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

[Livyjr]

"Request to pull Guantanamo lawyer plan"

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer

9 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is trying to evade responsibility for problems at the Guantanamo Bay prison by falsely blaming defense lawyers for the trouble, the New York City Bar says.

The group's president leveled the criticism in asking Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to abandon a Justice Department proposal to limit lawyers' access to the nearly 400 detainees.

In a court filing this month, the department said attorney access via the mail system has "enabled detainees' counsel to cause unrest on the base by informing detainees about terrorist attacks."

The mail system was "misused" to inform detainees about military operations in Iraq, activities of terrorist leaders, efforts in the war on terror, the Hezbollah attack on Israel and abuse at Abu Ghraib prison, the department said in this month's court filing.

"This is an astonishing and disingenuous assertion," the association president, Barry M. Kamins, wrote Gonzales.

Kamins said many detainees have been held in solitary confinement for prolonged periods and have lost hope of a fair hearing to demonstrate their innocence.

"Blaming counsel for the hunger strikes and other unrest is a continuation of a disreputable and unwarranted smear campaign against counsel," according to the letter Friday.

Kamins pointed to recent remarks by the former deputy assistant secretary for detainee affairs, Charles Stimson.

Stimson resigned after saying he found it shocking that lawyers at many top firms represent detainees held at the U.S. military prison in Cuba.

The 137-year-old New York City Bar, with more than 23,000 members, is one of the oldest and largest lawyers' organizations in the country.

A Justice Department spokesman, Erik Ablin, said the department is reviewing the New York City Bar's letter.

Ablin pointed to the department's court papers that say the proposal on attorney access is well beyond what the Constitution and the law require.

Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said the military is giving broad lawyer access to many detainees, even though they are accused of having al-Qaida or Taliban links and the U.S. is at war.

Attorney Zachary Katznelson sees the Justice Department proposal as an attempt to seal the facility from critics.

"If we cannot come in, the only news getting out of here will be the government's carefully crafted version, which to my chagrin as an American deviates far too often from the truth," Katznelson said in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

He is spending two weeks at Guantanamo Bay to meet with 18 client detainees.

The department wants to narrow the definition of "legal mail" and impose a three-visit rule on the number of face-to-face meetings once a detainee agrees at an initial meeting to let an attorney represent him.

On Thursday, American Bar Association President Karen J. Mathis criticized "arbitrary restrictions concerning the number of times and the ways that lawyers may confer with their clients in Guantanamo."

She said such practices at Guantanamo or in a court "would threaten competent representation without at all advancing national security."

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear arguments on the department's proposal May 15.

___

Associated Press writer David McFadden in San Juan, Puerto Rico, contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

New York City Bar: http://www.abcny.org

Justice Department: http://www.usdoj.gov/

[Livyjr]

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Can't fix this! Brooklyn judge Garson guilty of bribes"

BY NANCIE L. KATZ, DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Friday, April 20th 2007, 4:00 AM

A disgraced Brooklyn judge, who was caught on hidden cameras accepting boxes of cigars and expensive liquor during cozy meetings with a crooked lawyer, was convicted yesterday of fixing divorce cases.

Former Supreme Court Justice Gerald Garson did not react when the jury, which deliberated for two days, found him guilty of receiving bribes and official misconduct.

He was acquitted of four other lesser counts.

The ex-judge faces up to 15 years in prison at his sentencing in June.

During the four-week trial, prosecutors showed Brooklyn jurors excerpts of hundreds of hours of profanity-laced audio and videotapes of Garson, 75, accepting boxes of expensive cigars, top-shelf liquor and other gifts from his pal Paul Siminovsky from October 2002 to March 2003.

Siminovsky testified against Garson.

"We proved the court system is corrupt," said Frieda Hanimov, who in 2002 raised suspicions that Garson was accepting bribes to fix divorce cases.

She had been told her husband, who was divorcing her, paid a bribe to win custody of their children.

"It's a big shame."

"It proves no citizen should trust anyone in the court system," she said.

Garson's conviction comes as the result of a wider investigation District Attorney Charles Hynes conducted into whether judgeships were being bought and sold.

The probe nabbed the head of the Brooklyn Democratic Party, Clarence Norman, who was convicted three times, including once for forcing a judicial candidate to pay $10,000 to Norman's pals or lose his political machine's support.

Garson's attorney, Michael Washor, vowed to appeal.

He called the videotapes a "Class-D" movie that created the "illusion of criminal conduct."

nkatz@nydailynews.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime_file...arson_guil.html

New York Daily News Daily Politics

"Brooklyn's Double Whammy - It's not a good day for Brooklyn Democratic politics"

Not only was former Kings County Democratic Party Treasurer and ex-state Supreme Court Justice Gerald Garson found guilty on charges of accepting bribes and official misconduct, but a federal judge said two-time 40th Council special election candidate Eugene Mathieu manipulated the election process in order to get on the ballot the second time around.

The Politicker has helpfully posted the decision that restored Eugene's opponent, Wellington Sharpe, to the ballot.

The New York Law Journal (unfortunately, subscription only) wrote about both Brooklyn stories today.

In the case of Garson, a Brooklyn political observer wrote in to note that the former judge is joining a long list of disgraced jurists from the borough, which includes, but is not necessarily limited to:

Victor Baron, elected to the Supreme Court in 1998, who was caught on videotape in his chambers accepting $18,000 in marked bills;

Reynold Mason, who had served on the Supreme Court bench since 1997, and was removed by the Court of Appeals on May 1st, 2003 for unethical conduct;

Michael Garson (brother of Gerry Garson) a former Supreme court judge forced off the bench for looting his dead aunt's fortune;

and Michael Feinberg, the Brooklyn Surrogate judge removed from the bench for looting the estates of the dead.

They join former favorite of the Brooklyn organization City Councilmember Angel Rodreguiez, who was convicted of taking bribes to fix a development project; former Assemblyman Roger Green, convicted of padding expenses, and, of course, our former Kings County Democratic party leader Clarence Norman who has been convicted in three separate cases (and just this week was sentenced to yet more jail time).

If you've got more, feel free to let me know.

This observer further notes that the current Brooklyn judiciary is filled with additional relatives and friends of the County Democratic organization (see his rundown after the jump).

"The bottom line in Brooklyn it's who you know," he writes.

"The thousands of highly-qualified lawyers who would give their right arm to be a judge have no chance against these insiders."

"The time for merit selection is now!"

Gov. Eliot Spitzer announced his support of merit selection during his first State of the State address in January.

The New York State Bar Association has proposed a model plan for merit selection.

District Leader Dilia Schack's husband Arthur is a Supreme Court judge, District Leader Lori Knipel's husband Larry is a Supreme Court judge, District Leader Earl Williams daughter Jacqueline is a Civil court judge, County Leader Lopez's girl friend's brother is Supreme Court judge Jack Battaglia, Lopez daugther Gina is a Court of Claims judge, District Leader Roberta Sherman's son Kenny is a Civil Court judge, disgraced former Executive Director of the Brooklyn Democrat party Jeffrey Feldman's wife is Brooklyn Supreme Court judge Marsha Stenhardt, Supreme Court judge Yvonne Lewis is the god daughter of District Leader Assemblywoman Annette Robinson.

Supreme Court judge Karen Rothenberg was Gerry Garson's law partner, Acting Supreme Court judge Rachel Amy Adams is the former law clerk to convicted judge Victor Barron as well as being the wife of Greg Brooks, former borough President Howard Golden's Chief of staff.

Supreme Court judge Abe Gerges is a former party operative and former City Councilmember, Supreme Court judge Martin Solomon is a party mainstay and a former NY State Senator.

Civil Court judge Robin Garson is the wife of convicted judge Gerry Garson.

Supreme Court judge Michael Pesce is a former Assemblyman.

Posted by Elizabeth Benjamin on April 20, 2007 12:14 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli...hammy.html#more

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Garson's wife may face rap on ethics"

BY NANCIE L. KATZ

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Monday, April 30th 2007, 4:00 AM

The wife of disgraced Brooklyn judge Gerald Garson, who was convicted this month of accepting bribes for fixing divorce cases, could be soon facing her own legal problems, the Daily News has learned.

The state Commission on Judicial Conduct may begin investigating possible judicial ethical lapses by Robin Garson, a Civil Court judge, involving campaign funds and failing to report criminal behavior, a legal source said.

Her husband, 75, a former Supreme Court justice, was convicted on April 19 and faces up to 15 years behind bars at his sentencing on June 5.

"They decided to let the trial get over with, to let out what would be aired," said a well-informed source.

At Robin Garson's husband's trial, corrupt lawyer Paul Siminovsky testified that Gerald Garson asked him to solicit campaign contributions and provide free legal help for her 2002 judicial campaign.

In 2004, Robin Garson testified at a grand jury investigation of her husband's cousin, retired Supreme Court Justice Michael Garson, who was suspected of stealing thousands of dollars from his elderly aunt.

She said Michael Garson confessed to improperly taking $100,000 from his aunt Sarah Gershenoff.

She also testified that a power of attorney the nephews used to pilfer Gershenoff's nearly $1 million fortune was forged, according to sources.

Robin Garson was Gershenoff's guardian at the time.

Ethical rules require judges to report criminal acts.

The commission is also reviewing a letter sent by the National Organization for Women about Robin Garson's behavior on the day of her husband's conviction.

The letter accused her of "exploiting her official status to obtain special privileges" at the trial, passing notes to defense attorneys and entering the courtroom through special doors reserved for officials.

Garson's lawyer, Richard Godovsky, dismissed the charges in the NOW letter.

"There is nothing against her," he said.

"That's going to be clear."

The administrator of the judicial commission, Robert Tembeckjian, declined to comment, but confirmed the panel had received the NOW letter.

