Bailey challenges Supreme Court with serious due process deprivations in response to recommended suspension of law license/PCRLN history of coverage

The initial coverage on this site centered on the disciplinary proceedings filed against civil rights lawyer Don Bailey in early 2011.  From the start, we have contended that the Bailey disciplinary proceedings would show the need for court reform through the difficulties that American citizens were having in bringing their claims for the violations of their individual constitutional rights in the courts.  This is what has been shown, and the need for reform remains clear.

On May 1, 2013, the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board, as we predicted, recommended that Don Bailey be suspended from the practice of law for 5 years for doing nothing other than criticizing judges for not being fair, and, on June 7, 2013, Don Bailey filed a response demonstrating clearly both 1) that he was right in so-criticizing, and 2) that, as we have covered at length here, the proceedings against him, because they had a bogus origin and were designed to serve an illicit agenda, were bereft of the most basic due process protections.

We asked, from the beginning on this site, that readers take the time to digest and understand the issues that we have been discussing, and the very important themes that they reveal in the larger context of the access to the courts and justice that individuals in this country have when seeking vindication for the violation of their individual constitutional rights.  Please take the time to read and study both the Recommendation of the Disciplinary Board, and the Bailey Response to Board Recommendation.  The matter now will be finally decided by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, who still have a chance to see that true justice, i.e., constitutional due process, can be done in this case.

As to the general themes set forth in this site, there have been tens of thousands of words written in the articles on this site that address many of the general themes, in the context of the Bailey disciplinary proceedings, and the varying topics addressed throughout.  We had nearly 11,000 views in the month of May, and are on track to eclipse that number for June, and appreciate the reception our honest and coverage of these matters is receiving.  At this time, we refer our readers back through the history of some of the postings specific to the Don Bailey disciplinary proceedings, and the themes they reveal, and ask our newer viewers to familiarize yourself with all of these matters, and the many other topics reported on on this site.

In Civil rights lawyer Don Bailey under attack and he and clients sue federal judges for misbehavior, the Bailey disciplinary proceedings were introduced, upon the commencement of the “hearings” in August, 2011.  We pointed out how these proceedings had their origins over two decades ago in the political career of Don Bailey and how the forces he opposed as an  honest public servant have followed him into his service as an honest civil rights lawyer.  We further pointed out, nearly two years ago, the due process shortcomings that have stated with these proceeding, as clearly aticulated in the June 6, 2013 Bailey response.

In Don Bailey’s opening statement in defense of lawyers and your civil rights, we posted the words of Don in his opening statement that clearly articulated the themes that we have continued to cover.

In The lesson of the Bailey disciplinary hearings (phase one) – reform is needed, we commented on the first two days of the Bailey disciplinary hearings, and how the matters that had been revealed, as discussed, showed the genuine need for reform for the lawyer disciplinary system.

In The Bailey Docket – pleadings and filings in the Bailey disciplinary hearing, we linked in all of the filings from the proceedings so the reader could study these filings on their own, and reach their own judgments about the issues being addressed in the articles on this site.  The erosion of Constitutional rights on a mass scale is done incrementally in individual cases, and, while we appreciate the effort it take to understand these things, and the distraction it is from the daily responsibilities we all have, there is just no way, other than studying thee things for yourselves, that they can be understood.  No single tweet or link can capture all that needs to be said abut these critically important issues.

In UPDATE: Federal Judge recuses herself from civil rights case of Don Bailey and clients/State disciplinary authorities resist release of hearing tapes/Efforts underway to initiate investigations, we referenced the status of the federal court’s response to the ongoing disciplinary proceedings, the continuing due process administrative violations to which Don Bailey was being subjected, and the nature of the further efforts that were needed to correct these deficincies.

In The struggle behind the civil rights struggle, we pointed out the burdens and difficulties involved in representing injured individual American citizens in general in the courts of the United States, and how those burden are magnified in a climate of hostility toward civil rights cases in general, and how the ongoing disciplinary proceedings were a further impediment to the innocent individual citizens who were being represented by Don Bailey.

