Regarding the third suggestion:
"an outraged public should force lawmakers to pass laws for the
creation of bodies external to the judiciaries to take effective
action on complaints against judges and make judges accountable
for the use of public funds."
It has no merit. It is only extinguishing fire with gasoline;
just more big-govt mentality: feed the parasite. Judges are
already supposed to be the "external bodies" who watch over the
welfare of the defendants to see they get fair trials. Who says
the new external bodies / govt watchers ("watcher watchers")
will be any less corruptible? Who will watch them? When they
fail, who will watch the next crop of watcher watchers? And who
will be left to be able to pay them all?
-Mark
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Looks like an approach that may have merit. I don't expect it
would
succeed in the courts, but could draw a lot of critical attention
by the
public, and draw the support of like-minded groups.
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. wrote:
> Dear Mr. Roland ,
>
>
>
> Please find below the text of an e-mail on how to take the
first
> concrete step toward the implementation of the Programmatic
Program
> through the creation of the virtual firm on the Internet of
> investigative journalists and lawyers to expose judges engaged
in
> coordinated wrongdoing and abuse of power and bring a class
action
> against them.
>
>
>
> I encourage you to forward it to others to spread the word and
look
> forward to receiving your comments and suggestions.
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> How You Can Help to Take the First Concrete Step
>
> Toward the Implementation of the Programmatic Program
>
> Through the Creation of the Virtual Firm on the Internet
>
> of Investigative Journalists and Lawyers
>
> to Expose Judges Engaged in Coordinated Wrongdoing and Abuse of
Power
>
> and Bring a Class Action against Them
>
>
>
> by
>
> Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org is an organization that aims to
bring
> together all the entities and individuals that are separately
working
> toward accomplishing what constitutes in fact a common mission,
> namely, to ensure integrity in our federal and state courts. By
> focusing their efforts and combining their resources they can
pursue
> it much more effectively than up to now.
>
>
>
> To that end, JDR put forward the "Programmatic Proposal to
Unite
> Entities and Individuals to Use Their Resources Effectively in
Our
> Common Mission to Ensure the Integrity of Our Courts by
Engaging in
> Specific Activities and Achieving Concrete Objectives".
>
(http://judicial-discipline-reform.org/docs/Programmatic_Proposal
.pdf)
>
>
>
> The Programmatic Proposal intends to accomplish that mission by
> achieving three realistic and progressively attainable
objectives
> through a program of specific, manageable activities.
>
>
>
> To begin with, it seeks to form a virtual firm on the Internet
of
> investigative journalists and lawyers that will find evidence
of
> coordinated wrongdoing by judges and expose it on the Internet
and the
> traditional media. Having made both the public aware of such
> wrongdoing and the media cover it, a class action will be
brought
> against judges engaged in it.
>
>
>
> A public outraged by the exposure in the media and through the
class
> action should lead to the attainment of the second objective of
> causing the FBI, the Department of Justice, Congress, and their
state
> counterparts to investigate coordinated wrongdoing in the
judiciaries.
>
>
>
> Thirdly, an outraged public should force lawmakers to pass laws
for
> the creation of bodies external to the judiciaries to take
effective
> action on complaints against judges and make judges accountable
for
> the use of public funds.
>
>
>
> Coordinated wrongdoing by judges, whether in the federal or the
state
> jurisdiction, substantially impairs the integrity of the
judiciaries.
> It may manifest itself in different areas of the law, including
> bankruptcy, taxation, probate, partition of marital assets,
child
> support and visitation rights, etc.
>
>
>
> What is common to, and at the origin of, any form of such
wrongdoing
> is that a judge that engages in wrongdoing in one area of the
law and
> gets away with it because the other judges will not discipline
him,
> will be more likely to do wrong in all areas of his work and in
the
> process, set the example for other judges to follow. This
triggers a
> trend that is likely to degenerate into coordinated wrongdoing
until
> organized corruption festers. Judges can engage in it by
immunizing
> themselves from prosecution through their systematic dismissal
of
> complaints against their conduct. This explains how in the 217
years
> since the U.S. Constitution of 1789, only 7 federal judges have
been
> impeached and convicted.
>
>
>
> The Proposal recognizes that for the entities and individuals
to hold
> reasonably any expectation of eliminating coordinated judicial
> wrongdoing under those circumstances, public support is
indispensable.
> If the public is made aware of the judges' wrongdoing, it is
likely to
> be offended by the fact that judges apply the law to all of us
only to
> abuse their power in order to put themselves above that same
law.