"We will deal with it as we deal with all complaints," he said.

nkatz@nydailynews.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime_file..._on_ethics.html

[Livyjr]

FROM THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS DAILY POLITICS BLOG:

With respect to "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer agreeing with the state Commission on Judicial Conduct that its chairman, celebrity divorce attorney Raoul Felder, should go because his new book, co-authored with comic Jackie Mason, is "inappropriate", we countryfolks up here would refer your readers to what we call up here the "Lawyers' and Judges' Coming Out of the Closet" speech by Michael P. Friedman, President of the Albany County Bar Association, dated March 2003, and if one scrolls down to the 2d page, one sees the smiling face of Chief Judge Judith Kaye in the same publication, and I would maintain to "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer and the state Commission on Judicial Conduct that it was this very document, which received wide distribution up this way, long before this Felder book became an issue, that served to destroy any illusions that anyone up this way had about the integrity of the bar and judiciary in NYS, and by appearing in this document along with many of her fellow judges, it is our opinion that Judge Judith Kaye failed to avoid the appearance of impropriety, and that failure on her part then caused a major erosion in any trust and confidence the public up here might have had for the judiciary, as can be seen in these following excerpts from the "THE LAWYERS IN NY COME OUT OF THE CLOSET" SPEECH, and this at a time when the "STEAMROLLER" himself was up in Albany, serving as the state's top lawyer:

"As I spoke, I realized that the practice of law is essentially amoral."

"Our advice to clients is not designed to guide anyone in ethical behavior."

"We do not exist to tell anyone what is right or wrong."

"We are all but prohibited from doing so!"

"Our duty is to advise of the legal consequences of actions, and to promote the interests of our client within the boundaries of the legal system."

"For this reason, we do not necessarily advise the guilty to accept their punishment, nor do we chastise the adulterer, the negligent driver and the trespasser."

"So, we don't deal in fairness, we deal in legal results, without regard to ethics."

"You think clients come to us for our opinions on good and evil?"

"Think again, Jack."

"We are not the clergy."

"After all, it is just 'Ethical Considerations' in the Code of Professional Responsibility, as in 'OK, I've considered it, now here's what we do' ....."

"It is this fine line between the practice of law and the absence of moral judgment that confounds the public in so many ways."

"After all, we stand in defense of the most heinous members of our society, and I'm not just talking about defense negligence lawyers here, of course."

http://www.albanycountybar.com/MarNL-03.pdf

Posted by: John Galt | April 16, 2007 8:02 AM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypoli..._2.php#comments

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Rotten lawyers face raft of raps in ripoffs"

BY WILLIAM SHERMAN

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Sunday, April 29th 2007, 4:00 AM

Meet some of New York's lousiest lawyers.

One spent $131,000 of his clients' money on vacations, jewelry, lingerie and home improvement.

Another charged 76 clients $11,500 each for filing a simple application that should have cost no more than $700.

And a third deceived an elderly couple into investing their life savings - $222,000 - in a suspect real estate deal.

All three lawyers are among the scores of attorneys cited for misconduct last year by judges of the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court.

None has been disbarred.

Individual client losses range from as little as $500 to more than $6 million, according to cases ruled on last year.

"The elderly and immigrants are among those preyed upon by some attorneys, but there are plenty of wealthy victims and businessmen as well," said Thomas Cahill, chief counsel for the Disciplinary Committee of the division's 1st Department, which covers Manhattan and the Bronx.

The public record of the court's discipline begins with censure, a reprimand that goes on the lawyer's record but does not prohibit the lawyer from practicing.

One attorney censured last year was Ronald Sims, of Hackettstown, N.J., who was cited for "repeatedly touching and pinching his secretary's buttocks, attempting to kiss her, and grabbing her hand and hip," according to court documents.

Sims declined to return telephone calls.

"Some of the lawyers we come across are in a state of denial," said Cahill, who is the chief prosecutor of attorney misconduct in Manhattan and the Bronx.

"We hear all kinds of excuses for their actions."

"Pre-traumatic stress syndrome was one."

"Of course that's impossible, but I'm not kidding."

"Another lawyer said, 'I got depressed because I found out I was adopted late in life,' and he had a therapist come in and testify that he was severely depressed," said Cahill.

But invariably, Cahill said, greed, gambling or substance abuse are the major causes of severe misconduct by lawyers.

"I have heard the 'Park Ave.' or 'Great Neck' defense, where they say they needed the money to maintain a certain lifestyle," said Cahill.

His office, which polices the 76,777 lawyers in Manhattan and the Bronx, has a staff that includes 20 full-time attorneys, many of whom are former prosecutors, investigators, an accountant and paralegals.

It handles about 3,500 matters a year in a complex process that begins with screening of complaints.

Out of that total, however, only a small number result in penalties for attorneys, not because the office is lax, but rather because many consumer complaints fall outside its mandate.

The Daily News reviewed the records of some 300 disciplinary proceedings.

Most ripoffs by attorneys involve theft from escrow accounts and trusts and estates or billing for work that wasn't done, according to an analysis by the state Lawyers Fund for Client Protection.

"In a real estate practice you have large pools of money in your accounts at various times, and some lawyers dip their hands in," said Steven Krane, a former president of the state Bar Association.

Here are some of the lousiest of the lousy:

Pizza shop owners say lawyer took a big slice

Chase Caro, 48, of White Plains, who practices in Manhattan and Westchester County, represented Frank and Francesca Salvi when they sold their restaurant, Francesca Pizza and Pasta, in Shrub Oak.

The price was $354,900, but the Salvis didn't get the money.

Instead, Caro deposited $319,000 of the funds into his business account, according to a Disciplinary Committee investigation.

Another check for the remaining $35,900, is still being traced.

The probe, which led to Caro's suspension, also found he deposited $470,143.05 into his business account from the sale of a Peekskill home owned by Herbert Newkirk, 70.

Newkirk received a worthless check.

"It bounced," said Newkirk, a widower.

"Insufficient funds."

"Caro didn't do anything but swindle me."

"One third of my practice is pro bono," Caro said.

"I'm sure when I get my chance to put my side of the story out, I'll be exonerated."

Money mess

Frank DeGrasse, 46, of North Salem, with offices in Westchester County and the Bronx, is accused of mishandling a divorce matter, mishandling escrow money, commingling funds, negligence in real estate matters, and failure to pay taxes.

Investigators found DeGrasse also improperly deposited clients' escrow money in his personal account, and spent $131,000 at gas stations, Circuit City, The Athlete's Foot, restaurants, gym clubs, Home Depot, Frederick's of Hollywood and Bailey Banks & Biddle, a jewelry store.

"I went to him for an uncontested divorce."

"I paid him $500," said Tawanna Arnold, of Newburgh, Orange County.

"He didn't follow through."

"Then I went to his office, sat there and waited for him."

"I called him a lot of times, but he never showed up and never returned the calls."

DeGrasse has not responded to phone calls, letters or subpoenas from the Disciplinary Committee.

On Nov. 9, he was suspended from practice.

Last month, in a separate matter, DeGrasse pleaded guilty in Suffolk County Supreme Court to participating in a $750,000 mortgage scam.

'Shocking disregard'

Barry Spiegler, 67, of New City, Rockland County, was suspended from practice on Aug. 3 pending further disciplinary proceedings.

He allegedly misappropriated $27,000 in estate funds in one case and did no work for a $10,000 fee in another.

Spiegler has a "shocking disregard for the judicial system" and "threatens the public interest," the Appellate Court judges wrote.

He still hasn't responded to the Disciplinary Committee nor did he return phone calls from The News.

Corner of conflict

Over a four-year period, Suzanne Drysdale, 40, of Flatbush Ave., Brooklyn, represented approximately 200 clients buying real estate.

In what the Appellate Court judges called "an impermissible conflict of interest," she had her clients buy title services at a company next door that she also owned.

Drysdale declined comment.

Jewel of the guile

Lawrence Newman, 60, with offices on Third Ave., in Manhattan, specialized in recovering money on claims filed with insurance companies.

He had many clients in the Diamond District, including Rakesh Barmecha, who complained to the Disciplinary Committee that Newman owed him $127,000, part of an insurance claim payment in escrow for gems that were stolen.

A committee audit of a relevant 10 months' activity in Newman's escrow account showed "disbursements totalling more than $1.3 million, the majority of which ($1 million) were checks issued by respondent to himself."

But apparently there was no money for Barmecha.

In the end, investigators found "uncontested evidence of misappropriation of $320,000."

On Oct. 10, Newman was suspended pending further action by the court.

Newman declined comment.

Meanwhile, Barmecha said eventually he got his $127,000 in a complicated arrangement.

"But it cost me $25,000 to get what was owed me."

"Believe me, it was a learning experience," he said.

Clients left high and dry

Linda Stanch, 53, formerly of Manhattan, now living somewhere in the Midwest, worked as an attorney for the city Corporation Counsel's office and then opened her own practice.

In 2003, she ran unsuccessfully for Manhattan Civil Court judge in the Democratic primary.

On Oct. 17, Stanch was suspended from practice after telling the Disciplinary Committee she abandoned six clients because she was "the victim of stalking and harassment by an ex-boyfriend whom she feared could still harm her," according to court documents.

She also said that she had been "diagnosed with depression and anxiety."

For months - even while she still lived in Manhattan - she had ignored the committee's phone calls, letters and subpoenas.

Finally, she wrote the committee that her mother had bought her a plane ticket so she could leave town with her children.

wsherman@nydailynews.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/04/29..._in_ripo-1.html

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Ex-judge law unto himself - Worked system to evade parking tickets - his own and his clients'"

By WILLIAM SHERMAN

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Monday, April 30th 2007, 4:00 AM

Glenn Caldwell was a citywide administrative law judge who ruled on thousands of cases involving parking tickets.

But he hated paying his own.

