Pennsylvania Civil Rights Law Network | Working to provide provide equal justice under the law in Pennsylvania
Posted in The Inquisition of Don Bailey and Civil Rights Tagged Civil Rights, Due Process Violations, Inquisition of Don Bailey, Opening Statement Leave a comment
The Opening Statement at today’s assault on Don Bailey and Civil Rights
Members of Judicial-Corruption.net, PennsylvaniaCivilRightsLawNetwork.com and TrueDemocracyParty.net got together and united as we were all in the courtroom for the hearing of Don Bailey this morning in Harrisburg, PA for one of the most important hearings ever to take place, that should have never been allowed to occur.
The hearing began before a hearing examiner by the name of Brian Cali, Esquire. Mr. Cali is believed to be under federal investigation for his role in an ankle bracelet business that was connected to the “kids for cash” scandal. Marty Carlson, the federal magistrate judge appointed to get Bailey, was U.S. Attorney early on in this scandal, and has been criticized for turning a blind eye to that judicial corruption scandal early on before it got out of control. Chances are that Carlson and Cali’s paths crossed before. Bailey filed a motion for Cali’s recual, which was denied without discussion, with Cali never having to reveal what his true role is in the kids of cash investigations. We demand to know. Is he “giving” them Bailey in exchange for favorable criminal treatment? Did Marty Carlson and Calis paths cross paths again? Again ,we demand to know.
The testimony was consumed by a day of 2 federal judges appearing in state court to go after a lawyer. Bailey is chagrged for saying that judges met to discuss how to get him, and that is exactly what the testimony was. Phone calls and meetings betwen federal judges about Don Bailey. Judge Conner was visibly nervous and had the “i don’t recalls” typicaly scattered throughout his otherwise disturbing testimony. Everything about his and Jones demeanor suggested that they know they have been caught by Don Bailey, and that they are trying still to figure out a way out. We have one – impeachament!
These judges don’t work on cases together, so there is only one reason to be discussing him, and then working with state authorities to get him – because what Bailey said is true. Don Bailey is being prosecuted for true statements about judicial corruption. We will have all the testimony here when it becomes available.
The crux of the issue hinges on the preservation of our civil rights, and our ability to enjoy due process rights and protection when it comes to blowing the whistle on corruption – at any level of government – executive, legislative, or judicial – state or local.
We caught up with Mr. Bailey after the proceedings today, and he was kind enough to give us a copy of his Opening Statement, which we felt articulates the gravity of the situation every single American is facing at this immediate moment in regards to the future protections of their civil rights.
Tomorrow’s hearing will resume at 8:30 AM, at the Judicial Center, Commonwealth Avenue, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and we encourage you to attend.
Opening Statement of Respondent Don Bailey: August 11, 2011
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Fulton, and Attendees,
I very much appreciate the opportunity to defend myself, to the extent I can under the limitations I must endure, against charges that I wrote in a pleading that certain federal judges were misbehaving. I confess that I did so. Because objectively speaking, they were. And I also confess that I still believe every word that I said.
The Federal judicial system, at least in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, has been corrupted by certain errant and dishonest judges. There is no need to address what we have suffered, as of late, in our state judicial system. And even greater than the injustices that I am suffering right here are the deprivations of American citizens who deserve, but have been denied, their day in court. Political and personal misconduct by judicial officers continues in our system. The evidence is overwhelming. Favoritism, selective law firm influence, cronyism and political retribution are common place. Corruption in Pennsylvania has become a pervasive way of life. There isn’t a lawyer, nor is there a functionary in this system, who is not aware of these facts. And just because there’s always been some wrongdoing doesn’t mean this is okay. There are two generic classes of victims in this orchestration. The unfortunate spill off reflects on the large maturity of our judges, the decent and honest judges whose service we are privileged to enjoy, countless citizens are required to depend upon a class of dishonest and corrupt public officials to try and seek redress of their grievances. There is no greater example of the corruption which exists in Pennsylvania today than this very proceeding. Pennsylvania’s so-called Lawyer’s Disciplinary System is a fraud. If a lawyer dares to complain then his or her profession and livelihood are threatened and destroyed. Furthermore, as Paul Killian’s behavior demonstrates, in one place you apply standards, in the next place you don’t, it all depends on who the favor is being done for.
