an impeachment against the governor or lieutenant-governor, neither the lieutenant-governor nor the temporary president of the senate shall act as a member of the court.

No judicial officer shall exercise his or her office after articles of impeachment against him or her shall have been preferred to the senate, until he or she shall have been acquitted.

Before the trial of an impeachment, the members of the court shall take an oath or affirmation truly and impartially to try the impeachment according to the evidence, and no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present.

Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, or removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any public office of honor, trust, or profit under this state; but the party impeached shall be liable to indictment and punishment according to law.

§ 25. a. The compensation of a judge of the court of appeals, a justice of the supreme court, a judge of the court of claims, a judge of the county court, a judge of the surrogate's court, a judge of the family court, a judge of a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article, a judge of the district court or of a retired judge or justice shall be established by law and shall not be diminished during the term of office for which he or she was elected or appointed.

Any judge or justice of a court abolished by section thirty-five of this article, who pursuant to that section becomes a judge or justice of a court established or continued by this article, shall receive without interruption or diminution for the remainder of the term for which he or she was elected or appointed to the abolished court the compensation he or she had been receiving upon the effective date of this article together with any additional compensation that may be prescribed by law.

b. Each judge of the court of appeals, justice of the supreme court, judge of the court of claims, judge of the county court, judge of the surrogate's court, udge of the family court, judge of a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article and judge of the district court shall retire on the last day of December in the year in which he or she reaches the age of seventy.

Each such former judge of the court of appeals and justice of the supreme court may thereafter perform the duties of a justice of the supreme court, with power to hear and determine actions and proceedings, provided, however, that it shall be certificated in the manner provided by law that the services of such judge or justice are necessary to expedite the business of the court and that he or she is mentally and physically able and competent to perform the full duties of such office.

Any such certification shall be valid for a term of two years and may be extended as provided by law for additional terms of two years.

A retired judge or justice shall serve no longer than until the last day of December in the year in which he or she reaches the age of seventy-six.

A retired judge or justice shall be subject to assignment by the appellate division of the supreme court of the judicial department of his or her residence.

Any retired justice of the supreme court who had been designated to and served as a justice of any appellate division immediately preceding his or her reaching the age of seventy shall be eligible for designation by the governor as a temporary or additional justice of the appellate division.

A retired judge or justice shall not be counted in determining the number of justices in a judicial district for purposes of subdivision d of section six of this rticle.

c. The provisions of this section shall also be applicable to any judge or justice who has not reached the age of seventy-six and to whom it would otherwise have been applicable but for the fact that he or she reached the age of seventy and retired before the effective date of this article.

§ 26. a. A justice of the supreme court may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in any judicial district or to the court of claims.

A justice of the supreme court in the city of New York may be temporarily assigned to the family court in the city of New York or to the surrogate's court in any county within the city of New York when required to dispose of the business of such court.

b. A judge of the court of claims may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in any judicial district.

c. A judge of the county court may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in the judicial department of his or her residence or to the county court or the family court in any county or to the surrogate's court in any county outside the city of New York or to a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article.

d. A judge of the surrogate's court in any county within the city of New York may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in the judicial department of his or her residence.

e. A judge of the surrogate's court in any county outside the city of New York may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in the judicial department of his or her residence or to the county court or the family court in any county or to a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article.

f. A judge of the family court may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in the judicial department of his or her residence or to the county court or the family court in any county or to the surrogate's court in any county outside of the city of New York or to a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article.

g. A judge of a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the supreme court in the judicial department of his or her residence or to the county court or the family court in any county or to the other court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article.

h. A judge of the district court in any county may perform the duties of office or hold court in any county and may be temporarily assigned to the county court in the judicial department of his or her residence or to a court for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article or to the district court in any county.

i. Temporary assignments of all the foregoing judges or justices listed in this section, and of judges of the city courts pursuant to paragraph two of subdivision j of this section, shall be made by the chief administrator of the courts in accordance with standards and administrative policies established pursuant to section twenty-eight of this article.

j. (1) The legislature may provide for temporary assignments within the county of residence or any adjoining county, of judges of town, village or city courts outside the city of New York.

(2) In addition to any temporary assignments to which a judge of a city court may be subject pursuant to paragraph one of this subdivision, such judge also may be temporarily assigned by the chief administrator of the courts to the county court, the family court or the district court within his or her county of residence or any adjoining county provided he or she is not permitted to practice law.

k. While temporarily assigned pursuant to the provisions of this section, any judge or justice shall have the powers, duties and jurisdiction of a judge or justice of the court to which assigned.