In Bailey clients demand cases be reopened/Hearing transcripts now available, we covered the efforts that Don Bailey’s clients were undertaking to seek to remedy the additional harms to them that were being caused by the agenda to “get” him, and how the disciplinary proceedings revealed to them that they were being further victimized and having their access to the courts cut off because of who their attorney is.

In The role of partisan politics in PCRLN – the Bailey “shit storm”, we introduced how the $1.5 million jury verdict in favor of two Attorney General narcotics agents represented by Don Bailey, against then Attorney General Mike Fisher and others was taken away, and the suspicious court and political connections that were behind it, and the relation of that case to the disciplinary proceedings.

In Bailey motion demands that Pennsylvania Supreme Court dismiss disciplinary action against him, we discussed an additional filing that Bailey made, in December, 2011, seking to have the Supreme Court take action to dismiss the disciplinary proceedings baed upon the clear due process violations that had already been revealed as of that point.

In PCRLN call goes out to Senators Casey and Toomey, we introduced our political efforts, which are continuing, to take the matters directly to our United States Senators to seek formal political reform for the issues being revealed through the disciplinary proceedings.

In The politics of personal destruction – anatomy of the judicial lynching of Don Bailey – Caputo piles on, we discussed the true power of the judicial pen and the black robe in creating impressions and dictating the course of public opinion, and how their misuse was behind every negative pubic impression created about Don Bailey.

In Supreme Courts act in Silent Synchrony – Bailey disciplinary motions Secretly denied – once again no due process!, we pointed out how the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was failing to take action during the course of the proceedings on the clear record of due process violations to intervene and end them.  Of course, the Supreme Court still has the final say in these proceedings, and the record has been even further developed, and the chance for the Supreme Court to make a statement in favor of due process and real justice remains.

In “I thought my case just fell between the cracks” – Bailey client motions to open updates, etc., we discussed the notion of how difficult it is for people to understand the shortcomings in the judicial process unless and until they experience it for themselves, and how devoted study and understanding by many numbers of people was critical if these issues were ever gong to be properly addressed, and needed reforms instituted, so that having your rights violated is not the only way to understand these things.

In Bailey responds (loudly and clearly) to state and federal disciplinary actions – proves state and federal complicity – and lack of basis to any charge of misconduct, we linked in a 75 page response that Don Bailey filed over a year ago, before any findings were ever made by the Disciplinary Board.  Review of this clear and substantial document and comparison to the May 1, 2013 recommendation by the Disciplinary Board reveals that either it was not even read, or that it was completely disregarded.  Don Bailey, and all of his many past, current, and future clients are entitled to more due process than having the efforts he is making to defend himself and protect his license, and their access to courts completely disregarded.  There is a supreme arrogance of power among and by lawyers to assume that they can act in such an arbitrary and capricious fashion, and to have any chance of maintaining some semblance of public integrity.

In NEWS RELEASE: Andy Ostrowski and PCRLN file federal action based upon violations by courts and authorities in Bailey disciplinary proceedings, we highlighted the experience of this process through the experience of Andy Ostrowski, and how he was specifically mistreated by the disciplinary authorities in connection with the Bailey disciplinary proceedings.  This lawsuit also called into question the constitutionality of Article 5, Section 10(c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and how that provision lends itself to the due process abuses that have pervaded the Bailey disciplinary proceedings, as covered on this site.

There are many more articles in a variety of contexts addressing these and other themes that are inimical to the equal access to justice for all, as was the stated principle and purpose of this site from its inception in February, 2011, as set forth on our Welcome page.  We will continue to bring you coverage of these and more civil rights issues as we continue to expand our reach and coverage in our state and country.

Thank you.

7 thoughts on “Bailey challenges Supreme Court with serious due process deprivations in response to recommended suspension of law license/PCRLN history of coverage”

  1. This is like Al Capone going down for tax evasion. Don Bailey, who attempts in his own ineffectual way to be a bully, did not simply allege that judges were unfair; he outright accused them of criminal conduct. You, of course, see nothing wrong with that, but that is the fundamental problem that separates you and Don from the rest of the bar. And it is why neither of you will be permitted to practice law.

    Don has made a career of filing lawsuits that lack factual and legal support and then crying corruption when those cases get dismissed. He has an egocentric personality disorder and a persecution complex. And, Andy, your pathological devotion to him is just sad.

