PLEASE NOTE: This blog is a bigotry free zone open to all persons, regardless of age, race, religion, color, national origin, sex, political affiliations, marital status, physical or mental disability, age, or sexual orientation. Further, this blog is open to the broad variety of opinions out there and will not delete any comments based upon point of view. However, comments will be deleted if they are worded in an abusive manner and show disrespect for the intellectual process.
Saturday, January 21, 2017
Wednesday, January 18, 2017
MICHAEL NOWACKI DECRIES THE WIDESPREAD PERJURY PRACTICED BY JUDGES AND JUDICIARY COMMITTEE MEMBERS DURING THE REAPPOINTMENT HEARINGS!
Today, your suggestion and that of Rep. Rebimbas will be challenged through a media strategy to indicate that the Chairs have engaged, personally, in aiding and abetting false testimony to be delivered in your self described "rigorous" review of those re-nominated for judicial reappointments.
I have confirmed by performing due diligence on the Chairs that the six page form of the Judicial Selection Commission have never been secured and distributed to the membership of the entire Judiciary Committee.
While we would agree that it would be important to redact telephone numbers and addresses for judges to ensure you, as attorneys, do not abuse your position to talk to judges on matters under current litigation including appeal.
There is a legitimate and well grounded concern about a far too "cozy" relationship between the Chairs of the Judiciary Committee and ranking members who are attorneys.
We noted the Chief Justice, in the offices of the Judiciary Committee where the Chairs have an office, meeting prior to the start of the re-confirmation process which began on January 11, 2017.
Do you really believe that members of the United States Congress meet to discuss cases which are controversial decisions?
It may be time for the citizens of this State to initiate a change in the State Constitution to change the Connecticut judiciary to an elected---not an appointment position inasmuch as lawyers, as legislators, have consistently voted favorably on all judicial re-appointments.
Your refusal and failure to provide for public inspection copies of the Judicial Selection Commission forms sworn as "truthful" and not distributing that redacted document to the members of your OWN committee raises serious issues of your self-proclaimed "due dilligence" today.
The decision of the Chairs to limit public posting of transcripts to refute testimony of judges is another example of creating a system where "perjured" testimony is not only tolerated but condoned by the chairs who are definitely more interested in coddling judges than "professional skepticism" which is the hallmark of many professions.
The Judicial Review Council needs to be revised so that all complaints, dismissed or not, are a matter of public record.
The comments on "sealing cases" by Judge Buzzuto for judges who go through a divorce is inconsistent with open disclosure of records to ensure that "addresses are redacted" but the decisions an open public record---just as you make our decisions a matter of an "open public record" which is used to humiliate the citizens while protecting the privacy rights of public officials.
Recent surveys done on the judiciary ranks Connecticut as one of the least transparent of any state in the country.
The fact that the judiciary cut $60 million from its budget because it was bloated without services being decreased should be a clear sign that the legislators, in general, don't have the same "access issues" to the courts that the general public has to endure.
The fact that Rep. Rebimbas refused to disclose on her "stump speech" on Judge Adelman that she received appointments by Judge Adelman smacks of an undisclosed conflict of interest.
As you know, the lack of disclosure of the answers to the 32 questions by your Committee Chairs is a clear sign that what you don't know can hurt the citizens you claim to serve.
There will be letters sent to those who you serve who will be randomly selected off the voter roles to expose the failure of the Chairs to have properly investigated allegations of misconduct reported to you by "railroading" controversial candidates within a week of the controversy involving allegations of perjury to be investigated by a select subcommittee which is balanced with lawyers and non-lawyers to review transcripts which the Chairs refuse to post and share with the colleagues on the committee as "equals".
The lack of "professional skepticism" by lawyers serving as legislators is demonstrated by your consistent voting and "unchallenged" public comments by Rep. Tong and Rep. Rembimas.
The Chairs of the Judiciary Committee asked no tough questions about the "Hightower" matter raised by Rep. Tong---who never even asked a question about it to Judge Adelman today.
There is only ONE representative of the people on your committee who asks tough questions and that is Minnie Gonzalez.
I watched all but one interview conducted by your committee and and I am one of five individuals who will have filed by complaints with the Chief State Attorney on five judges who meet the standard of probable cause for arrest for perjury defined in C.G.S. 53a-156 (a).
If the Chief State Attorney Office had a grand jury system in place, then judges would be far less likely to deliver material and false testimony and in written statements provided to the Judicial Selection Commission is provided with a General Release Form.