After the expiration of any temporary assignment, as provided in this section, the judge or justice assigned shall have all the powers, duties and jurisdiction of a judge or justice of the court to which he or she was assigned with respect to matters pending before him or her during the term of such temporary assignment.

§ 27. The governor may, when in his or her opinion the public interest requires, appoint extraordinary terms of the supreme court.

The governor shall designate the time and place of holding the term and the justice who shall hold the term.

The governor may terminate the assignment of the justice and may name another justice in his or her place to hold the term.

§ 28. a. The chief judge of the court of appeals shall be the chief judge of the state of New York and shall be the chief judicial officer of the unified court system.

There shall be an administrative board of the courts which shall consist of the chief judge of the court of appeals as chairperson and the presiding justice of the appellate division of the supreme court of each judicial department.

The chief judge shall, with the advice and consent of the administrative board of the courts, appoint a chief administrator of the courts who shall serve at the pleasure of the chief judge.

b. The chief administrator, on behalf of the chief judge, shall supervise the administration and operation of the unified court system.

In the exercise of such responsibility, the chief administrator of the courts shall have such powers and duties as may be delegated to him or her by the chief judge and such additional powers and duties as may be provided by law.

c. The chief judge, after consultation with the administrative board, shall establish standards and administrative policies for general application throughout the state, which shall be submitted by the chief judge to the court of appeals, together with the recommendations, if any, of the administrative board.

Such standards and administrative policies shall be promulgated after approval by the court of appeals.

§ 29. a. The legislature shall provide for the allocation of the cost of operating and maintaining the court of appeals, the appellate division of the supreme court in each judicial department, the supreme court, the court of claims, the county court, the surrogate's court, the family court, the courts for the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article and the district court, among the state, the counties, the city of New York and other political subdivisions.

b. The legislature shall provide for the submission of the itemized estimates of the annual financial needs of the courts referred to in subdivision a of this section to the chief administrator of the courts to be forwarded to the appropriating bodies with recommendations and comment.

c. Insofar as the expense of the courts is borne by the state or paid by the state in the first instance, the final determination of the itemized estimates of the annual financial needs of the courts shall be made by the legislature and the governor in accordance with articles four and seven of this constitution.

d. Insofar as the expense of the courts is not paid by the state in the first instance and is borne by counties, the city of New York or other political subdivisions, the final determination of the itemized estimates of the annual financial needs of the courts shall be made by the appropriate governing bodies of such counties, the city of New York or other political subdivisions.

§ 30. The legislature shall have the same power to alter and regulate the jurisdiction and proceedings in law and in equity that it has heretofore exercised.

The legislature may, on such terms as it shall provide and subject to subsequent modification, delegate, in whole or in part, to a court, including the appellate division of the supreme court, or to the chief administrator of the courts, any power possessed by the legislature to regulate practice and procedure in the courts.

The chief administrator of the courts shall exercise any such power delegated to him or her with the advice and consent of the administrative board of the courts.

Nothing herein contained shall prevent the adoption of regulations by individual courts consistent with the general practice and procedure as provided by statute or general rules.

§ 31. This article does not apply to the peacemakers courts or other Indian courts, the existence and operation of which shall continue as may be provided by law.

§ 32. When any court having jurisdiction over a child shall commit it or remand it to an institution or agency or place it in the custody of any person by parole, placing out, adoption or guardianship, the child shall be committed or remanded or placed, when practicable, in an institution or agency governed by persons, or in the custody of a person, of the same religious persuasion as the child.

§ 33. Existing provisions of law not inconsistent with this article shall continue in force until repealed, amended, modified or superseded in accordance with the provisions of this article.

The legislature shall enact appropriate laws to carry into effect the purposes and provisions of this article, and may, for the purpose of implementing, supplementing or clarifying any of its provisions, enact any laws, not inconsistent with the provisions of this article, necessary or desirable in promoting the objectives of this article.

§ 34. a. The court of appeals, the appellate division of the supreme court, the supreme court, the court of claims, the county court in counties outside the city of New York, the surrogate's court and the district court of Nassau county shall hear and determine all appeals, actions and proceedings pending therein on the effective date of this article except that the appellate division of the supreme court in the first and second judicial departments or the appellate term in such departments, if so directed by the appropriate appellate division of the supreme court, shall hear and determine all appeals pending in the appellate terms of the supreme court in the first and second judicial departments and in the court of special sessions of the city of New York and except that the county court or an appellate term shall, as may be provided by law, hear and determine all appeals pending in the county court or the supreme court other than an appellate term.