When Caldwell left the bench, switching sides to earn $20,000 a month as a parking ticket defense attorney for thousands of clients, he pulled out a novel basket of tricks to evade tickets and avoid paying 167 summonses.

Caldwell kept his judge's parking placard on his dashboard, even though he was no longer on the bench.

He also ordered vanity plates with a special combination of letters and numbers he knew from experience would provide him with a technical defense against summonses, among other moves, the documents detailed.

During a two-year period, Caldwell ran up $12,000 in fines, not including interest.

Caldwell, 58, is also one of the lousiest licensed lawyers in the New York area, according to a Daily News probe.

Yesterday, the probe focused on attorneys who allegedly ripped off clients or engaged in other misconduct and were cited by the state Supreme Court's Appellate Division.

Like Caldwell, the rogue barristers in today's spotlight concocted more elaborate scams, court records show.

For example, investigators for the Appellate Divisions' disciplinary committee found Caldwell had an arrangement with Pay-O-Matic, a chain of check-cashing stores with 92 outlets in the metropolitan area.

In return for putting large posters in their windows reading "Pay Your Parking Tickets Here with Glenn Caldwell, Attorney At Law," the chain received $1 per ticket paid.

Caldwell got $3 per ticket and 75% of any fine reduction accomplished.

Caldwell routinely got reductions claiming that the tickets were "illegible and should be dismissed," according to court documents.

The Disciplinary Committee cited Caldwell for charging excessive fees to clients and otherwise tricking them into thinking they were simply paying tickets rather than retaining a lawyer.

"I believe I provide a valuable service to these individuals and my fee is not excessive when put in perspective," Caldwell told the committee.

The Appellate Court judges called Caldwell's behavior a "dishonest scheme to cheat the city out of parking fines."

The judges also said that Caldwell's "knowledge of the inner working of the PVB [Parking Violations Bureau] for his own personal gain is simply appalling."

On Feb. 16, 2006, Caldwell was suspended from practice for three years.

Here are others on the Daily News lousy lawyer list.

None has been arrested or disbarred:

Jay Gordon, who graduated first in his class at Boston University Law School and was head of the tax department and a partner of Greenburg Traurig, an international firm with 1,600 lawyers, voluntarily surrendered his law license Nov. 9.

The disciplinary committee found he "betrayed his partners."

"Even worse, he betrayed his clients."

"And most basically, he betrayed our profession."

At issue was Gordon's role in arranging tax shelters for real estate mogul and former MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow.

Without telling his partners or Kalikow, Gordon got a $292,400 kickback from a tax shelter firm.

The money was wired to his family bank account.

Gordon made similar arrangements with other tax shelter brokers on behalf of several other clients, for a total of $1.27 million in kickbacks, records show.

Greenberg Traurig and Gordon made restitution to Kalikow and the other clients.

Citing a confidentiality agreement, Kalikow declined to comment on the matter through a spokesman, Martin McLaughlin.

Gwenrva Cherry, 50, of Manhattan, a graduate of Columbia Law School, persuaded client Samantha Fong to invest $40,000 in a local real estate company Cherry owned — money that disappeared.

A disciplinary committee investigation also found Cherry misappropriated $892,000 in complex real estate deals and clients' escrow funds.

In one case, she sold the same property to two different buyers.

Last year, the committee scheduled three separate depositions for Cherry.

She failed to appear, and on Feb. 13, her license was suspended pending further proceedings.

Patrick Carmody, 46, of Manhattan, formerly a partner at the prestigious Wilkie Farr & Gallagher firm, charged $30,000 worth of long distance personal phone calls to friends and family to his firm's clients, according to a Disciplinary Committee report.

Carmody told the committee that he made the calls because of the breakup of his marriage and the need he felt "to contact friends and family overseas."

On July 27, the Appellate Division suspended him from practice for a year.

"The numbers are not accurate, and there's much more to the case than meets the eye," Carmody told The News.

Patent lawyer Michael Kroll, 70, of Syosset, L.I., boasts on his Web site he has obtained more than 1,600 patents for clients, including an "Exercise Treadmill for Dogs," and a "Portable Feet Tanning Device."

But the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office determined that Kroll had charged 76 clients $11,500 apiece for preparing a patent application that should have cost $700.

Total overcharges were $820,800.

Later, Kroll refunded half the fees, and the matter was referred to the Disciplinary Committee, which found he had forged clients' signatures.

He was censured for professional misconduct.

"The entire report was wrong," Kroll said when asked about the case, adding, "Why should I spend $100,000 to fight this?"

Erik Veski, 53, of Hastings persuaded his old friends and clients Robert and Aime Vant to lend him $212,964 - their entire retirement savings - for a real estate deal.

He didn't tell the Vants that the property was heavily indebted and under foreclosure, according to court documents.

But Veski didn't stop there.

He also persuaded the Vants' daughter Angelika to invest $10,000 of her college fund.

An accomplished organist, Veski also successfully solicited members of a church choir he conducted to put money in the venture as well.

The deal went bust.

On March 30, 2006, Appellate Court judges suspended Veski's license to practice law for three years because of his "egregious" misconduct.

According to published reports, Veski and his wife have been making money, in part, by selling their handmade glasswork at a local gallery.

As for the Vants, their $212,964 loss was reimbursed last year by the New York State Lawyers Fund for Client Protection.

Angelika Vant also was reimbursed for her $10,000.

Veski did not return phone calls.

Richard Boter, 31, a Manhattan lawyer, paid $40,850 to a man with contacts at Long Island hospitals, records show.

In return, Boter got emergency room records of car accident victims, among other confidential patient records.

Then he contacted the patients and offered his services to press personal injury lawsuits, according to court documents.

According to a Disciplinary Committee report, Boter also sometimes wrote worthless checks to his clients.

On Feb. 14, 2006, Appellate Court judges suspended Boter for professional misconduct, pending further investigation.

Boter could not be reached for comment.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime_file...to_himself.html

[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.

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.

"Strevell admits to fraud at nonprofit - Former CEO of the SUNY-affiliated Institute for Entrepreneurship faces up to 5 years in prison, fine"

By JORDAN CARLEO-EVANGELIST, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, May 1, 2007

ALBANY -- The former head of a publicly-funded program meant to help jump-start businesses admitted Monday to finagling a fraudulent $95,000 pay raise, using his corporate credit card for a trip to Disney World and insisting his father be included on two business junkets to China.

J. Felix Strevell, 45, of Schodack, the former chief executive and executive director of the Institute for Entrepreneurship, could face up to five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 for those and other instances of fraud he admitted in federal court.

Strevell, who quit the not-for-profit in 2001, pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Gary L. Sharpe to one count of mail fraud, ending years of speculation about the organization's murky finances.

He is scheduled to be sentenced on Aug. 30.

As part of the 20-page plea agreement, the former deputy secretary of state agreed to pay $111,000 in restitution.

In a 2005 civil settlement brokered by then-Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, Strevell and his brother, Chauncey Strevell, the Institute's former chief operating officer, dodged personal liability -- though the state hoped to recover $170,000 from the Institute and its insurance company.

In the course of the federal criminal case, Strevell's lawyer, William Fanciullo, argued that his client's actions, including putting relatives on the state payroll, were normal government practices.

"Any 'dishonesty,' any state law violation, connected to employment, coupled with mailing or wire, becomes a federal felony," he said, arguing earlier for dismissal.

The Institute for Entrepreneurship was founded in 1998 under the State University of New York and affiliated with Empire State College.

The Institute solicited millions of dollars in public grants and private donations.

Strevell joined the institute in 1999 and quit abruptly in July 2001, with his brother, as the first state investigations into his tenure there, the organization's finances and its claims of accomplishments gathered steam.

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 Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno, R-Brunswick, Gov. George Pataki and his administration, and former U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park.

Jordan Carleo-Evangelist can be reached at 454-5445 or by e-mail at jcarleo-evangelist@ timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK SUN

"Pirro Accused of Withholding Evidence in Murder Case"

By JOSEPH GOLDSTEIN

Staff Reporter of the Sun

May 3, 2007 updated 11:47 am EDT

The saga of Jeanine Pirro is about to take a dramatic new turn, with the disclosure that while serving as district attorney of Westchester, Ms. Pirro was in the habit of secretly recording work-related telephone conversations, and a federal grand jury wants to hear them.

That fact was disclosed in a filing in federal court in Manhattan in the course of an investigation the purpose of which is not yet fully in the public record.

But the disclosures so far indicate that when Ms. Pirro left office in 2005 to run for state attorney general, she asked an investigator to destroy a box containing at least some of the tapes, an assistant district attorney in Westchester, Richard Hecht, wrote in a letter to the 2nd United States Circuit Court of Appeals.

The investigator, who is not identified in the letter, did not follow through, Mr. Hecht wrote.

One of the reasons this is of interest is that that Ms. Pirro's successor now is in possession of a tape suggesting Ms. Pirro failed to disclose evidence that could have helped a man whom Ms. Pirro subsequently charged with murder.

But the existence of any tapes immediately raises the question of whom Ms. Pirro was talking to over her years in office and what conversations, whether of a political or legal nature, might be recorded in the surviving tapes.

"The fact that the then District Attorney secretly recorded certain conversations in her office and on her telephone came to light during a still continuing federal grand jury investigation conducted jointly by the United States Attorney and this Office," Mr. Hecht wrote.

A lawyer for Ms. Pirro, William Aronwald, said that Ms. Pirro "did not regularly tape all of her conversations," but declined to comment further.

He said any allegations that Ms. Pirro had ordered the destruction of any tapes was "wrong."

"In so far as any claim that she ordered destruction of tapes at any time, that is categorically false," Mr. Aronwald said.

This description of Ms. Pirro's alleged conduct is emerging in court filings before the 2nd Circuit.