Until the Chairs take corrective actions to rebuild the trust that only you can restore, the public will exercise our rights to expose "corrupt practices" which the Chairs seem to support.
Have any of you ever sat in a short calendar in family court and watched the meter running?
Have any of you visited a courthouse in Virginia where a help desk directs clients to "calendered" matters in which Connecticut has to run a "pilot program".
The "cattle calls in family courts" is the single, most inefficient way to conduct the public's access to justice.
Despite Rep. Tong's statements that you take these comments seriously, all we need to do is review the voting records of the 19 lawyers on the judiciary committee (if we include one member who had a direct relative on the Supreme Court) and your attempts to deliver Judge Fuger's head on a platter today to show how "tough you are".
At no point in time, since Judge Frazzini sent a "letter of retraction" after I filed a criminal complaint alleging perjury to the Chief's State Attorney's Office has any judge been subject to a delayed vote until a full investigation of allegations of perjury occurs.
There is a section of the Code of Judicial Conduct which prohibits a Judge from making a knowingly false statement to a legislative committee.
Until there is either legislative reforms to clean up this system of inefficiencies in due process and remove judges from sitting on administrative committee meetings which take them away from their duties "in court", we will continue to challenge publicly and privately, whether you approve or not, our "professional skepticism" that the lawyers in the legislature are engaging and abetting perjury by refusing to table the vote on any judge who is alleged to have committed perjury under oath.
We will be unrelenting because this "tyranny" creates through the empowerment of "judicial discretion" to rape and pillage the financial resources of parents via a reallocation of our lifetime savings to support your "system of racketeering" by having lawyers sitting in a courtroom for hours and then billing their clients for accomplishing nothing and being paid for it.
I would be happy to sit down with you to discuss with a group of litigants to show us the evidence of perjury---which are now on their way for review by the "probable cause" standards which apply to criminal arrests of those judges who made knowingly false material statements to a committee.
For Rep. Rebimbas to have made a claim that "she has some sort of access to transcripts" to the 3,850 pages of transcripts, is nothing less than balderdash.
We are tired of the "obstruction" by the Chairs to a proper review of evidence by limiting the posting of transcripts on the judiciary committee website.
In the movie "A Few Good Men", Jack Nicholson's line seems appropriate to close this email:
"You can't handle the truth."
January 18, 2017
January 18, 2017
You lied to the public today on CT-N when you said you have the ability to review public records on-line about a judge to evaluate the authenticity of testimony.
Transcripts of court proceedings are not readily available on line and your comments were disingenuous.
You and your colleagues as lawyers have ZERO credibility in the fawning which I am watching on CT-N today regarding judges re-confirmation hearings today in the House.
When my house sells in Connecticut, I may need to reside somewhere for two years and will expose you by taking residence in your district to reveal your conflicts of interest in having been appointed by Judge Bozzuto as a GAL when she was first appointed to the bench.
We will continue to expose you and the other lawyers on the judiciary who don't allow transcripts to be shared on line on the judiciary website to refute the sworn testimony of judges at public hearings.
I have a bag of marshmellows here in my home for a reason today---to toss them at the screen when legislators like Labriola and you stand up and lie to protect judges who deliver knowingly false testimony under oath.
There is a reason why we call Connecticut--Corrupticut--to honor your personal enduring legacy which is causing people to leave the State---30,000 of them last year.
In your entire time of voting on judicial confirmations which I have observed for the last sic years, I am still waiting for you to oppose an re-nomination---even on Judge Parker.
We have no respect for you and your legal colleagues on the judiciary committee who you allow to perjure themselves under oath without consequence.
It is time for citizens to expose you for your undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Look for my LTE in your weekly newspaper exposing your mis-statements about "your access" to public records to review "difficult cases".
New Canaan, CT
To the Members of the General Assembly:
By the time you consider the Re-Appointment Votes on Judges of the Superior Court, you should be aware that there have been or will be five criminal complaints filed with the Chief State Attorney's Office that certain judges on January 11 and January 13, delivered sworn testimony which constitutes grounds for "material mis-statements" of "facts" and/or "knowing or willful" sworn testimony in documents provided to the Judicial Selection Commission.
The lack of the willingness of the Chairs of the Judiciary Committee to re-consider an "arbitrary rule" limiting public testimony to five pages, has resulted in an "erosion" in the public confidence in the elected members of the General Assembly to be provided to documents refuting sworn testimony via this "five page rule".