Further appeal from a decision of the county court, the appellate term or the appellate division of the supreme court, rendered on or after the effective date of this article, shall be governed by the provisions of this article.

b. The justices of the supreme court in office on the effective date of this article shall hold their offices as justices of the supreme court until the expiration of their respective terms.

c. The judges of the court of claims in office on the effective date of this article shall hold their offices as judges of the court of claims until the expiration of their respective terms.

d. The surrogates, and county judges outside the city of New York, including the special county judges of the counties of Erie and Suffolk, in office on the effective date of this article shall hold office as judges of the surrogate's court or county judge, respectively, of such counties until the expiration of their respective terms.

e. The judges of the district court of Nassau county in office on the effective date of this article shall hold their offices until the expiration of their respective terms.

f. Judges of courts for towns, villages and cities outside the city of New York in office on the effective date of this article shall hold their offices until the expiration of their respective terms.

§ 35. a. The children's courts, the court of general sessions of the county of New York, the county courts of the counties of Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond, the city court of the city of New York, the domestic relations court of the city of New York, the municipal court of the city of New York, the court of special sessions of the city of New York and the city magistrates' courts of the city of New York are abolished from and after the effective date of this article and thereupon the seals, records, papers and documents of or belonging to such courts shall, unless otherwise provided by law, be deposited in the offices of the clerks of the several counties in which these courts now exist.

b. The judges of the county court of the counties of Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond and the judges of the court of general sessions of the county of New York in office on the effective date of this article shall, for the remainder of the terms for which they were elected or appointed, be justices of the supreme court in and for the judicial district which includes the county in which they resided on that date.

The salaries of such justices shall be the same as the salaries of the other justices of the supreme court residing in the same judicial district and shall be paid in the same manner.

All actions and proceedings pending in the county court of the counties of Bronx, Kings, Queens and Richmond and in the court of general sessions of the county of New York on the effective date of this article shall be transferred to the supreme court in the county in which the action or proceedings was pending, or otherwise as may be provided by law.

c. The legislature shall provide by law that the justices of the city court of the city of New York and the justices of the municipal court of the city of New York in office on the date such courts are abolished shall, for the remainder of the term for which each was elected or appointed, be judges of the city-wide court of civil jurisdiction of the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article and for such district as the legislature may determine.

d. The legislature shall provide by law that the justices of the court of special sessions and the magistrates of the city magistrates' courts of the city of New York in office on the date such courts are abolished shall, for the remainder of the term for which each was appointed, be judges of the city-wide court of criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen provided, however, that each term shall expire on the last day of the year in which it would have expired except for the provisions of this article.

e. All actions and proceedings pending in the city court of the city of New York and the municipal court in the city of New York on the date such courts are abolished shall be transferred to the city-wide court of civil jurisdiction of the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article or as otherwise provided by law.

f. All actions and proceedings pending in the court of special sessions of the city of New York and the city magistrates' courts of the city of New York on the date such courts are abolished shall be transferred to the city-wide court of criminal jurisdiction of the city of New York established pursuant to section fifteen of this article or as otherwise provided by law.

g. The special county judges of the counties of Broome, Chautauqua, Jefferson, Oneida and Rockland and the judges of the children's courts in all counties outside the city of New York in office on the effective date of this article shall, for the remainder of the terms for which they were elected or appointed, be judges of the family court in and for the county in which they hold office.

Except as otherwise provided in this section, the office of special county judge and the office of special surrogate is abolished from and after the effective date of this article and the terms of the persons holding such offices shall terminate on that date.

h. All actions and proceedings pending in the children's courts in counties outside the city of New York on the effective date of this article shall be transferred to the family court in the respective counties.

i. The justices of the domestic relations court of the city of New York in office on the effective date of this article shall, for the remainder of the terms for which they were appointed, be judges of the family court within the city of New York.

j. All actions and proceedings pending in the domestic relations court of the city of New York on the effective date of this article shall be transferred to the family court in the city of New York.

k. The office of official referee is abolished, provided, however, that official referees in office on the effective date of this article shall, for the remainder of the terms for which they were appointed or certified, be official referees of the court in which appointed or certified or the successor court, as the case may be.

At the expiration of the term of any official referee, his or her office shall be abolished and thereupon such former official referee shall be subject to the relevant provisions of section twenty-five of this article.

l. As may be provided by law, the non-judicial personnel of the courts affected by this article in office on the effective date of this article shall, to the extent practicable, be continued without diminution of salaries and with the same status and rights in the courts established or continued by this article; and especially skilled, experienced and trained personnel shall, to the extent practicable, be assigned to like functions in the courts which exercise the jurisdiction formerly exercised by the courts in which they were employed.