The appellate court is hearing the case of Anthony DiSimone, who was prosecuted for murder by Ms. Pirro's office in the gang-related murder of Louis Balancio, which occurred outside a bar in Yonkers in 1994.

Mr. DiSimone was convicted in 2000, after turning himself in unexpectedly in 1999.

A federal judge overturned Mr. DiSimone's conviction earlier this year, after he served seven years in prison.

The district judge, Charles Brieant of United States District Court in Manhattan, said Ms. Pirro's office had withheld evidence that should have been turned over in the case.

Mr. Hecht's letter suggests that the tapes of Ms. Pirro's conversations contain additional leads which were never entered into the case file, much less passed on to the defense.

The two taped conversations, both from December 18, 1997, are of telephone calls between Ms. Pirro and the chief of criminal cases for the U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan, Mark Pomerantz.

They discuss whom Ms. Pirro ought to charge with the high-profile murder.

According to a transcript of the conversation, Mr. Pomerantz told Ms. Pirro that an FBI informant had heard a different man, whom was also charged in connection to the murder, confess to holding down the victim while yet another man stabbed him.

"This tape was never maintained in any of the files relative to the Balancio homicide or for that matter in any file regularly maintained by the District Attorney's Office," Mr. Hecht wrote to the court.

"Additionally, no written record of the taped conversations or the substance of either conversation was found in any of our Office files."

A lawyer for Mr. DiSimone is arguing that the new evidence should bar their client from being retried, according to a letter filed with the court.

"This admission was never turned over to the defense," a lawyer for Mr. DiSimone, John Bartels Jr., wrote in a letter to the 2nd Circuit.

"The state now admits that Ms. Pirro attempted to destroy this evidence."

The tape appears to have come to light during a federal grand jury investigation in Manhattan.

"The tape was among numerous other tape recordings discovered during the course of the federal probe," Mr. Hecht wrote.

"The tapes were apparently maintained over the years by criminal investigators on Mrs. Pirro's security detail."

It is not illegal under New York law for one person to record a telephone conversation without telling another.

But it is a requirement that a prosecutor turn over to a defense matters that might prove exculpatory or helpful in court.

Mr. Pomerantz, now in private practice, could not be reached for comment.

According to the transcripts, Ms. Pirro responds to Mr. Pomerantz's new information by asking how she should handle the press conference she planned to hold in connection to the case the following day.

The tape ends with Ms. Pirro saying, "I really don't mean to be pushy here, but I gotta know how I'm gonna handle this in the morning," according to the transcript.

Then the tape ends, with Ms. Pirro giving no indication of what she intends to do.

Ms. Pirro did not return a call for comment this morning.

http://www.nysun.com/article/53782?page_no=1

[Livyjr]

"Missing pants spur a $65M lawsuit"

Associated Press

First published: Friday, May 4, 2007

WASHINGTON -- A missing pair of pants has led to one big suit.

A customer got so steamed when a dry cleaner lost his trousers that he sued for $65 million.

Two years later, he is still pressing his suit.

The case has demoralized the South Korean immigrant owners of the mom-and-pop business and brought demands that the customer -- an administrative law judge in Washington -- be disbarred and removed from office for pursuing a frivolous and abusive claim.

Jin Nam Chung, Ki Chung and their son, Soo Chung, are considering moving back to Seoul, seven years after they opened their dry-cleaning business in the nation's capital, said their lawyer, Chris Manning.

"They're out a lot of money, but more importantly, incredibly disenchanted with the system," Manning said.

"This has destroyed their lives."

The customer, Roy L. Pearson Jr., who has been representing himself, declined to comment.

According to court documents, the problem began in May 2005 when Pearson became a judge and brought several suits for alterations to Custom Cleaners in Washington.

A pair of pants from one suit was missing when he requested it two days later.

Pearson asked the cleaners for the full price of the suit: more than $1,000.

But a week later, the Chungs said the pants had been found and refused to pay.

Pearson said those were not his pants, and decided to take the Chungs to the cleaners and sue.

Manning said the cleaners have made three settlement offers to Pearson: $3,000, then $4,600, then $12,000.

But Pearson was not satisfied and expanded his calculations beyond one pair of pants.

Because Pearson no longer wanted to use his neighborhood dry cleaner, he asked in his lawsuit for $15,000 -- the cost of renting a car every weekend for 10 years to go to another business.

Manning said Pearson somehow thinks he has the right to a dry cleaner within four blocks of his apartment.

[Livyjr]

"Execs plead guilty to bribing lawmakers"

By RACHEL D'ORO, Associated Press Writer

May 7, 2007

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Two top officers of an oil services company pleaded guilty Monday to bribing Alaska lawmakers with cash and the promise of jobs, contracts and favors for their backing on bills supported by the multinational firm.

Bill J. Allen, chief executive of Anchorage-based VECO Corp., and Rick Smith, a vice president, pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to extortion, bribery, and conspiracy to impede the Internal Revenue Service.

Their attorneys did not immediately return calls for comment Monday.

Prosecutors say Smith, Allen and five state lawmakers conspired to buy the lawmakers' support with money and other financial benefits, according to court documents.

Allen also pleaded guilty to issuing company bonuses to VECO executives to repay them for campaign contributions they made to politicians, then claiming those bonuses as legitimate company expenses.

Sentencing was not immediately scheduled.

The sentencing recommendation for Allen is between nine and just more than 11 years in prison and a fine between $15,000 and $150,000, according to the plea agreement dated Wednesday and unsealed Monday.

In exchange for Allen's cooperation, federal prosecutors agreed not to charge his son, Mark Allen, or other family members with any crimes, according to the plea deal.

The pleas came three days after federal prosecutors indicted one current and two former members of the Alaska House of Representatives on bribery and extortion charges related to last year's negotiations for a new oil and gas tax and a proposed natural gas pipeline.

Three unnamed representatives and two unnamed senators are listed in Allen's charging documents as participating in the conspiracy.

The three indicted lawmakers — Rep. Vic Kohring of Wasilla and former Reps. Pete Kott of Eagle River and Bruce Weyhrauch of Juneau — pleaded not guilty Friday.

Kott, the former House speaker, is accused of accepting $8,993 in payments, $2,750 in polling expenses and the promise of a contract as a lobbyist for VECO in exchange for his support of the proposed pipeline and a tax proposal that favored VECO, according to court documents.

He said he would throw his support behind the company if he was made warden of a prison the company was building in the Caribbean, according to the indictment.

The tax passed, but the contract for the pipeline negotiated by former Gov. Frank Murkowski was never approved.

The indictment did not name the company, but an attorney for VECO Corp. said it was the company involved.

The company issued a news release Friday, two days after Allen signed the plea agreement, saying the charges involve Allen and Smith, but no corporate subsidiaries or other executives.

Kohring is accused of demanding and accepting up to $2,600 in cash and a $3,000 job for a relative from VECO executives in exchange for his support.

The indictment also alleges Kohring sought but did not receive a $17,000 loan for credit card debt.

Weyhrauch, a 54-year-old lawyer, is charged with helping advance the oil service company's causes in exchange for the promise of future legal work, the indictment said.

Amy Menard, an attorney for VECO, said the corporation had turned over more than 100,000 pages of documents to the government.

An FBI spokesman said the arrests stemmed from an investigation that led federal agents last summer to raid the offices of at least six lawmakers, including Kohring, Kott and Weyhrauch.

Also raided was the office of former Senate President Ben Stevens, the son of U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens.

The younger Stevens has not been charged.

VECO Corp. is an Alaska oil field services and construction company whose executives are major contributors to Republican political campaigns.

The corporation also operates in Asia, the Middle East, the Caribbean and elsewhere in the U.S.

New Gov. Sarah Palin said Saturday she would call for a review of how the previous administration and the Legislature pursued that tax structure.

[Livyjr]

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Ad rips probe of his wife the judge"

BY SCOTT SHIFREL

DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Tuesday, May 8th 2007, 4:00 AM

The husband of a Bronx judge under investigation by the Commission on Judicial Conduct bashed the state panel in a bizarre full-page advertisement in The New York Times yesterday.

Former Proskauer Rose lawyer Saul Cohen paid $39,000 through a company he set up called Cannons Inc. for an ad slamming the commission, its controversial chairman and a powerful union boss who filed a complaint against his wife, Bronx Family Court Judge Marian Shelton.

The ad says the commission "overreached" by investigating her for alleged angry outbursts at court officers.

The ad also blasts commission Chairman Raoul Felder's comments on Latinos, Koreans and other ethnic groups.

Commission members have called for Felder's removal after a controversial book, "Schmucks," he wrote with humorist Jackie Mason.

The ad also attacks Dennis Quirk, head of the court officers union, quoting the head of Manhattan Legal Aid as calling Quirk "an unstable chauvinist."

"This is a bunch of bull," Quirk responded.

sshifrel@nydailynews.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2007/05/08..._the_judge.html

[Livyjr]

"Campaign donors overly generous - Groups call for state action; elections board says number of violators is likely less than report claims"

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

First published: Wednesday, May 9, 2007

ALBANY -- Three government reform groups found 161 cases of business donations exceeding campaign limits from the 2006 election cycle.

Common Cause, The League of Women Voters and the New York Public Interest Research Group said Tuesday they identified 72 corporations that exceeded the legal donation limit of no more than $5,000 per candidate per election.

Another 89 businesses may have given more than the $5,000 aggregate limit on corporate donations.

The group wrote to the state Board of Elections, calling on it to investigate and enforce the law.

Board officials are still weeding through 2005 corporate filings and probably won't get to 2006 for a few months.

However, the list of violations cited by the good-government groups is probably accurate, a spokesman said.

"That number is not alarming to begin with," said Lee Daghlian, a spokesman for the board.

"We usually get it down to 30 or 40."