    1. Larry, I have never accused any judge of criminal misconduct. I will point out that Judge Christopher Connor appears to have lied under oath at my disciplinary hearings however. And that has been testified to under oath by others. To the contrary from what you may have read in the Patriot News incidentally, I have never accused any judge anywhere at any time of being part of a cult. That was an intentional smear initiated by attorney Fulton of the ODC. He did that using documents that had been submitted by the daughter of an administrative law judge who was supposedly close to Judge Jones something Judge Jones incidentally denied. Those documents were submitted to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals by an individual proceeding pro se and not by me. Contrary to your generalized criticism of me, it is totally false and incorrect to indicate in any way that I have “filed lawsuits that lack factual and legal support and then cried corruption”. On the other hand I had dozens of cases filed on behalf of Pennsylvania State police officers alleging serious problems of public corruption that were dismissed. Generally by the same small group judges. But then I have had virtually millions of dollars in jury verdicts dismissed by recurring panels at the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals that were clearly void of legal and factual validity. Remember now Larry, these were jury verdicts. None of these cases were dismissed by federal judges (like Kane , Jones, and Connor) that were ever called frivoulous. I have never filed a factually vacuous case. If you’re going to follow the party line so to speak, please check your facts and please do your homework. You should identify yourself, and try to do something which demonstrates at least a semblance of knowledge of federal case litigation (like the effects of denying discovery and multiplying the requirement to file amended claims time and time again coupled with the abuse of the”stay ‘ to accomplish a plan to prevent the disclosure of public corruption. Yes I admit that I believe that our federal court system, particularly in the middle district and at the Third Circuit Court of Appeals level seriou, that judges are misbehaving and incidentally th him him and sly deficient. All I was disciplined for was saying that some “judges were misbehaving”. Your State Sen. Jeffrey Picola stole hundreds of thousands of dollars of his clients’ money and was able to enjoy a refusal by local and state prosecutors to punish him while he was given a private reprimand and is practicing law. Come on Doc, let’s not kill the messengers bacause you dislike the message they carry. Just because I had the courage to speak up you should not lack the courage to comment fairly and honestly. You have not done so whoever you are. As to my being the equivalent, to use the common vernacular, of a nut-case, that may be true, but like the saying goes us paranoid schizophrenic’s aren’t always wrong.

  2. The premise of everything being said in the article and Don’s response to the recommended suspension is that the Supreme Court Disciplinary Board is doing exactly what you have done here in this comment – make an ad hominem attack through a generalized comment that purports to be said with some measure of authority behind it, but has no substance whatsoever to back it up, and just expect people to believe it. It’s a very irresponsible way for an alleged esteemed “member of the bar” to act, but that is nothing new. In other words, you are doing exactly what you have accused Don Bailey of doing.

    18 U.S.C. Section 241 provides as follows:
    If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
    If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
    They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

    18 U.S.C. Section 242 provides as follows:
    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

  3. Gee Larry, you must be right. To suggest our judges are guilty of committing crimes is off the charts. How dare anyone, particularly members of the bar, speak out about corruption when we all know there is no such thing.

    Our judges travel through their careers not even tempted to hide, steal, cheat, fix, bribe, take bribes, etc. The boys from Luzerne, the traffic court judges in philly, Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice Seamus P. McCaffery and his wife, they couldn’t do wrong. All those complicit with them never did anything wrong. Good stuff Larry

  4. Hey Larry why don’t you reveal your real name, of course not why would you do such a thing because your probably one of those “lawyers” of the bar that are “special” and get special treatement. Your like the rest of the bar a coward piece of shit!

    1. Any one who hides behind initials but wants to throw shit is now getting hit because they threw it right in the fan! The fan of Justice! Blowing truth all over the internet as our only source for truthful reporting! The enemies of the people are easily identified- as the thieves, liars, and crooks in the ‘good ol’ boys’ club- destroying this once great nation from within ever since our inception! Recovery through unity, united WE Stand! These clowns and crooks are not taking MY Country down, not on OUR watch! Stand tall, fellow comrades! The Good guys win the war!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.