In the event that the adoption of this article shall require or make possible a reduction in the number of non-judicial personnel, or in the number of certain categories of such personnel, such reduction shall be made, to the extent practicable, by provision that the death, resignation, removal or retirement of an employee shall not create a vacancy until the reduced number of personnel has been reached.

m. In the event that a judgment or order was entered before the effective date of this article and a right of appeal existed and notice of appeal therefrom is filed after the effective date of this article, such appeal shall be taken from the supreme court, the county courts, the surrogate's courts, the children's courts, the court of general sessions of the county of New York and the domestic relations court of the city of New York to the appellate division of the supreme court in the judicial department in which such court was located; from the court of claims to the appellate division of the supreme court in the third judicial department, except for those claims which arose in the fourth judicial department, in which case the appeal shall be to the appellate division of the supreme court in the fourth judicial department; from the city court of the city of New York, the municipal court of the city of New York, the court of special sessions of the city of New York and the city magistrates' courts of the city of New York to the appellate division of the supreme court in the judicial department in which such court was located, provided, however, that such appellate division of the supreme court may transfer any such appeal to an appellate term, if such appellate term be established; and from the district court, town, village and city courts outside the city of New York to the county court in the county in which such court was located, provided, however, that the legislature may require the transfer of any such appeal to an appellate term, if such appellate term be established.

Further appeal from a decision of a county court or an appellate term or the appellate division of the supreme court shall be governed by the provisions of this article.

However, if in any action or proceeding decided prior to the effective date of this article, a party had a right of direct appeal from a court of original jurisdiction to the court of appeals, such appeal may be taken directly to the court of appeals.

n. In the event that an appeal was decided before the effective date of this article and a further appeal could be taken as of right and notice of appeal therefrom is filed after the effective date of this article, such appeal may be taken from the appellate division of the supreme court to the court of appeals and from any other court to the appellate division of the supreme court.

Further appeal from a decision of the appellate division of the supreme court shall be governed by the provisions of this article.

If a further appeal could not be taken as of right, such appeal shall be governed by the provisions of this article.

§ 36. No civil or criminal appeal, action or proceeding pending before any court or any judge or justice on the effective date of this article shall abate but such appeal, action or proceeding so pending shall be continued in the courts as provided in this article and, for the purposes of the disposition of such actions or proceedings only, the jurisdiction of any court to which any such action or proceeding is transferred by this article shall be coextensive with the jurisdiction of the former court from which the action or proceeding was transferred.

Except to the extent inconsistent with the provisions of this article, subsequent proceedings in such appeal, action or proceeding shall be conducted in accordance with the laws in force on the effective date of this article until superseded in the manner authorized by law.

§ 36-a. The amendments to the provisions of sections two, four, seven, eight, eleven, twenty, twenty-two, twenty-six, twenty-eight, twenty-nine and thirty of article six and to the provisions of section one of article seven, as first proposed by a concurrent resolution passed by the legislature in the year nineteen hundred seventy-six and entitled "Concurrent Resolution of the Senate and Assembly proposing amendments to articles six and seven of the constitution, in relation to the manner of selecting judges of the court of appeals, creation of a commission on judicial conduct and administration of the unified court system, providing for the effectiveness of such amendments and the repeal of subdivision c of section two, subdivision b of section seven, subdivision b of section eleven, section twenty-two and section twenty-eight of article six thereof relating thereto", shall become a part of the constitution on the first day of January next after the approval and ratification of the amendments proposed by such concurrent resolution by the people but the provisions thereof shall not become operative and the repeal of subdivision c of section two, section twenty-two and section twenty-eight shall not become effective until the first day of April next thereafter which date shall be deemed the effective date of such amendments and the chief judge and the associate judges of the court of appeals in office on such effective date shall hold their offices until the expiration of their respective terms.

Upon a vacancy in the office of any such judge, such vacancy shall be filled in the manner provided in section two of article six.

§ 36-c. The amendments to the provisions of section twenty-two of article six as first proposed by a concurrent resolution passed by the legislature in the year nineteen hundred seventy-four and entitled "Concurrent Resolution of the Senate and Assembly proposing an amendment to section twenty-two of article six and adding section thirty-six-c to such article of the constitution, in relation to the powers of and reconstituting the court on the judiciary and creating a commission on judicial conduct", shall become a part of the constitution on the first day of January next after the approval and ratification of the amendments proposed by such concurrent resolution by the people but the provisions thereof shall not become operative until the first day of September next thereafter which date shall be deemed the effective date of such amendments.

§ 37. This article shall become a part of the constitution on the first day of January next after the approval and ratification of this amendment by the people but its provisions shall not become operative until the first day of September next thereafter which date shall be deemed the effective date of this article.

http://www.senate.state.ny.us/lbdcinfo/senconstitution.html