The state budget includes $1.5 million to increase the board's enforcement staff, the groups noted.

Daghlian said the board wants to begin hiring promptly to help speed up enforcement.

The 12-person campaign finance staff -- mostly auditors who look for irregularities and one enforcement investigator to look into alleged violations -- are overtaxed, he said.

Some of the biggest apparent violators include Smokin Joe's, which totaled $28,300 in donations, the group reported.

The Native American cigarette business was joined by PCI Associates, $20,791; The Builders Institute, $77,570; New York Society of Professional Engineers, $36,765; Arnold Goldstein of Queens, who gave $45,000 to the Republican Assembly Campaign Committee; and the Long Island Builders Institute, $25,006.

Common Cause Executive Director Rachel Leon said some of the apparent violations may be the result of bad accounting by campaign staffs or mistakes in the state Department of State's corporate database.

But she complained that the Elections Board is not an effective watchdog.

The criticisms come as the groups back Gov. Eliot Spitzer's campaign finance reform proposals, which would banish some corporate giving and lower contribution limits from various donors, including unions.

Spitzer said negotiations with the Legislature are continuing on that and other measures.

James M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

[Livyjr]

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG:

And reading through the TU article “Campaign donors overly generous - Groups call for state action; elections board says number of violators is likely less than report claims” by JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union, first published Wednesday, May 9, 2007, I noticed the following:

“Some of the biggest apparent violators include Smokin Joe’s, which totaled $28,300 in donations, the group reported.”

“The Native American cigarette business was joined by **** New York Society of Professional Engineers, $36,765 ….”

Now, there is a real telling New York State story, alright …..

The New York Society of Professional Engineers violating the law in NYS!

According to the Rules of Professional Practice in NYS for professional engineers, they are supposed to practice in SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE with all federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations which govern the practice ….

But of course, that really is a joke, because the New York State Department of Education Office of Professional Discipline looks the other way on that issue ….

Because the New York Society of Professional Engineers, who are themselves regulated by the State Education Department, have a strong lobby and a lot of powerful political connections ….

Which in turn earns them a free ride here in Albany …

With the extra campaign cash they doled out helping to keep the skids well-greased ….

And so …

Comment by John Galt — May 9, 2007 @ 8:06 pm

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4604#comments

[Livyjr]

NY TIMES dated March 19, 2007:

Generous Judicial Screeners

Glittering legal résumés abound among the 23 people Governor Spitzer appointed earlier this month to five screening committees that will review candidates for the state bench.

Among Mr. Spitzer’s appointments are senior partners at some of New York City’s leading law firms, eminent law-school professors and several retired state judges.

But many of the appointees have another qualification, too.

Ten of them contributed to Mr. Spitzer’s gubernatorial campaign, including the leaders of all five committees, who are selected by the governor.

In total, the appointees contributed about $85,000 — small beer in the current world of gubernatorial fund-raising.

Most of that was given by two of the appointees: Robert A. Bourque, chairman of the First Judicial Department Committee, and Henry B. Gutman, who sits on the second department’s committee.

Both are partners at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; together they gave $68,500 to Mr. Spitzer during the 2006 election cycle.

Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer, noted that Mr. Spitzer’s campaign supporters were motivated by his message of reform, and that those selected for the screening panels were among them.

“It’s not surprising that some of the same people who got involved, spoke out or contributed to Eliot’s reform efforts would be interested in getting involved in his administration,” she said.

THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

"Judges' snub raises ire - 2 jurists left off list for choice post say politics, not merit, spurred pic"

BY CELESTE KATZ, DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Thursday, May 10th 2007, 4:00 AM

Two judges who were passed over for a chance at a plum appellate court post have accused the state screening panel of making selections based on politics, not merit.

The criticism came in highly unusual public statements this week from Appellate Division Justices Richard Andrias and David Saxe.

The two veteran judges, who were among many candidates vying to lead the Appellate Division, First Department, which covers Manhattan and the Bronx, were not among the five recommended to Gov. Spitzer for further consideration.

The job is so highly prized, said Edwin David Robertson of the New York County Lawyers' Association, because the presiding justice oversees "probably the most prestigious intermediate appellate court in the entire United States."

In a written statement, Andrias said the panel deprived Spitzer of the chance to fully consider all the interested applicants.

"The result - excluding two senior and highly qualified members of our court from consideration - should give the champions of 'merit selection' and the appointive process pause, as it reveals how easy it is to manipulate a supposedly impartial and independent panel," Andrias said.

In a separate statement, Saxe said he was personally disappointed at not having made the cut, and said he found it "puzzling" that two Appellate Division justices were somehow found unqualified to lead a court they have long served with distinction.

Spitzer's office declined to respond to the judges' statements.

The head of the screening panel, attorney Robert Bourque, did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

The candidates chosen by the panel, according to the New York Law Journal, included three First Department colleagues of the two judges who are complaining: Luis Gonzalez, Angela Mazzarelli and Peter Tom.

Also chosen were the state's chief administrative judge, Jonathan Lippman, and Justice Stephen Crane of the Appellate Division, Second Department, in Brooklyn.

A source familiar with both of the candidates and the selection process called Lippman one of - and possibly the - leading candidate in part because of his close ties to state Court of Appeals Chief Judge Judith Kaye.

"I think she'd be devastated if he didn't get that spot, because she likes him so much," the source said.

Court system spokesman David Bookstaver said Lippmann has nothing to do with the selection process.

"He, like the other candidates, is awaiting the governor's decision," Bookstaver said.

ckatz@nydailynews.com

http://www.nydailynews.com/boroughs/bronx/...ses_ire_-2.html

[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

Appeals should be out in the open, is what I think, anyway, which is to say, there should be witnesses to what transpires there that day, as was the case here in Rensselaer County back on November, 30, 1992, when we MUTE WITNESSES were assembled in Rensselaer County Court to hear what we thought was going to be "argument" in another "appeal" involving this same PLAINTIFF!

And this appeal argument on November 30, 1992 was quite important, to all of us, because it involved the "PRECURSER" intimidation tactic employed against this same PLAINTIFF by Rensselaer County, only that time using false criminal charges, which ultimately backfired against Rensselaer County, as this appeal transcript clearly demonstrates, because of the strong "DUE PROCESS OF LAW" provisions that are built in to the New York State Criminal Procedure Law to protect the innocent from malicious prosecution for political purposes by the "modern state"!

The dialogue from that appeal on November 30, 1992 between Rensselaer County Court Judge M. Andrew Dwyer and Assistant Rensselaer County District Attorney Richard McNally who had been hounding the PLAINTIFF through the criminal courts of Rensselaer County since 1990 on false testimony and manufactured evidence is as follows, and we were there to not only hear what transpired, which is important, in and of itself, since it is an official transcript, BUT MORE .....

BECAUSE OF WHAT WE SAW, with OUR OWN EYES, which was JUSTICE, true justice, finally be effected in that particular portion of this long night of terror for OUR PLAINTIFF:

JUDGE: There is a MOTION on, that I might as well dispose of first.

That is PEOPLE v. PLAINTIFF.

Apparently, it is pro se.

Mr. McNally, are you here for the PEOPLE?

This is a legal question.

I don't see that argument is necessary!

MCNALLY: This is a Motion to Dismiss!

JUDGE: A Motion to Reargue a Motion to Dismiss!

MCNALLY: I have no position, other than to say, the Court, in its previous position, left me without any recourse other than to not oppose a Motion to Dismiss, in my opinion!

JUDGE: That is your position?

MCNALLY: That is my position!

JUDGE: THEN YOU CONSENT TO THE DISMISSAL?

MCNALLY: I do, Judge, based upon the fact that the Court, in its previous Decision, left me with an untenable position at trial!

JUDGE: How closely did you read the decision?

MCNALLY: Very!

JUDGE: The District Attorney consented?

MCNALLY: It was the Court's opinion at trial that there was other evidence out there, and I can affirm that there IS NOT OTHER EVIDENCE ON WHICH TO BASE A PROSECUTION AND THE COURT RULED THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT, AND I HAVE NO OTHER EVIDENCE!

JUDGE: And you take the position that you have no further evidence, at all?

MCNALLY: No further evidence, Judge!

JUDGE: Then it is dismissed!

MCNALLY: (to PLAINTIFF) Good job!

PLAINTIFF: Thank you, Your Honor!

(Whereupon, matter concluded)

- EXCERPTED from pages 121-124 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

"Out of desperation, county GOP makes quality pick for DA"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, May 11, 2007

Leave it to those wily Republican leaders in Rensselaer County to come up with a strategy they haven't used in decades so they can keep the district attorney's office in this fall's election.

That is, offer the public a truly worthy candidate.

In recent memory, that's a first.

They must be desperate.

I suspect that even many insiders in Troy politics were surprised to learn that the Republican committee-endorsed candidate for DA will be Greg Cholakis, 41, son of the late and revered federal judge, Con Cholakis.

It's not that he isn't qualified, quite the opposite.

Greg has spent the last 13 years as the chief assistant public defender for Rensselaer County.

He's appeared in every court in the county and lives and breathes the law.

But like his father, Greg, who has been waiting for years in the wings for this opportunity, is fiercely independent.

Without fear or favor could be the family motto.

He is not a member of Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno's Republican machine, and in truth they view him with suspicion.

Suffice to say Greg Cholakis is not the usual formula candidate the machine comes up with.

So why in the world are the Republicans taking such a drastic step?

Because they have no choice.

Sitting DA Trish DeAngelis desperately wanted the nomination again.

As pols of all parties do these days, the Republicans polled the electorate.

What they got back should have been obvious from her lopsided loss to virtual unknown Bob Jacon for a county judgeship two elections ago: Trish is radioactive.

The voters don't want her.

Doubly ironic because that extra judgeship, which no one in the county was asking for but Senator Joe made happen anyway, was created as a safe landing for DeAngelis to get her out of the DA's office.

