Evidence of cover up by the judicial system

[Sharing Lights]

Commission Member
Appointing Authority
Year First Appointed Expiration of Present Term

Raoul Lionel Felder, Esq., Acting Chair
Governor 2003 March 31, 2008

Stephen R. Coffey, Esq.
Senate President Pro Tem 1995 March 31, 2007

Colleen C. DiPirro
Governor
2004 March 31, 2009
Richard D. Emery, Esq. Senate Minority Leader
2004 March 31, 2008

Vacant Governor
March 31, 2010

Marvin E. Jacob, Esq. Assembly Speaker 2006 March 31, 2010
Hon. Thomas A. Klonick Chief Judge
2005 March 31, 2009

Hon. Daniel F. Luciano Governor
1995 March 31, 2007

Hon. Karen K. Peters
Chief Judge
2000 March 31, 2010

Hon. Terry Jane Ruderman Chief Judge 1999 March 31, 2008
Vacant Assembly Minority Leader
March 31, 2009

[Sharing Lights]

Esq.

An abbreviation for esquire, which is a title used by attorneys in the United States. The term esquire has a different meaning in English law. It is used to signify a title of dignity, which ranks above gentleman and directly below knight.

In the United States, Esq. is written after a lawyer's name, for example: John Smith, Esq.

"title of dignity, which ranks above gentleman and directly below knight."


Raoul Lionel Felder, Esq., Acting Chair of the Commission, is a graduate of New York University and the New York University Law School and attended the University of Berne, College of Medicine. He is in private practice in New York City, heading his own law firm. Mr. Felder served previously as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Over the years, he has served on many professional and civic association boards and committees, such as the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, whose Matrimonial Law Committee he chaired, the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, on whose Matrimonial Law Committee he served, the New York State Commission on Child Abuse, the New York City Economic Development Corporation and the New York City Cultural Affairs Advisory Commission. Mr. Felder has received awards from, and been honored by many civic and charitable organizations including: Recipient of Defender of Jerusalem Medal from the Israeli Prime Minister (1990); Chairman of USA Day, Washington, D.C. (1991); Grand Marshal of The Israeli Day Parade (1991); Citation of Merit presented by The National Arts Club (1992); Exhibit of Photographs at The National Arts Club (1992); Volunteer Service Award presented by The National Kidney Foundation (1992); Award, >Man of the Year= from The Brooklyn School for Special Children (1990); Award, Guest of Honor at The Metropolitan Jewish Geriatric Center's Annual Dinner (1991); Chairman of Dinner for The Jewish Reclamation Project; Co-Director of food drive for New York City Homeless (1991); Member, Board of Trustees, National Kidney Foundation; Member, Board of Advisors, Cop Care; Member, Board of Directors, Big Apple Greeters; Member, Board of Directors, Kidney & Urology Foundation of America, Inc. (2003); Award, 12th Annual Joint Meeting of Brandeis Association and The Catholic Lawyers Guild (1999); Award, Child Abuse Prevention Services C Child Safety Institute (1998); Award, The Shield Institute for the Mentally Retarded and Developmentally Disabled (1997). He is the author of seven books (including a legal textbook that has been updated 27 times), and numerous articles on the law and public affairs. He appears regularly on television and radio giving commentaries on the law and contemporary events, as well as lecturing at various bar associations.

Stephen R. Coffey, Esq., is a graduate of Siena College and the Albany Law School at Union University. He is a partner in the law firm of O’Connell and Aronowitz in Albany. He was an Assistant District Attorney in Albany County from 1971-75, serving as Chief Felony Prosecutor in 1974-75. He has also been appointed as a Special Prosecutor in Fulton and Albany Counties. Mr. Coffey is a member of the New York State Bar Association, where he serves on the Criminal Justice Section Executive Committee and lectures on Criminal and Civil Trial Practice, the Albany County Bar Association, the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, the New York State Defenders Association, and the Association of Trial Lawyers of America.