I have been denied the opportunity to subpoena fact witnesses. Why? I have been denied the opportunity to review and require the production of documents and files. Why? I have been falsely misrepresented and intentionally attacked by certain manipulative judges, like Mr. Conner, but my clients and I expected to refrain from protest for fear of suffering personal retribution. This entire process originated with a courteous request to Mr. Conner to reconsider a racist memorandum he wrote in a York County case. I am suffering retaliation today because I had to courage and loyalty to my client, Stephen Conklin, to do what was right. And the facts will clearly demonstrate that. They are irrefutable. But Mr. Conner moved to have them struck. It is partly for these reasons that an effort is underway to impeach him. See the Venesevich writ of certiorari which demonstrates not just judicial excess, but clearly illustrates the arrogance and abuse that lawyer’s and citizens can suffer because of the privileges that evolved in our judicial system that protect dishonest and abusive judges like my accusers. The document upon which my charges are based stem from my complaining that my client Thom Lewis and I were the victims of judicial misbehavior. Well, I believe we were. When we attempted to present evidence we were even denied the right to subpoena witnesses in a so-called sanctions hearing. We weren’t even allowed to question the individual who claimed to have done the legal work we were sanctioned for in the legal panorama devoid of due process.
This board is not even legally constituted. It does not have the civilian representation it’s supposed to have. It inappropriately mixes prosecutorial, adjudicatory, and investigative functions. It has been recognized nationally as unreliable.
I’m the best evidence. As I’ve been told I am here because federal judges Yvette Kane, John E. Jones III, Anthony Scirica, and Christopher Connor complained that I criticized them. Magistrate Judge Carlson has virtually thrown tantrums comprising uncontrollable attacks on me personally which then strangely ended up being manipulated into the media. That stemmed from my innocent questioning of his mysterious midnight appointment and the committee behind it. So like political operatives carrying out the wishes of a political boss, I am being hauled in here to make sure that the civil rights issues I raise and the people I represent don’t have a chance to present their cases in court. This begs other questions. More is yet to come.
The vast majority of my clientele are police officers. Invariably their cases touch upon and require the disclosure of public corruption. Today whistleblowers and loyal hard-working law enforcement personnel are under attack by our Federal courts. Now, I’ve had the privilege of representing dozens of Pennsylvania State troopers against abuses in their own leadership system. A case study on those cases alone should provide revealing information about the politics of our federal courts, or more specifically certain judges. I have won over $5 million in verdicts and through settlements in just the Middle District. Perhaps a study should be done on how those verdicts have been taken away. I assure this committee it will be.
This is not a world of even trying to exercise neutral and detached judgments. It’s a world of politics and egos and arrogance. The responsibility of any official community is to at least try and let it police itself. Our judicial system cannot do so. And this so-called disciplinary system is little more than an enforcement arm of those who would abuse it. The manner in which this hearing process has been conducted is a testament to the entire systems’ excesses. Institutional reform is needed. Judges should not be policing or regulating lawyer’s and judges should not have the bootstrapped protections they have enshrouded themselves in.
The rules of conduct that are being used to abuse me are both unconstitutional as written and as applied. Although I have no doubt as to the outcome of this process I do have a political and more duty to fight it.
Please allow me to finish with a brief personal story.
When my children ask me, and I have six, how I seem myself, assuming I see myself as a dad and husband first, am I an ex-football player, or an ex-congressman, or an ex-statewide officer holder I laugh and tell them I’m a jungle fighter. That’s what I did best. That’s what I knew best and that’s what I excelled at. My mind goes back to a day long ago back in 1969 in Vietnam. Delta Company had surrounded a few enemy soldiers in a draw near the base of Nui Khe Mountain, just a little Southwest of the Villiage of Nam Hoa. Naturally, my platoon was sent in to get them. Because we were the best. As we moved up the draw through a little blue we began to find bones. Little bones at first and then bigger and heavier bones and then skulls. We found the disjointed chopped skeletons of over 200 people who had been marched out of Nam Hoa in 1968. Their names had been on a list because they had said things critical of the Communists. That’s all they did. They had criticized the political structure. Now the story, which is true, is certainly an exaggeration to press the point here. But how far removed is this so-called hearing or process? Perhaps not as far as some of you would like to think? You would take my right to earn a living, but more important my right to represent people that not one of you has the courage to stand up and fight for. That I voiced substantive criticisms is not important. You haven’t the slightest interest in the accuracy or efficacy of what I said about these judges’ and their misbehavior. Your only fear is that someone will hear what my clients and I said and might pay attention to it. You see what you seek to stop is any attorney saying anything critical of any judge at any time. The judicial system charged with the responsibility for protecting American citizens from First Amendment intrusions by the government is the greatest abuser of all.