It didn't work.

Nor does the public want another self-indulgent Ken doll, the DA who preceded her, as in Joe's son, Ken Bruno.

Ken and Trish were both propped up by the senator and rammed down the voters' throats.

Without the senator's enormous power and strings, neither Ken nor Trish could have been elected to anything.

At any rate, key Republicans, including Bruno, are now clearly aware that the old style of Republican County nepotistic politics is wearing thin at the moment, so they actually have to resort to a quality candidate.

Not that Greg's the only one.

The Dems will be offering Hoosick Falls lawyer Rich McNally, a seasoned, respected former chief assistant prosecutor in former DA Lou Catone's office.

He's quality goods as well.

Which means, either way, Rensselaer County won't be embarrassed by its district attorney.

Isn't that remarkable?

Now, there is no question Cholakis should run away with this race.

McNally is a native of Syracuse, and with the Dems coming off a devastating factional fight, fundraising will be tough.

Both sides figure the race will cost between $100,000 and $150,000.

By contrast, Cholakis is a native Trojan and has stuck it out right here through good times and bad, and he has that magic name.

Although more to the point, Greg Cholakis has carefully carved out his own thoughtful, compassionate identity, and is as well liked as any one practicing law on that side of the river.

The only minor obstacle in Cholakis' path, and it shouldn't be there long, will be an attempt by Troy City Council president and disgraced former judge Henry Bauer to primary Cholakis.

Bauer is exactly the wrong person for the job, and the minor support he's receiving so far is testimony to the fact that even his closest associates and many friends are aware of his unelectability.

In a rare bit of humiliation, he was tossed off the Troy city court bench by the state's highest court for essentially depriving defendants of their rights.

There are those who might see this as a John Wayne-plus for a super aggressive DA, but it's really quite the opposite.

The rule of law is about following rules and procedures.

Trish DeAngelis could give Bauer a treatise on that.

Anyway, Bauer hasn't earned the voters' trust on this.

That's all we need to know.

Besides, Bauer and the Republicans have another, more pressing election problem: keeping City Hall and the City Council.

If Bauer were to make a serious run for DA, he would have to resign his City Council seat, making it vulnerable.

His colleagues, I suspect, will talk him out of it.

LeBrun can be reached at 454-5453 or by e-mail at flebrun@timesunion.com.

This post has been edited by Livyjr: May 11 2007, 04:40 PM

[Livyjr]

"Out of desperation, county GOP makes quality pick for DA"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, May 11, 2007

The Dems will be offering Hoosick Falls lawyer Rich McNally, a seasoned, respected former chief assistant prosecutor in former DA Lou Catone's office.

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG:

And it is indeed interesting that the subject of Mr. Richard McNally of Rensselaer County would turn up here in this open thread!

I was just over on another BLOG where issues of importance to Rensselaer County residents are discussed:

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...mp;#entry716935

And lo and behold, a real blast from the past circa 1990 through November 30, 1992 concerning Mr. Richard McNally and his false prosecution of former Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer Paul R. Plante was right there, staring me in the face!

Which makes me laugh right out loud when I read \”concerned citizen\” talk about “his substantial contribution to the citizens of Renssalaer as a prosecutor” ...

And so that everyone in here can judge for themselves, here is a copy of a transcript from that public website of Mr. McNally standing before then-Rensselaer County Criminal Court Judge M. Andrew Dwyer on November 30, 1992, being forced to admit that he had no evidence to substantiate his malicious prosecution of Plante in the various town courts of Rensselaer County from January of 1990 to that time, after Plante was the victim of a hit-and-run driver on liberty Lane in the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County on December 29, 1989, a politically-connected hit-and-run driver who was then allowed to bring criminal charges in Poestenkill Town Court against Plante to cover up the hit-and-run, which charges McNally then prosecuted for him:

JUDGE: There is a MOTION on, that I might as well dispose of first.

That is PEOPLE v. PLANTE.

Apparently, it is pro se.

Mr. McNally, are you here for the PEOPLE?

This is a legal question.

I don’t see that argument is necessary!

MCNALLY: This is a Motion to Dismiss!

JUDGE: A Motion to Reargue a Motion to Dismiss!

[u]MCNALLY:[/b] I have no position, other than to say, the Court, in its previous position, left me without any recourse other than to not oppose a Motion to Dismiss, in my opinion!

JUDGE: That is your position?

MCNALLY: That is my position!

JUDGE: THEN YOU CONSENT TO THE DISMISSAL?

MCNALLY: I do, Judge, based upon the fact that the Court, in its previous Decision, left me with an untenable position at trial!

JUDGE: How closely did you read the decision?

MCNALLY: Very!

JUDGE: The District Attorney consented?

MCNALLY: It was the Court’s opinion at trial that there was other evidence out there, and I can affirm that there IS NOT OTHER EVIDENCE ON WHICH TO BASE A PROSECUTION AND THE COURT RULED THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT, AND I HAVE NO OTHER EVIDENCE!

JUDGE: And you take the position that you have no further evidence, at all?

MCNALLY: No further evidence, Judge!

JUDGE: Then it is dismissed!

MCNALLY: (to PLANTE) Good job!

PLANTE: Thank you, Your Honor!

(Whereupon, matter concluded)

- EXCERPTED from pages 121-124 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

Comment by John Galt — May 11, 2007 @ 6:59 pm

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4613#comments

[Livyjr]

"White House pressed Ashcroft on wiretaps"

By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press

7 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A top Justice Department official thought President Bush's no-warrant wiretapping program was so questionable that he refused for a time to reauthorize it, leading to a standoff with White House officials at the bedside of the ailing attorney general, a Senate panel was told Tuesday.

Former Deputy Attorney General James Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee that he refused to recertify the program because Attorney General John Ashcroft had reservations about its legality just before falling ill with pancreatitis in March 2004.

The White House, Comey said, recertified the program without the Justice Department's signoff, allowing it to operate for about three weeks without concurrence on whether it was legal.

Comey, Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert Mueller and other Justice Department officials at one point considered resigning, Comey said.

"I couldn't stay, if the administration was going to engage in conduct that the Department of Justice had said had no legal basis," Comey told the panel.

A day after the March 10, 2004, incident at Ashcroft's hospital bedside, President Bush ordered changes to the program to accommodate the department's concerns.

Ashcroft signed the presidential order to recertify the program about three weeks later.

The dramatic hospital confrontation involved Comey, the acting attorney general during Ashcroft's absence, and a White House team that included Bush's then-counsel, Alberto Gonzales, and White House Chief of Staff Andy Card, Comey said.

Gonzales later succeeded Ashcroft as attorney general.

Senior government officials had expressed concerns about whether the National Security Agency, which administered the warrantless eavesdropping program, had the proper oversight in place.

Other concerns included whether any president possessed the legal and constitutional authority to authorize the program as it operated at the time.

Comey testified Tuesday that when he refused to certify the program, Gonzales and Card headed to Ashcroft's sick bed in the intensive care unit at George Washington University Hospital.

When Gonzales appealed to Ashcroft, the ailing attorney general lifted his head off the pillow and in straightforward terms described his views of the program, Comey said.

Then he pointed out that Comey, not Ashcroft, held the powers of the attorney general at that moment.

Gonzales and Card then left the hospital room, Comey said.

"I was angry," Comey told the panel.

"I thought I had just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man who did not have the powers of the attorney general."

Comey's testimony revived one of the Bush administration's most bitter internal fights just as Gonzales appeared less under siege about the firings of several U.S. attorneys last year.

Bush has stood solidly by his longtime counselor's side; calls for Gonzales' resignation have waned in recent weeks.

Asked about Comey's testimony, White House press secretary Tony Snow said he didn't know anything about the conversation at Ashcroft's bedside.

But he defended the program.

"Because he had an appendectomy, his brain didn't work?" Snow said of Ashcroft.

"Jim Comey can talk about whatever reservations he may have had."

"But the fact is that there were strong protections in there, this program has saved lives and it's vital for national security and furthermore has been reformed in a bipartisan way."

Dean Boyd, a Justice Department spokesman, said he couldn't comment on "internal discussions that may or may have not taken place concerning classified intelligence activities."

But he said the program succeeded in helping detect and prevent terrorist attacks and was always subject to rigorous oversight and review.

Democrats cited Comey's testimony as evidence of what they say is Gonzales' tendency to put loyalty to Bush ahead of most everything — including Justice's tradition of independence from the politics of the White House.

"What happened in that hospital room crystallized Mr. Gonzales' view about the rule of law: that he holds it in minimum low regard," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

Under questioning by Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., Comey said he was not threatened by Vice President Dick Cheney or other White House officials who disagreed with him on the legality of the eavesdropping program.

Comey recalled that after the bedside incident he started to offer his resignation and was persuaded to wait a few days until Ashcroft could resign with him.

"Mr. Ashcroft's chief of staff asked me something that meant a great deal to him, and that is that I not resign until Mr. Ashcroft was well enough to resign with me," Comey said.

On March 12 at their daily briefing of the president, Bush asked Comey and Mueller for separate private conversations on Justice's concerns about the eavesdropping program.

There, Comey said, Bush agreed to do "the right thing."

"We had the president's direction to do what we believed, what the Justice Department believed, was necessary to put this matter on a footing where we could certify to its legality," Comey said of the period after those private meetings.

"We did that."

Spokesmen for Ashcroft and Mueller refused requests for comment.