> People react to abuse and unfairness that can turn them into
victims
> and make them feel disrespected and as persons of lesser value.
>
>
>
> Consequently, the first task of the virtual firm of
investigative
> journalists and lawyers is to search for, and expose, evidence
of
> coordinated wrongdoing. Such evidence cannot be excluded by
judges
> under the pretense that it concerns judicial acts, for which
judges
> are immune from prosecution; instead, acts of coordinated
wrongdoing
> fall among crimes, which are not protected by judicial
immunity.
>
>
>
> However, since coordinated wrongdoing judges disregard the law,
they
> could exclude even such evidence in order to dismiss a class
action
> based on it...unless the evidence already exposed by the
virtual firm
> caused the national media to provide extensive coverage of the
judges
> having to decide whether to incriminate themselves by blatantly
> disregarding the law in order to exclude evidence of criminal
conduct
> to protect themselves or incriminate themselves by being
faithful to
> their oath to "administer justice without respect to persons"
(28
> U.S.C. §453) at the risk of judges being held civilly liable
and left
> exposed to impeachment.
>
>
>
> Therein lies a strategy: to put judges in a damn if you do,
damn if
> you don't situation.
>
>
>
> To implement it, the firm of investigative journalists and
lawyers
> needs to be formed. To that end, the Table of Division of Labor
for
> the Formation of the Virtual Firm is reproduced below and gives
a
> concrete idea of how entities and individuals can start working
> together to form it.
>
>
>
> You too can help in that work. You can forward this e-mail to
entities
> and individuals that complain about judges that abuse their
power and
> disregard the law or that are corrupt. Thereby you will let
them know
> that they need not remain complaining in isolation while judges
keep
> coordinating their wrongdoing, but rather they can unite in
order to
> effectively expose such judges and also form the class to sue
them in
> a class action. You can search the Internet for the e-mail
addresses
> of those entities and individuals by using keywords such as
judges,
> judicial, courts, corruption, abuse of power, law, legal, etc.
>
>
>
> Likewise, you can forward this e-mail to bloggers,
investigative
> journalists, reporters, and anchors at newspapers as well as
radio and
> TV stations so that they may disseminate the story to an ever
larger
> audience.
>
> Similarly, you can forward it to lawyers to invite them to
participate
> in the discussion of judicial wrongdoing and consider joining
the firm.
>
>
>
> By so doing, you will be helping yourself, for judges wield
immense
> power over our lives, liberty, and property, and when they
decide a
> case, they set a precedent that affects you too. So it is in
your
> interest that they be men and women of integrity that apply the
law
> not just to us, but also to themselves. Do not let judges place
> themselves above you and the rest of us as they place
themselves above
> the law.
>
>
>
> For more information, visit
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.
>
> Send your comments or inquiries to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
>
>
>
>
****************************************************************
>
> Table of Division of Labor for the Formation of the Virtual
Firm
>
> of Investigative Journalists and Lawyers
>
>
>
> described in the Programmatic Proposal1
>
> to Unite Entities and Individuals to Use Their Resources
Effectively in
>
> Our Common Mission to Ensure Integrity in Our Courts
>
>
(http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/Programmatic_Proposal
.pdf)
>
>
>
> by
>
> Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
> The purpose of this Table is to divide the tasks of contacting
> entities and individuals that are pursuing the common mission
of
> ensuring integrity in our courts so as to identify among them
seven
> persons, highly committed to that mission, who exhibit
moderation,
> pragmatism, organizational skills, and the ability to
communicate
> clearly and concisely, and who are willing to constitute the
committee
> to form the virtual firm of investigative journalists and
lawyers that
> will expose in the media and through a class action the
coordinated
> wrongdoing and abuse of power of federal judges. (Programmatic
> Proposal:3§§II and III)
> (http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/Programmatic3.htm)
>
>
>
> The task of that committee will include finding the supporters
and
> professionals necessary to staff the firm and make it run.