The Chairs of the Judiciary Committee have been unresponsive to emails requesting a "waiver" be issued to allow the public the opportunity to post documents to refute "materially false and misleading" sworn testimony and documents notarized which are required to be submitted to the Judicial Selection Commission.
The Judicial Selection Commission, as noted in the six page form attached to this email, has never provided access to the answers to all 32 questions---even to the members of the Judiciary Committee of this legislature.
This failure to have "full disclosure" of the answers to the Judicial Selection Commission documents for review by the members of the Judiciary Committee erodes the confidence of the public trust placed in the hands of legislators who will be voting today.
We urge you to consider "abstaining" or "voting no" consistent with your "due diligence" responsibilities before casting a vote confirming a candidate today.
Monday, January 16, 2017
LINDA WIEGAND, VICTIM OR PERPETRATOR, SET THE STAGE FOR CUSTODY SWITCHING SCHEMES THAT NOW STRIP MOTHERS OF ALL PARENTAL RIGHTS IN FAMILY COURTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT!
The Linda Wiegand Case: Part I
So What Happened? The Linda Wiegand Case: Part II
Linda Wiegand Case: Part III He Said
Linda Wiegand: Part IV She Said
Linda Wiegand, Part V: The Judge Said
Linda Wiegand, Part VI: Rambo Said
Part VII: Linda Wiegand, A Pedophile Conspiracy
Part VIII: Linda Wiegand, Conclusion
Gifts of Love and a Surprising Twist
Clayton R. Douglas of "The Free American" Comments on the Linda Wiegand Case
Charges Dropped Against Linda Wiegand
Monday, January 9, 2017
HEARING THIS WEDNESDAY,
JANUARY 11, 2017 AT THE LOB AT 9:00AM
TO CONSIDER THE REAPPOINTMENT OF
JUDGE GERARD ADELMAN!
Please Attend the Hearing and
JANUARY 11, 2017 AT THE LOB AT 9:00AM
TO CONSIDER THE REAPPOINTMENT OF
JUDGE GERARD ADELMAN!
Please Attend the Hearing and
to show your support!
It Is Not OK!
Tell the Judiciary Committee:
"Do Not Reappoint Connecticut Judge Gerard Adelman!"
Please email and call the co-chairs of the 2017 Connecticut Judiciary Committee to tell them "It is Not OK" to reappoint family court judge - Gerard Adelman - who dismisses evidence of domestic violence and punishes protective mothers by retaliating and taking custody of their children away! There are 10 cases where mother's lost custody in his courtroom...It is Not OK!
2017 Connecticut Judiciary Committee
Public Hearing is Wednesday January 11 at 10 a.m. in Hartford, LOB Building
WEAR RED TO THE HEARING!
CT Public Hearing Agenda for Judicial Reappointment
as a Trial Referee Judge. His previous 8 year tenure as a family court judge has torn families apart, bankrupted litigants and allowed and condoned the continued abuse - litigation abuse - of domestic violence victims and dismissal of their traumatic DV experiences from his bench.
“I have been moved by the individual stories of the families and the harm they have suffered at the hands of the courts. The stories of greed and miscarriages of justice, many that have gravely harmed children and parents, are heartbreaking.”
CT Announces Investigation of Corrupt Courts
to educate them about how they can protect children in family court from harm by VOTING NO on the reappointment of Gerard Adelman as a Trial Referee Judge.
Co-Chair Paul Doyle
Legislative Aide: David Seifel, David.email@example.com
860-240-0475 or Toll-free: 1-800-842-1420
Co-Chair William Tong William.Tong@cga.ct.gov
(860) 240-8585 | 1-800-842-8267
Co-Chair John Kissel
Legislative Aide: Kate McAvoy
Phone: (800) 842-1421 firstname.lastname@example.org
Mae Flexor Kerensa.Konesni@cga.ct.gov
Legislative Aide: Andrew Elash
860-240-8634, or Toll-free: 1-800-842-1420
Senator Chris Murphy
Senator Richard Blumenthal
Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro
Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty
OUR FIRST STAND: SAVE HEALTH CARE
A Rally In Support of the Affordable Care Act
Sunday January 15, 2017
Connecticut State Capitol
Bushnell Park side
210 Capitol Avenue Hartford, CT