An intricate and difficult problem; is but one definition of the word conundrum. Please do not misinterpret the title above, for I believe in my task, but this posting will acknowledge and address those that may view me as the problem.
I am only a problem, if and when those that subscribe to the "good ole boy's and girl's" mentality are asked their opinions or broach the subject of this blog or civil actions 08-cv-02407 and 11-cv-06304.
Hence, conflict may have been the more appropriate word to use in the title, but again, I don't see that being the case from a moral standpoint. What I see, as an outsider looking into our judicial system, is a situation wherein "dirt" rules. How much "dirt" one possess over his or her opponent, how many times one knows of a judges violations of the rules appear to control which side wins or looses a case.
Moreover the above appears to substantiate the fact that nowadays most cases are settled. Why? Well as I see it, a settlement allows for the lawyers and judges to maintain their dirt on one another, and no dirty laundry has to washed on the record. I've have termed this "the sweeping under a judicial rug." [More on that later]
What I really wanted to discuss with you is my own conundrum. To make injustice known, I need the support of all those that believe that there has been one in the first place. Who would be in the best position to say if injustice has reared its ugly head? Yes, those studied in the law. Law students, lawyers, law professors, and any judicial officers with legal training. BUT…
Think about it, if you were in law school right now, would you put your legal career on the line by siding with a pro se litigants campaign to expose judicial misconduct, denial of equal protection of the laws and denial of meaningful access to the court's. Of course not unless your goal was to become a legal malpractice attorney.
Think once more, this time you're an attorney, you've done your time in law school, you've passed the bar, and you are actually practicing law. Again, unless you’re a legal malpractice attorney looking to put a notch on your belt you won't side with the exposure of judicial misconduct. There's no pay check coming to you if the unethical judges, lawyers and other judicial officers are exposed. Most importantly you can't risk supporting a pro se litigant that you are more that likely to hold a prejudice against, and even if he appears to have a valid issue there is a chance that he has missed something, so why stick your neck out, right?
I think we all understand where I'm coming from right now. I've put this issue off for quite some time now. I must admit that I feared making enemies of those in the best position to support me. But due to the huge support I have received from the legal community I will move forward. I understand that there are many out there in the legal profession that take interest, and know what I set forth is true.
Let me thank them for their support, and further acknowledge to them that I will respect their wish to remain anonymous. I'm placed in the same conundrum as Frederick Douglass, wherein he could not name those that aided him in learning to read. He feared that retaliation would befall them. Yet as the writer of the preface of his book stated: "Mr. Douglass has frankly disclosed the place of his birth, the names of those who claimed ownership in his body and soul, and the names also of those who committed the crimes which he has alleged against them. His statements therefore, may easily be disproved, if they are untrue." [See page 12 of Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an AmericanSlave, by Frederick Douglass]
The same holds true for any averments I have made, and as we can see no one has stepped up to disprove me, nor has any one taken up my offers that I be corrected upon the finding of a false allegation or the passing on of misinformation. I ask the same herein, if the above is not true, the comment box below is open to all.
Most importantly I want everyone to see that the above is why we are still waiting for a decision from Judge Noel L. Hillman, as to his recusal. Think, for one last time, this time you are a United States District Judge, do you want to admit that a man you claimed and or attempted to portray as "lacking personal knowledge," has caused you to admit that you have violated the law by presiding over a case that could further expose you’re a gratia favors, violations of the federal rules of civil procedure, attempted indoctrination of a newly appointed African-American female Magistrate Judge, failure to sanction clear violations of FRCVP 11, failure to consider complaints in their entirety, willfully ignorance of exhibits attached to complaints, and plainly shown that your do not uphold the Constitution of the United States of America?
Houston, we do have a problem but it's not with the messenger.
Thank you, one and all please continue to tell a friend or two.
The Casino Gaming Oracle!
There's more...to be continued...