>
>
>
> Tasks to develop rosters of, or take action to:
Person in charge
>
>
>
> 1. Entities and individuals advocating legal reform
>
> 2. names with e-mail and postal addresses to send letter
calling
> to unite in pursuit of the mission and support the formation of
the
> virtual firm
>
> 3. review credentials and qualifications
>
>
>
> 4. Organizing committee of the virtual firm
>
> 5. define the mission, objectives, and activities of the
virtual
> firm
>
> 6. draw up a contract of participation
>
> 7. recruit the virtual firm's staff and plan physical
office for
> class action
>
> 8. solicit support and develop the firm's website as a
profit
> center, i.e. advertising, sale of information & publications,
to
> generate revenue for the virtual firm's pursuit of its mission,
such
> as the class action and lobbying Congress to adopt judicial
discipline
> reform laws
>
>
>
> 9. Financial supporters
>
> 10. financial sponsors committed to long term support
>
> 11. financial donors likely to provide support on a given
> occasion
>
>
>
> 12. Information Technology
>
> 13. experts to set up the database for hyperlinking and
posting
> with different degrees of access evidence, source documents,
and files
> of the library of collaborative writing
(Programmatic_Proposal:5§C
> (http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/Programmatic5.htm)
>
> 14. ensure search engine optimization for the website &
> reciprocal linking
>
>
>
> 15. Investigative journalists
>
> 16. media owners, editors, news anchors, and assignment
managers
> to whom the case can be made to investigate coordinated
judicial
> wrongdoing, either overtly by publishing evidence as they
obtain it,
> or anonymously until a critical mass of evidence has been
collected,
> turned into an investigative report, and its publication or
> broadcasting choreographed for maximum impact on the public and
judges
>
> 17. investigative journalists and bloggers to be invited
to
> participate in, or become promoters or coordinators of, the
> investigation of judicial wrongdoing either on their own or as
firm
> members (Programmatic Proposal:4para.11-12 on tasks and
competence
> requirements)
(http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/Programmatic4.htm)
>
>
>
> 18. Lawyers
>
> 19. lawyers and law firms that advocate social and
judicial
> reform or that have experience in class action and
multi-district
> litigation to be invited to support or join the firm
(Programmatic
> Proposal:5para.13 on tasks & competence requirements)
> (http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/Programmatic5.htm)
>
>
>
>
>
> Footnotes:
>
>
>
> 1 1. Programmatic Proposal
>
> a) in a downloadable PDF:
>
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/Programmatic_Proposal.
pdf.
>
> b) accessible on the website:
> http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/Programmatic1.htm
>
> 2. Summary of the Programmatic Proposal
>
>
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/Programmatic_proposal_
summary.pdf
>
>
>
>
> 2 A meeting of entities and individuals, to be effective,
should not
> be envisaged until there is a clear agenda that gives it a
theme and
> direction, and allows participants to know what to expect and
how to
> prepare for the discussion ahead.
>
>
>
> A brainstorming meeting will only be an opportunity for
everybody who
> has a complaint against somebody in the judiciary, elsewhere in
> government, or on the moon to stand on a soapbox to have their
15
> minutes of famous speech, however unfocused, unsupported by
evidence,
> and extremist so that it will only bore and alienate more
people than
> it will enlighten and unite them. People that are willing to
commit
> their money, time, and effort to a common program of activities
can be
> put off quite easily by others babbling half-baked ideas off
the top
> of their heads.
>
>
>
> A meeting is only meaningful after its likely participants have
> thought through their ideas, put them in writing, thus showing
> commitment and competence, and given others the opportunity to
comment
> on them. After collective revisions have developed a draft into
a
> document enjoying the majority's approval, an auspicious
meeting can
> be held to sign and give it a personal touch.
>
> That meeting can be an occasion for celebratory speeches and a
press
> conference that the media can report as that of a team of
> professionals with a well-conceived program, the public can
feel
> addressing its own problems and attracted to support or even
join it,
> and the judges can take seriously as the statements of
competent
> people very capable of taking them on.
>
>
>
> 3 "Neither the firm nor the class action can pursue the
particular
> complaints of each of its professionals, supporters, or
members. They
> will know before joining that a shotgun of issues and agendas
is
> confusing, overwhelming, conflict-generating, and ultimately
fatal to
> the certification of the class. Hence, they must shed
distinguishing
> elements from their complaints and divisive statements from
their
> discourse in order to pursue effectively their common mission
of
> ensuring the integrity of the legal system. Given their
unifying
> commitment to it, they will agree to concentrate their efforts
and
> resources on three reasonable objectives attainable through a
program
> of specific, manageable activities." Programmatic
Proposal:4para9
> (http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/Programmatic4.htm)
>
>
>
> 4
>
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/docs/Statement_of_Facts_Tab
le_of_Cases.pdf
> or http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/StatFacts1.htm
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757
512/299-5001 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