[Livyjr]

And from REPUBLICAN SENATE MAJORITY LEADER Joe Bruno's personal fiefdom of Rensselaer County in the State of New York, we have:

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION LOCAL POLITICS BLOG

"Cholakis and Mahar make it official"

May 8, 2007 at 12:53 pm by Bob Gardinier

The GOP law and order candidates will share the steps of the Rensselaer County Courthouse Wednesday when First Assistant Public Defender Gregory Cholakis announces his bid to run for district attorney.

http://www.CholakisForDA.com

Cholakis, who was endorsed by the GOP, will be joined by Sheriff Jack Mahar, who is running for re-election in November; County Executive Kathy Jimino, Troy Mayor Harry Tutunjian and others.

GOP Chairman Jack Casey, in his press release today announcing the get together, called Cholakis the ”dream candidate of the year”.

Cholakis was a little uncomfortable with the ”dream” part.

“Maybe you could change that to ‘ideal’,” he said.

Cholakis, 41, works as a public defender in the county courthouse named for his late father, federal judge Con. G. Cholakis.

The Troy resident has been with the office for 14 years and has been practicing law for 15 years.

His sister, Kiki Cholakis, is a Family Court judge.

Henry Bauer, a former city judge and current City Council president, had hoped for a nod from the county GOP executive committee, for the run for DA but it never came.

Bauer, who was removed from the bench by the Court of Appeals in 2004, announced just over a week ago he will challenge his party’s pick in a primary.

Democrats interested include attorney Timothy Nugent and county conflict defender Richard J. McNally Jr.

Current DA Patricia DeAngelis, who has had a number of reversals of cases she prosecuted and was chastised by the higher courts for prosecutorial errors, announced in March she would not run for re-election.

http://blogs.timesunion.com/localpolitics/?p=193#comments

This post has been edited by Livyjr: May 16 2007, 05:17 AM

[Livyjr]

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION LOCAL POLITICS BLOG COMMENTS

Ah, yes!

Mr. Richard J. McNally, Jr. of Rensselaer County as District Attorney of Rensselaer County!

Yes, yes, yes!

And with respect to Mr. Richard J. McNally, Jr., I was just over on another BLOG where issues of importance to Rensselaer County residents are discussed:

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for…mp;#entry716935

And lo and behold, a real blast from the past circa 1990 through November 30, 1992 concerning Mr. Richard McNally and his false and malicious prosecution of former Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer Paul R. Plante was right there, staring me in the face!

Which makes me laugh right out loud when I read think about the concept of Mr. Richard J. McNally, Jr. now being the next Rensselaer County District Attorney, to be quite truthful in here …

And so that everyone in here can judge for themselves, here is a copy of a transcript from that public website of Mr. McNally standing before then-Rensselaer County Criminal Court Judge M. Andrew Dwyer in the Rensselaer County Court House on November 30, 1992, being forced to admit before all the people in that courtroom that day that he had no evidence whatsoever to substantiate his malicious prosecution of Plante in the various town courts of Rensselaer County from January of 1990 to that time, after Plante was the victim of a hit-and-run driver on Liberty Lane in the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County on December 29, 1989, a politically-connected hit-and-run driver who was then allowed to bring false criminal charges in Poestenkill Town Court against Plante to cover up the hit-and-run, which false charges McNally then prosecuted for him:

JUDGE: There is a MOTION on, that I might as well dispose of first.

That is PEOPLE v. PLANTE.

Apparently, it is pro se.

Mr. McNally, are you here for the PEOPLE?

This is a legal question.

I don’t see that argument is necessary!

MCNALLY: This is a Motion to Dismiss!

JUDGE: A Motion to Reargue a Motion to Dismiss!

MCNALLY: I have no position, other than to say, the Court, in its previous position, left me without any recourse other than to not oppose a Motion to Dismiss, in my opinion!

JUDGE: That is your position?

MCNALLY: That is my position!

JUDGE: THEN YOU CONSENT TO THE DISMISSAL?

MCNALLY: I do, Judge, based upon the fact that the Court, in its previous Decision, left me with an untenable position at trial!

JUDGE: How closely did you read the decision?

MCNALLY: Very!

JUDGE: The District Attorney consented?

MCNALLY: It was the Court’s opinion at trial that there was other evidence out there, and I can affirm that there IS NOT OTHER EVIDENCE ON WHICH TO BASE A PROSECUTION AND THE COURT RULED THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED INSUFFICIENT, AND I HAVE NO OTHER EVIDENCE!

JUDGE: And you take the position that you have no further evidence, at all?

MCNALLY: No further evidence, Judge!

JUDGE: Then it is dismissed!

MCNALLY: (to PLANTE) Good job!

PLANTE: Thank you, Your Honor!

(Whereupon, matter concluded)

- EXCERPTED from pages 121-124 of the O’Connor BIBLE submitted to the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City on behalf of defendant REPUBLICAN Rensselaer County Executive Kathleen Jimino and her co-defendants, in or about November of 2005

Comment by John Galt — May 13, 2007 @ 6:39 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/localpolitics/?p=193#comments

[Livyjr]

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION LOCAL POLITICS BLOG COMMENTS

In post #21 entitled “DA RACE IN RENSSELAER COUNTY” by \”concerned citizen\” — May 11, 2007 @ 4:41 pm in the TU Capital Confidential BLOG Friday OPEN THREAD @:

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4613#comments

it was publicly stated with respect to DEMOCRATIC Rensselaer County District Attorney CANDIDATE Richard Richard J. McNally Jr. as follows:

In his recent column Jay Jochnowitz stated: “It’s often cited that in politics, perception is everything.”

“Sometimes the doors of perception are altered by ideology, interests or perspective.”

If in fact that is true, as I believe it is, then Fred Lebrun did a disservice to his readers when, in his recent column about the DA RACE in Rensselaer County, he referred to democratic candidate Rich McNally as a “Syracuse native” without further elaboration and referred to Cholakis as a “native trojan.”

What Lebrun failed to state is that Cholakis, the “native trojan” did not “stick it out” in New York State when he elected to study law in Florida instead of the many excellent law schools in New York State.

By referring to McNally as a “Syracuse native,” Lebrun creates the inaccurate impression that McNally is an itinerant interloper.

Lebrun disregards Mr. McNally’s 20 year residency in Renssalear, his substantial contribution to the citizens of Renssalaer as a prosecutor and his committed service to fair and impartial justice as a member of the capital defenders project.

Mr. Bauer may be a “minor obstacle” in Mr. Cholakis’ quest for the nomination but, if Cholakis gets the Republican nod, he will find that Mr. McNally’s passionate pursuit of equal justice for all and extensive experience will be a formidable hurdle to overcome.

Hopefully, Mr. Lebrun, in service to his readers will more accurately portray Mr. McNally’s qualifications in a follow-up article.

end quotes

And with that public statement made in the electronic edition of the TU by \”concerned citizen\” in an election matter of great importance to all of us here in Rensselaer County, I would say as a lifelong Rensselaer County resident myself who is also a disabled Viet Nam war veteran who finds himself very interested in hearing much more about what \”concerned citizen\” is calling “Mr. McNally’s passionate pursuit of equal justice for all”, I would say that an issue has been joined here for the public affected by this up-coming DA race here in Rensselaer County to openly debate in this forum of the TU Local Politics BLOG ….

And indeed, with the quality of the moderation in here, and the high level of access for plain common ordinary people like myself living on simple and limited means, I would say that this is the ideal forum in which to have this public debate, all in one place, as it were, open to all points of view, equally, on this Rensselaer County race for District Attorney between Mr. McNally and Greg Cholakis ….

And let logic and rational argument of the facts and evidence prevail, which will benefit us all, here in Rensselaer County, friends and foes of Greg Cholakis alike, if the true end result of this discussion is actual “equal justice for all”, which is to me what Greg Cholakis represents, by his performance as a practicing attorney and member of the community in Rensselaer County over these last so many years, versus empty promises of a “PURSUIT” of equal justice by Mr. McNally and \”concerned citizen\” which has Mr. McNally appearing to us like a small cat chasing its tail, endeavoring fiercely to catch up with it, but never quite achieving the task ….

Which, based upon direct experience with Mr. McNally, is what I would say he represents, when it comes to an actual quest for true equal justice in Rensselaer County for all, and not just a select few, as was the case with Mr. McNally back in October 9, 1990 when he was arguing in North Greenbush Town Court before Hon. Hon. Raymond J. Elliott, III, ESQUIRE that former Rensselaer County Associate Public Health Engineer Paul R. Plante, PE, now on permanent disabled status, should have to face double jeopardy in connection with restoring false criminal charges against Plante which had been previously dismissed by Judge Eliot for lack of evidence based on a motion by Plante which is now a permanent part of the records of Rensselaer County preserved in the files and records of Mr. Frank Merola, the Rensselaer County Clerk!

And since this is all a part of the public record of Mr. McNally’s past conduct as a Deputy Rensselaer County District Attorney under Hon. James B. Canfield, and since this public record, and especially a Plante Motion Pursuant TO NYSCPL 170.25 which is a part of that public record go directly to the fitness of Mr. McNally to be truly able to actually deliver real “EQUAL JUSTICE” to the ALL the residents of Rensselaer County, and not just the chosen few, I would like to initiate the discussion in here on this important and vital subject of great import to us all by presenting for the public record a “writing” of Mr. McNally’s from October 9, 1990 to Hon. Raymond J. Elliott, III, ESQUIRE, North Greenbush Town Court, 2 Douglas St., Wynantskill, N.Y. 12198 concerning what Mr. McNally then considered “equal justice” for the chosen few as opposed to disabled public health engineer Plante, a public document which comes to us not only from Mr. Merola’s public files and records, but from pp. 118-119 of what is called in Rensselaer County the “O’CONNOR BIBLE SUBMITTED TO THE FEDERAL SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS ON BEHALF OF THE RENSSELAER COUNTY DEFENDANTS” which is on file with the Office of the Rensselaer County Attorney, the New York State Attorney General and the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals in NYC:

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

Comment by John Galt — May 13, 2007 @ 2:58 pm

http://blogs.timesunion.com/localpolitics/?p=193#comments

[Livyjr]

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONNECTION BLOG COMMENTS

Over in Rensselaer County, I hear that the REPUBLICANS are not going to challenge DEMOCRATIC County DA contender Richard McNally on his record ….