Colleen C. DiPirro is President and CEO of the Amherst Chamber of Commerce, which has over 2,300 members. Prior to joining the Chamber, she worked for the Erie County Legislature and as a retail manager. She was the first President of the Western New York Chamber Alliance, an organization for Chamber Executives serving an eight county region. She was identified as one of the 100 most influential people in Western New York by Business First. In 1998, Ms. DiPirro became the first woman honored as the Executive of the Year by the Buffalo Sales and Marketing Executives. That same year Daeman College named her Citizen of the Year. She received the Governor’s Award for Excellence in Business in 1999. She served on the Board of Directors of New York State Chamber of Commerce Executives in 1999. Ms. DiPirro serves as event and sponsorship coordinator and a member of the Advisory Board for the Buffalo Bills Alumni and was selected by Bills owner Ralph Wilson to serve on the Project 21 initiative. She served on a committee for Erie County Executive Joel Giambra’s Transition Team. She has served on numerous not for profit and community boards of directors, including Western New York Autism Foundation, Hospice Playhouse Project, Executive Women International and the Williamsville Sweet Home Junior Football Association. Additionally, she served as the first Chairwoman of the University of Buffalo Leadership Development Program. Ms. DiPirro was appointed to serve on the Peace Bridge Authority by Governor Pataki in 2002. Ms. DiPirro is the widowed mother of two sons and the proud grandmother of one. She attended Alfred College where she majored in Marketing.

Richard D. Emery, Esq., is a graduate of Brown University and Columbia Law School (cum laude), where he was a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar. He is a partner in the law firm of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff and Abady in Manhattan. Professional Affiliations: Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Committee on Election Law, Civil Rights Committee, Advisory Board of the National Police Accountability Project, Criminal Justice Operations Committee, Criminal Advocacy Committee, Criminal Courts Committee. Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Municipal Arts Society Legal Committee, Governor's Commission on Integrity in Government. Honors: Common Cause/NY, October 2000, "I Love an Ethical New York" Award for recognition of successful challenges to New York's unconstitutionally burdensome ballot access laws and overall work to promote a more open democracy; New York Magazine, March 20, 1995, "The Best Lawyers In New York" Award for recognition of successful Civil Rights litigation; Park River Democrats Public Service Award, June 1989; David S. Michaels Memorial Award, January 1987, for Courageous Effort in Promotion of Integrity in the Criminal Justice System from the Criminal Justice Section of the New York State Bar Association.

Marvin E. Jacob, Esq., is a graduate of Brooklyn College and New York Law School. Mr. Jacob was a partner in the Business Finance & Restructuring Department of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, until his recent retirement. His practice included litigation in the bankruptcy courts and federal district and appellate courts. Mr. Jacob currently serves as a consultant and mediator in bankruptcy, litigation and SEC matters. Mr. Jacob was formerly Associate Regional Administrator, New York Regional Office, US Securities & Exchange Commission (1964-1979). He has served as adjunct professor of law at New York Law School and recently received a Distinguished Service Award for twenty-five years of service as a faculty member. Mr. Jacob is Chairman of the Board of Legal Assistance for the Jewish Poor, a member of the Advisory Board of Chinese American Planning Council, a member of and counsel to the Board of the Memorial Foundation For Jewish Culture, a member of and counsel to YouthBridge New York. Mr. Jacob has published and lectured extensively on bankruptcy issues and has been recognized with many legal and community awards.

[Sharing Lights]

