An epidemic of government corruption in America has led to economic decline, and social unrest. Evidence increasingly points to a major source as the Judicial Branch – the most powerful part of the government, expected to have the most integrity. It is no longer just conjecture, as citizen complaints of racketeering and misconduct by members of the Judiciary, are rampant across social media. A study published by Yale University Law School supports this reality, that judicial corruption is a major U.S. problem. Continue reading “America Wakes Up To Find Its Judicial Branch Infiltrated By Organized Crime”
The renowned journal the Legal Intelligencer recently revisited an embarrassing industry topic in an article entitled “Why Do Pennsylvania’s Courts Suffer From Chronic Scandal?” While the author included its numerous infamous scandals as evidence, they fell short in answering their own question. It is answered here. The failure to remedy the situation itself speaks volumes, with an obvious aversion to interfering with the status quo… the reason is simple and not unique to Pennsylvania. Continue reading “The Money Laundering Behind Chronic Judicial Corruption”
Last Updated May 29, 2017 : 8:10 PM EST
Even for those that have become resigned to accepting the status quo, the series of events in the following brings a whole new perspective to judicial corruption. While such abuse of power is now expected, the state of Pennsylvania has very unique influence all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. If none of the following is true, the above pictured federal judges surely would have offered proof to refute it, to “preserve confidence” in the judiciary. Thus far they have declined to do so. Continue reading “Federal Judges Caught Fixing Cases- Does the Corruption Lead to SCOTUS?”
As President Trump struggles to “make America great again” the “draining of the swamp” has been self-effectuating. We just saw how some of that muck surfacing from the bottom, could possibly have put themselves in control of national security. There is a larger lesson here to be learned from the dog and pony show that three judges put on for the country. Continue reading “The Black Hole at the Bottom of the Swamp”
The saga of Democrat and first female Pennsylvania Attorney General, Kathleen Kane, is an interesting contrast to that of Presidential Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton’s quagmire regarding mishandling of official government emails. In fact, the two women are, or were comrades and Clinton supported Kane’s run for office in 2012. The difference of course is who they were up against and how much money they had to fight allegations, making the speed and timing of today’s announcement that Clinton has been cleared a bit suspicious. Continue reading “Clintongate versus Porngate: A Tale of Two Email Scandals That Just Doesn’t Add Up”
Without the Seventh Amendment, which guarantees the right to civil jury trial, we cannot defend our rights under the First, Second, or any other Amendments of the Bill of Rights. Jury trials are the institutional check against judicial criminality. Because relatively few people become involved in litigation, the fact that civil jury trials have almost completely disappeared has gone unnoticed.The average citizen assumes that should they become entangled in a lawsuit, the problem will be resolved by a jury of their peers. They are sorely mistaken; more often than not, they will be at the mercy of one person — a judge who has very little restrictions on how they want to apply the law. Continue reading “Erosion of the Seventh Amendment”
It may be old news that Judge William Carpenter, Senior Judge William Nicholas, and Judge Richard Haaz sat on the April 27, 2015 panel to determine if Carpenter’s ambiguous protective order was violated by Attorney General Kane. But while thus far, Judge Richard Haaz has remained under the radar, it may be time to give him his place of honor in the Pennsylvania Courts Hall of Shame.
Continue reading “Montgomery Co. Judge Richard Haaz Fails to Disclose Conflict on Panel Against AG Kane”
Why You Should Opt-Out
If you have ever received a notice in the mail inviting you to join in a class action lawsuit, or received an unexpected check for some negligible amount, please read on. These lawsuits are being generated not by the public, but by the lawyers. While they claim they perform a public service by controlling corporate corruption, the regulations are designed by the bar associations specifically to cycle money into their political machine and pockets, rather than for maintaining social order. Instituting your own lawsuit would, if you prevailed, be substantially more rewarding.
While most mainstream media outlets are still on the judicial bandwagon, it appears that rather than get caught in the crossfire, some are starting CYA campaigns. More journalists are exposing each day, that the lives of millions of Americans over the last fifty years, have been destroyed because of abuse of power and collusion by judges and attorneys. A shadow government appears to have formed in the judicial branch via what is essentially a lawyers union, -the American Bar Association with its state and county subsidiaries- that have continually manipulated court rules to block all avenues of protection and restitution against judicial misconduct. It is estimated that 40,000 Americans are falsely imprisoned, and millions have had assets extorted by lawyers and judges through intentional complicating of cases to increase legal fees, with nowhere to turn for help except judicial conduct boards populated by these same bar members. Americans are often essentially trapped for years, once they get involved in the court system.
Continue reading “Are Judges and Lawyers Around the Country Finally Realizing Its Game Over?”
"The once honorable profession of law now fully functions as a bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside the elected Congress and state legislatures.”
— Justice John F. Molloy
When I began practicing law in 1946, justice was much simpler. I joined a small Tucson practice at a salary of $250 a month, excellent compensation for a beginning lawyer. There was no paralegal staff or expensive artwork on the walls. In those days, the judicial system was straightforward and efficient. Decisions were handed down by judges who applied the law as outlined by the Constitution and state legislatures. Cases went to trial in a month or two, not years. In the courtroom, the focus was on uncovering and determining truth and fact.