The subject of Mr. McNally’s record as an assistant and deputy Rensselaer County District Attorney back in 1990 through 1992 in the office of then-Rensselaer County District Attorney James B. Canfield is apparently verboten!

Which is very interesting, as it puts Mr. McNally into a strong position with respect to their own candidate, Greg Cholakis, who the TU’s Fred LeBrun says is viewed with suspicion by the Joe Bruno-ites in Rensselaer County who dominate the local politics over there ….

Of the two candidates, McNally vs. Cholakis, McNally, based upon his record, has actually done more for Joe Bruno and the REPUBLICANS than Mr. Cholakis, and based upon his actual record, Mr. McNally will have much more support from REPUBLICANS involved in “land development” out in the county ....

And I wouldn’t be surprised to see Kathleen Jimino herself becoming more aligned with McNally than Mr. Cholakis ….

Which makes me wonder if Cholakis’s future political career is not being nipped in the bud here, by the Rensselaer County REPUBLICANS, by making him a “throw-away” candidate, as a favor to Joe Bruno ….

And so ….

Comment by John Galt — May 15, 2007 @ 9:16 am

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4633#comments

[Livyjr]

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 .....

NY TIMES

March 3, 2007

Editorial

"No More Denials, Please"

It is time for the Justice Department to stop issuing rote denials that are becoming increasingly hard to believe about the suspicious firing of eight United States attorneys.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should appoint an impartial investigator to get to the bottom of this unfolding scandal.

Just this week, David Iglesias, one of the eight fired United States attorneys, charged that he was dismissed for resisting pressure to begin a politically charged prosecution before the 2006 election.

His allegation came shortly after performance evaluations came to light that throw considerable doubt on the Justice Department’s claim that the United States attorneys were fired for poor performance.

United States attorneys, the highest federal prosecutors at the state level, must be insulated from politics.

Their decisions about whether to indict can ruin lives, and change the outcome of elections.

To ensure their independence, United States attorneys are almost never removed during the term of the president who appointed them.

The Bush administration ignored this tradition, and trampled on prosecutorial independence, by firing eight United States attorneys in rapid succession, including one, Carol Lam of San Diego, who had put a powerful Republican congressman in jail.

Mr. Iglesias, who was the U.S. attorney in New Mexico, says two members of Congress called him last October and urged him to pursue corruption charges against a prominent Democrat before the November election.

He did not.

He was dismissed.

Most of the fired United States attorneys’ performance evaluations praise them for the quality of their work, and for following the priorities set in Washington.

These do not appear to be the evaluations of people who were fired for poor performance.

A House subcommittee has subpoenaed several of the fired United States attorneys to testify next week.

The Senate is doing its own investigation.

They should question the fired prosecutors, as well as top members of the Justice Department, to find out how these dismissals came about.

They should also investigate Mr. Iglesias’s allegations about the two members of Congress, who may have violated Congressional rules, and even criminal law.

Mr. Gonzales should also begin his own inquiry.

Mr. Iglesias has raised a serious question about politicization of the Justice Department.

That, and not public relations, should be the attorney general’s primary concern.

"Gonzales rapped as president's 'yes man'"

By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 23 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales says his long friendship with President Bush makes it easier to say "no" to him on sticky legal issues.

His critics, however, say Gonzales is far more likely to say "yes" — leaving the Justice Department vulnerable to a politically determined White House.

Probably not since Watergate has an attorney general been so closely bound to the White House's bidding.

In pushing counterterror programs that courts found unconstitutional and in stacking the ranks of federal prosecutors with Republican loyalists, Gonzales has put Bush's stamp on an institution that is supposed to operate largely free of the White House and beyond the reach of politics.

"This intertwining of the political with the running of the Justice Department has gone on in other administrations, both Republican and Democrat," said Paul Rothstein, a professor at Georgetown Law School.

"But I think it's being carried to a fine art by this president."

"They leave no stone unturned to politicize where they think the law will permit it."

"And they push the line very far."

Gonzales, a friend and adviser to Bush since their days in Texas, calls their close relationship "a good thing."

"Being able to go and having a very candid conversation and telling the president: 'Mr. President, this cannot be done. You can't do this,' — I think you want that," Gonzales told reporters this week.

"And I think having a personal relationship makes that, quite frankly, much easier always to deliver bad news."

"Do you recall a time when you (were) in there and said, 'Mr. President, we can't do this'?" Gonzales was asked.

"Oh, yeah," the attorney general responded.

"Can you share it with us?" a reporter asked.

"No," Gonzales said.

Gonzales, facing a no-confidence vote in the Senate, is resisting lawmakers' demands to resign and says he will remain as attorney general until he no longer has the president's support.

The White House is steadfastly backing its man.

"It's important for any public official to have as much confidence as he can garner, and it will ebb and flow," White House spokesman Tony Fratto said Friday.

"But it will not ebb and flow with this president and this attorney general."

An ever-growing cadre of critics says Gonzales has repeatedly sought to shape the normally independent Justice Department to the White House's ends.

The department has long resisted political influences that could threaten its ability to fairly and impartially uphold the law.

Among examples they cite of White House meddling at the Justice Department:

_A dramatic 2004 confrontation between Gonzales, then serving as White House counsel, and former Attorney General John Ashcroft over whether to reauthorize a secret program to let the government spy on suspected terrorists without court approval.

At the time, Ashcroft was hospitalized in intensive care and not seeing any visitors.

His former deputy, Jim Comey, told the Senate this week that Gonzales and then-White House chief of staff Andy Card came to Ashcroft's hospital room to get his approval in what Comey described as an "effort to take advantage of a very sick man."

Ashcroft refused to sign off on the program.

The next day, the White House reauthorized the program without the Justice Department's approval.

Ultimately, Bush ordered changes to the program to help the Justice Department defend its legality.

Less than a year later, in February 2005, Gonzales took Ashcroft's place as attorney general.

The program was branded unconstitutional by a federal judge and has since been changed to require court approval before surveillance can be conducted.

_Allegations that Monica Goodling, the Justice Department's liaison to the White House and Gonzales' former counsel, aimed to only hire career prosecutors who were Republicans.

Making hiring decisions based on political affiliation is illegal.

Goodling quit the Justice Department last month and is set to testify next week before a House panel investigating whether politics played a part in the firings last year of eight U.S. attorneys.

_Justice Department documents show that shortly after the 2004 elections, Bush political adviser Karl Rove questioned whether all 93 of the nation's top federal prosecutors should be ordered to resign.

He also helped coach Justice aide William Moschella's planned testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

Rove also was included in e-mail traffic about the firings between the White House and the Justice Department.

As presidential appointees, U.S. attorneys serve at the president's pleasure, and the White House is properly involved in discussions about their employment.

But Rove used an unofficial e-mail address, registered to the Republican National Committee, to correspond about the firings — raising the specter that politics was behind the ousters.

_The administration changed policy to allow more Justice Department officials to be in touch with the White House about some of the government's most sensitive criminal and civil cases.

During the tenure of Democrat Bill Clinton, such discussions were restricted to six people — two at Justice and four at the White House.

In 2002, a year after Bush took office, the number of people was greatly expanded.

By Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse's estimates, 417 White House staff members and 42 Justice Department employees can discuss sensitive cases.

"It creates a partisan atmosphere, and that creates issues of confidence in the administering of justice," said Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat who previously served as U.S. attorney there.

Some Republicans, too, doubt Gonzales can keep the White House's influence from improperly seeping into the Justice Department.

"The problem here is that it appears the attorney general, when he moved from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to the Department of Justice, he didn't realize he'd changed jobs," said Arnold I. Burns, a deputy attorney general during the Reagan administration.

Burns himself is a reminder that close ties between Justice and the White House have posed problems before.

He resigned in 1988 in protest of charges of improper behavior by then-Attorney General Edwin Meese III, a longtime friend of President Reagan.

Meese was later cleared but resigned before the end of the term.

Former Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, too, had obvious close ties to President John F. Kennedy, his brother.

But critics say Gonzales' relationship with Bush rivals that between former Attorney General John Mitchell and his former law partner, President Nixon.

Mitchell left the Justice Department in 1972 to run Nixon's re-election campaign.

He served 19 months in prison after conviction on conspiracy, perjury and obstruction of justice charges for his role in the Watergate break-in of Democratic headquarters.

Reacting to Watergate abuses, Carter administration Attorney General Griffin Bell instituted reforms to help maintain the department's independence.

Among the changes: a ban on lawmakers and the White House directly contacting prosecutors about specific investigations.

That ban was violated last year when New Mexico GOP Sen. Pete Domenici and Rep. Heather Wilson called former U.S. attorney David Iglesias in Albuquerque to ask about the status of public corruption cases.

Iglesias later said they wanted to know whether he was going to indict Democrats before the looming election.

The incident is cited by Democrats who argue the U.S. attorney firings were politically motivated.

No one has accused Gonzales, personally, of breaking the law to put Bush's stamp on the Justice Department.

The attorney general maintains he is working to not only fix mistakes that his aides made in hiring and firing prosecutors, but also to secure the public's confidence in the beleaguered department.

Whether he can salvage his own reputation remains to be seen.

Philip Heymann, a Harvard law professor who worked at the Justice Department under several Democratic presidents, said the White House is using the law "almost exclusively as a form of protection and a form of armor, if you can get the Justice Department to say it's fine."

"I think they wanted a loyal attorney general, not somebody who would say 'no' when they very badly wanted them to say 'yes,'" Heymann said.

"And now they've got that."
___

On the Net:

Justice Department: http://www.usdoj.gov/