Honorable Thomas A. Klonick is a graduate of Lehigh University and the Detroit College of Law, where he was a member of the Law Review. He maintains a law practice in Fairport, New York, with a concentration in the areas of commercial and residential real estate, corporate and business law, criminal law and personal injury. He was a Monroe County Assistant Public Defender from 1980 to 1983. Since 1995 he has served as Town Justice for the Town of Perinton, New York, and has also served as an Acting Rochester City Court Judge, a Fairport Village Court Justice and as a Hearing Examiner for the City of Rochester. From 1985 to 1987 he served as a Town Justice for the Town of Macedon, New York. He has also been active in the Monroe County Bar Association as a member of the Ethics Committee. Judge Klonick is the former Chairman of the Prosecuting Committee for the Presbytery of Genesee Valley and is an Elder of the First Presbyterian Church, Pittsford, New York. He has also served as legal counsel to the New York State Council on Problem Gambling. He serves on the boards of St. John’s Home and Main West Attorneys, a provider of legal services for the working poor. He is a member of the New York State Magistrates Association, the New York State Bar Association and the Monroe County Bar Association. Judge Klonick lectures in the Office of Court Administration's continuing Judicial Education Programs for Town and Village Justices.

Honorable Daniel F. Luciano was educated in the public schools of the City of New York and attended Brooklyn College, from which he received a Bachelor of Arts degree. He thereafter attended Brooklyn Law School, earning a Bachelor of Laws degree in 1954. After serving in the United States Army from August 1954 to July 1956, he entered the practice of law, specializing in tort litigation, real property tax assessment certiorari and general practice. He was engaged as trial counsel to various law firms in litigated matters. Additionally, he served as an Assistant Town Attorney for the Town of Islip, representing the Assessor in real property tax assessment certiorari from 1970 to 1982, and chaired the Suffolk County Board of Public Disclosure from 1980 to 1982. Justice Luciano is one of the founders of the Alexander Hamilton Inn of Court and served as a Director of the Suffolk Academy of Law. He was the Presiding Member of the New York State Bar Association Judicial Section, and served as a Delegate to the House of Delegates of the New York State Bar Association. Justice Luciano served as President and all other elected offices in the Association of Justices of the Supreme Court of the State of New York and is currently a member of the Executive Committee. Justice Luciano was a Director of the Suffolk County Women’s Bar Association. Additionally, he is a member of the Dean's Advisory Council of the Touro College, Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center. He was elected a Justice of the Supreme Court in 1982 and presided over a general civil caseload. In May 1991 he was appointed to preside over Conservatorship and Incompetency proceedings, later denominated Guardianship Proceedings in Suffolk County. He was appointed as an Associate Justice of the Appellate Term, Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts, in April of 1993. On May 30, 1996, Justice Luciano was appointed by Governor George E. Pataki as an Additional Justice to the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department. After he was re-elected to the Supreme Court in November of 1996, Governor Pataki redesignated him as an Additional Justice to the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department. Upon reaching the age of 70, Justice Luciano was Certified by the State of New York Administrative Board of the Courts for an additional two year term as a retired Justice of the Supreme Court, and was redesignated by Governor Pataki to serve as an Additional Justice of the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department, for a two year term commencing January 1, 2001. In 2002, after having been again Certified by the State of New York Administrative Board of the Courts for an additional two year term as a retired Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice Luciano was redesignated by Governor Pataki to serve as an Additional Justice of the Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department, for a second two year term, commencing January 1, 2003. Justice Luciano was appointed to the Commission by Governor Pataki in 1996, reappointed by Governor Pataki to a four year term in 1999, and reappointed in 2003 for a third term expiring March 31, 2007.

Honorable Karen K. Peters received her B.A. from George Washington University (cum laude) and her J.D. from New York University (cum laude; Order of the Coif). From 1973 to 1979 she was engaged in the private practice of law in Ulster County, served as an Assistant District Attorney in Dutchess County and was an Assistant Professor at the State University of New York at New Paltz, where she developed curricula and taught courses in the area of criminal law, gender discrimination and the law, and civil rights and civil liberties. In 1979 she was selected as the first counsel to the newly created New York State Division on Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse and remained counsel until 1983. In 1983 she was the Director of the State Assembly Government Operations Committee. Elected to the bench in 1983, she remained Family Court Judge for the County of Ulster until 1992, when she became the first woman elected to the Supreme Court in the Third Department. Justice Peters was appointed to the Appellate Division, Third Department, by Governor Mario M. Cuomo on February 3, 1994. Justice Peters has served as Chairperson of the Gender Bias Committee of the Third Judicial District, and on numerous State Bar Committees, including the New York State Bar Association Special Committee on Alcoholism and Drug Abuse, and the New York State Bar Association Special Committee on Procedures for Judicial Discipline. Throughout her career, Justice Peters has taught and lectured extensively in the areas of Family Law, Judicial Education and Administration, Criminal Law, Appellate Practice and Alcohol and the Law.