I charged clients by what I was able to accomplish for them. The clock did not start ticking the minute they walked through the door.
The legal profession has evolved dramatically during my 87 years. I am a second-generation lawyer from an Irish immigrant family that settled in Yuma. My father, who passed the Bar with a fifth-grade education, ended up arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court during his career.
The law changed dramatically during my years in the profession. For example, when I accepted my first appointment as a Pima County judge in 1957, I saw that lawyers expected me to act more as a referee than a judge. The county court I presided over resembled a gladiator arena, with dueling lawyers jockeying for points and one-upping each other with calculated and ingenuous briefs
That was just the beginning. By the time I ended my 50-year career as a trial attorney, judge and president of southern Arizona’s largest law firm, I no longer had confidence in the legal fraternity I had participated in and, yes, profited from.
I was the ultimate insider, but as I looked back, I felt I had to write a book about serious issues in the legal profession and the implications for clients and society as a whole. The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion was 10 years in the making and has become my call to action for legal reform.
Our Constitution intended that only elected lawmakers be permitted to create law. Yet judges create their own law in the judicial system based on their own opinions and rulings. It’s called case law, and it is churned out daily through the rulings of judges. When a judge hands down a ruling and that ruling survives appeal with the next tier of judges, it then becomes case law, or legal precedent. This now happens so consistently that we’ve become more subject to the case rulings of judges rather than to laws made by the lawmaking bodies outlined in our Constitution.
This case-law system is a constitutional nightmare because it continuously modifies constitutional intent. For lawyers, however, it creates endless business opportunities. That’s because case law is technically complicated and requires a lawyer’s expertise to guide and move you through the system. The judicial system may begin with enacted laws, but the variations that result from a judge’s application of case law all too often change the ultimate meaning.
When a lawyer puts on a robe and takes the bench, he or she is called a judge. But in reality, when judges look down from the bench they are lawyers looking upon fellow members of their fraternity. In any other area of the free-enterprise system, this would be seen as a conflict of interest.
When a lawyer takes an oath as a judge, it merely enhances the ruling class of lawyers and judges. First of all, in Maricopa and Pima counties, judges are not elected but nominated by committees of lawyers, along with concerned citizens. How can they be expected not to be beholden to those who elevated them to the bench?
When they leave the bench, many return to large and successful law firms that leverage their names and relationships.
Business of law
The concept of “time” has been converted into enormous revenue for lawyers. The profession has adopted elaborate systems where clients are billed for a lawyer’s time in six-minute increments. The paralegal profession is another brainchild of the fraternity, created as an additional tracking and revenue center. High powered firms have departmentalized their services into separate profit centers for probate and trusts, trial, commercial, and so forth.
The once-honorable profession of law now fully functions as a bottom-line business, driven by greed and the pursuit of power and wealth, even shaping the laws of the United States outside the elected Congress and state legislatures.
Today the skill and gamesmanship of lawyers, not the truth, often determine the outcome of a case. And we lawyers love it. All the tools are there to obscure and confound. The system’s process of discovery and the exclusionary rule often work to keep vital information off-limits to jurors and make cases so convoluted and complex that only lawyers and judges understand them.
The net effect has been to increase our need for lawyers, create more work for them, clog the courts and ensure that most cases never go to trial and are, instead, plea-bargained and compromised. All the while the clock is ticking, and the monster is being fed.
The sullying of American law has resulted in a fountain of money for law professionals while the common people, who are increasingly affected by lawyer-driven changes and an expensive, self-serving bureaucracy, are left confused and ill-served. Today, it is estimated that 70 percent of low-to-middle-income citizens can no longer afford the cost of justice in America. What would our Founding Fathers think?
This devolution of lawmaking by the judiciary has been subtle, taking place incrementally over decades. But today, it’s engrained in our legal system, and few even question it. But the result is clear. Individuals can no longer participate in the legal system.
It has become too complex and too expensive, all the while feeding our dependency on lawyers. By complicating the law, lawyers have achieved the ultimate job security. Gone are the days when American courts functioned to serve justice simply and swiftly. It is estimated that 95 million legal actions now pass through the courts annually, and the time and expense for a plaintiff or defendant in our legal system can be absolutely overwhelming.
Surely it’s time to question what has happened to our justice system and to wonder if it is possible to return to a system that truly does protect us from wrongs.
A lawyer from Tuscon, Arizona, John Fitzgerald Molloy (b. 1917) was elected to the Superior Court bench where he served for seven years as both a juvenile court and trial bench judge. He subsequently was elected to the Court of Appeals where he authored over 300 appellate opinions, including the final Miranda decision for the Arizona Supreme Court. During that period, he also served as president of the Arizona Judge’s Association. After 12 years, Molloy returned to private practice to become president of the largest law firm in southern Arizona. His book has received widespread praise for its candor and disquieting truths. (Photo courtesy of Paragon House)
Copyright 2004, Paragon House
From an Internet released preview of the book by John Fitzgerald Molloy, The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion, Paragon House, St. Paul, Minnesota, 2004. Reprinted in accordance with the “fair use” provision of Title 17 U.S.C. § 107 for a non-profit educational purpose.