[Sharing Lights]

Honorable Terry Jane Ruderman graduated cum laude from Pace University School of Law, holds a Ph.D. in History from the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and Masters Degrees from City College and Cornell University. In 1995, Judge Ruderman was appointed to the Court of Claims and is assigned to the White Plains district. At the time she was the Principal Law Clerk to a Justice of the Supreme Court. Previously, she served as an Assistant District Attorney and Deputy County Attorney in Westchester County, and later she was in the private practice of law. Judge Ruderman is a member of the New York State Committee on Women in the Courts and Chair of the Gender Fairness Committee for the Ninth Judicial District, and she has served on the Ninth Judicial District Task Force on Reducing Civil Litigation and Delay. She is also Vice President of the New York State Association of Women Judges, Assistant Presiding Member of the New York State Bar Association Judicial Section, President of the White Plains Bar Association, a board member and former Vice President of the Westchester Women’s Bar Association and a former State Director of the Women’s Bar Association of the State of New York. Judge Ruderman also sits on the Alumni Board of Pace University School of Law and the Cornell University President’s Council of Cornell Women.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RECENT MEMBERS

Lawrence S. Goldman, Esq., served on the Commission from 1990 to 2006, and as Chair from 2004-06. He is a graduate of Brandeis University and Harvard Law School. He is in private practice in New York City, concentrating in white-collar criminal defense. He is a past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, co-chair of its white-collar committee and former chair of its ethics advisory committee. He is also a past president of the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the New York City Criminal Bar Association. He is a member of the Executive Committee of the Criminal Justice Section of the New York State Bar Association, the Advisory Committee on the New York Criminal Procedure Law, and the New York State Commission on the Future of Indigent Defense Services. He has received outstanding criminal law practitioner awards from the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the New York State Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the New York Criminal Bar Association. He has lectured at numerous bar associations and law school programs on various aspects of criminal law and procedure, trial tactics and ethics. He was an assistant district attorney in New York County and a consultant to the Knapp Commission. He is an honorary trustee of Congregation Rodeph Sholom in New York City. He and his wife Kathi have two adult children and live in Manhattan.

Christina Hernandez, MSW, is a member of the New York State Board of Parole. She previously served as a member of the New York State Crime Victims Board. She received a Bachelor of Arts from Buffalo State College, a Masters in Social Work Management from the Rockefeller College School of Social Welfare, State University of New York at Albany and a Certificate of Graduate Study in Women and Public Policy from the Rockefeller College School of Public Affairs and Policy, State University of New York at Albany. Presently she is enrolled in the doctoral program at the School of Social Welfare, pursuing a PhD in Social Work. Ms. Hernandez is a former Fellow of the Center for Women In Government. She served on the Board of Directors of the National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards and is a member of the Capital District Coalition for Crime Victims Rights, the Sex Offender Management Grant Steering Committee, and the New York State Hispanic Heritage Month Committee. A native of New York City, Ms. Hernandez resides in the Capital Region.

Alan J. Pope, Esq., served on the Commission from 1997 to 2006, as Vice Chair from 2005-06 and as Acting Chair and Chair from April 1 to March 16, 2006. He is a graduate of the Clarkson College of Technology (cum laude) and the Albany Law School. He is a partner in the Binghamton law firm of Pope, Schrader & Murphy. Mr. Pope is a member of the Broome County Bar Association, where he co-chairs the Environmental Law Committee; the New York State Bar Association, where he serves on the Insurance, Negligence and Compensation Law Section, the Construction and Surety Division, and the Environmental Law Section; and the American Bar Association, where he serves on the Tort & Insurance Practice Section and the Construction Industry Forum Committee. Mr. Pope is also an Associate Member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, a member of the New York Chapter of the General Contractors Association of America, and a past member of the Broome County Environmental Management Council.

[Sharing Lights]

Introduction




The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct receives and reviews written complaints of misconduct against judges of the state unified court system, which includes State, County, Municipal, Town and Village Courts. Upon review of a complaint, the Commission decides whether to investigate or dismiss it.


A complaint that, if true, would not constitute judicial misconduct will not be investigated.

SL: the key phrase - "judicial misconduct"

These noble honors created a defence line for their kin.
Anything that constitutes serious violations, can be classified by them as not "misconduct" but "criminal" activity.

Then, the honors of honors would claim that they have no jurisdiction over such matter.

They would waste your time under the pretext of investigation, only to write this clause if that serves their purpose.

This is a key point.
Please do not underestimate it.

The types of complaints that may be investigated by the Commission include improper demeanor, conflicts of interest, intoxication, bias, prejudice, favoritism, corruption, prohibited business or political activity, serious financial and records mismanagement, assertion of the influence of judicial office for the private benefit of the judge or others, and other misconduct on or off the bench. Physical or mental disability may also be investigated.
The Commission does not act as an appellate court and does not review the merits of a judge’s rulings or alleged errors of law. The Commission does not have the authority, for example, to raise or reduce the amount of bail or change the sentence imposed upon a defendant. The Commission does not issue advisory opinions, give legal advice or represent litigants.

The Commission’s jurisdiction is limited to judges. Complaints against other court personnel or lawyers are not investigated. When appropriate, the Commission refers complaints to other agencies.



Disciplinary Action

Investigation of a complaint may entail such measures as interviewing witnesses, analyzing documents and getting the judge’s response to the allegations.

"Sl: another key phrase: a typical of attorneys-judges and their agenda"

"may" means that maybe - "yes" but maybe "no."

In truth, all of the above are required for a investigation if that is not a scam but a real one.

Every of their word is calculated to the letter.
They, always, try to leave an open window to jump out if the door is closed.
That is all by design for their protection, as well as of their kin."

If a complaint is investigated and the allegations are not substantiated, the Commission will dismiss the complaint. If the allegations appear to have merit, the Commission may direct that formal charges be served against the judge and a formal hearing be held.

After a formal hearing, the Commission may dismiss the complaint or caution the judge privately about the matter. The Commission may also determine that the judge should be publicly admonished or censured, removed from office or, in a case of disability, retired. Determinations to admonish, censure, remove or retire a judge are subject to review by the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court.

[Sharing Lights]

Part I


A basic investigation and rendering a decision based on facts and law, involves,

1) listening or reading the claims of Plaintiff(s,)

2) listening or reading the defense of Defender(s,)

3) doing actual investigation,

4) recording all the steps/procedures that have been utilized,

5) comparing all of the above against the existing facts if any,

6) utilizing evidence on record and/or witnesses’ testimony,

7) applying logic and laws against the findings,

8) informing all parties in writing of the outcome,

9) basing the outcome or the decision on existing laws,

10) making precise reference in the decision to what was done against what is lawful one by one accordingly.

I have quoted the Decision of the Commission of these noble, honors earlier.
In the next Post, I would put that Determination vs. the basic provision of any investigation.

[Sharing Lights]

1) Listening or reading the claims of Plaintiff(s.)

I wrote a general disclosure of corruption and request to investigate, stating that I
would supply the evidence. The evidence was never supplied by me as not one
has contacted me, asking to supply it.

2) Listening or reading the defense of Defender(s),

No reference to that is made in CJC latter anywhere and no copy of such defense
if any has been is provided to me.

That means:

a) either the defending judge has failed to raise his defense
b) or CJC has failed to investigate properly
c) a) & b).

There can be no due process or law utilized properly when the above is on the
record.

3) Doing an actual investigation.

There is no proof submitted to me of what that investigation consisted of and the
relevant steps.
There are no reasons to believe that proper investigation has commenced as the
proof of it is withheld and not by amateurs but the whole Commission.

Living in the physical world as well, I rely on physical evidence when physical evidence is or may be available.

I may utilize the concept of belief and so extensively in spiritual matters and
matters to which no physical proof exists in the immediate or reasonable vicinity.

As any investigation must be based on facts, evidence, and law, I choose to rely no ton a belief of what the CJC might have done but on facts on the record.

There are none and I allege that the Investigation cannot be based on law, thus.

A potential claim by the panel, “believe us, we did this or that…” is not accepted by me as I rely on facts as well as I do not believe they would be so audacious as to enter such plea.

4) Recording all the steps/procedures that have been utilized.

Such evidence has not been submitted to me.

5) Comparing all of the above against the existing facts if any,

As I know for a fact that my general complaint did not contain all the facts, which
I offered to submit to the Party, which had proper Authority to investigated, there
is nothing to compare against what is absent.

6) Utilizing evidence on record and/or witnesses’ testimony.

No reference was by CSS to the existing Court record if it is, still intact, and my
testimony which did not materialize yet.

7) Applying logic and laws against the findings.

What could, possibly, CSC find when the above provisions are violated in their
entirety?

8) Informing all parties in writing of the outcome.

I have received their Decision, which is invalid and is not based on law by all of
the above.

9) Basing the outcome or the decision on existing laws.

Not one reference to one was made. There is no proof that the Decision was based
on law or any concept of logic and Maxim.

10) Making precise reference in the decision to what was done against what is lawful
one by one accordingly.

No reference at all.

Conclusion:

The Decision of CSC is a default contrary to any, legal and proper investigation.

There was no due course.

There was no Justice.

No interests of public and law were served.

The alleged activity by the Judge is enabled by the silent approval; the crime is reinforced and encouraged by all of the above.

The taxpayers’ monies have been wasted in the cover up of corruption.

In the process, the corruption by the CSC has been revealed.

Corrupt group of some people may not investigate alleged corruption by another group of people or person.

Only non-corrupted and neutral group of people or Agency may investigate if law is to be followed.

I have the Civic duty and God/Nature given right to except and demand real and just laws to be implemented and not aid in conspiracy and corruption of the individuals referenced above.

Question:

if that was a valid investigation producing valid Decision, then, what is invalid investigation and unlawful Decision?

Just a question to the noble honors (and I was not wearing any hat when I was writing this – I affirm that.)

[Ice]

Once the man has been convicted of his wrong doing, the commission has solid evidence with which to remove the man from office.

Attempting to file a complaint against the office is an exercise in futility.

Ice

[Sharing Lights]

Even vs the "man" - not only the "office"
as, once again, who would "review" the complaint?

Answer:

One of their own kin, most likely!

Tonight, as promised, I would Post, what I believe is, the solution (may not be perfect - but way better what they have now.)

Dear Ice, we have to become so knowledgeable and precise that these impostors feel your ice when we need to freeze their actions and my fire when we need to shine the spotlight on them.

Question:

How wold have you proceeded vs the "person"
( I do not believe they acted as real men as manhood is noble so is real womanhood?)

With respect,

[Ice]

Originally Posted by Sharing Lights

Even vs the "man" - not only the "office"
as, once again, who would "review" the complaint?

Answer:

One of their own kin, most likely!

Tonight, as promised, I would Post, what I believe is, the solution (may not be perfect - but way better what they have now.)

Dear Ice, we have to become so knowledgeable and precise that these impostors feel your ice when we need to freeze their actions and my fire when we need to shine the spotlight on them.

Question:

How wold have you proceeded vs the "person"
( I do not believe they acted as real men as manhood is noble so is real womanhood?)

With respect,

How would I have reacted? Personally, I'd rather just shoot the turds... but an action for injury against the man, due to the overstepping of judicial authority outside the scope of office, would suffice.

Ice