All posts by admin

Roger Snyder Lancaster County politics case

Roger Snyder is a 3-time elected Republican West Donegal Township Commissioner in rural western Lancaster County.  In 2007, Roger became the target of a raw political power grab from some old time local gadflies and political operatives – a chief of police and some of his cohorts – in the style of Tamany Hall meets Mayberry.  This “clan” was able to orchestrate a complaint to the state ethics commission on the eve of the 2007 elections, and arranged for the release of the charge publicly so it could be used in campaign materials, in the hope of unseating Roger.  Roger, however, did win the election, and was completely vindicated after a hearing before the state ethics commission of all the bogus charges against him.  Roger sued the local politicos who orchestrated the plan along with officials with the ethics commission who became complicit with them, and his case remains pending.

Roger’s case tells a parallel story related to the treatment of his attorneys in this case, and he was a witness at the Bailey hearing.  Judge Kane was originally assigned to the case, and the case was reassigned to Judge Lawrence Stengel, of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and a former Lancaster County Common Pleas Judge, who has been specially assigned to several cases of Mr. Bailey, working, for the time-being, through Magistrate Judge Carlson.  The documents that follow, however, reveal that ultimately, Roger and his attorneys have placed a substantial case before the court, and that he is entitled to have his day before a jury.  The case, and many cases like this, can have lasting political and cultural ramifications on the way political business is done in the County, and point up the power of the federal courts to establish these standards.

Amended Complaint HBG2

Provides the legal framework for Roger’s case.

Snyder Declaration

Detailed and easily readable comprehensive statement of facts in Roger’s case.

The Bailey Docket – pleadings and filings in the Bailey disciplinary hearing

There is no better way for each of us to participate in seeking a public solution to the problems we have described in other posts, as revealed through the analysis of the Don Bailey disciplinary process, than to understand the jurisdiction of the courts, and exactly how they do business in cases such as these.  The Don Bailey situation is quite unique, as it involves a clear clash between two wholly separate “jurisdictions”, state and federal, implicating some very important principles at the heart of our system of government.  We hope eventually to provide you with all the detail you will need on these concepts of what is known as “federalism”, but for now we commend you to The Federalist Papers, a series of essays published in 1787 under the name Publius (written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay), explaining the advantages of the U.S. Constitution.

Briefly, as it relates to this case, there has been a clear trend in civil rights cases to invoke the Eleventh Amendment to maintain rigid separation between the jurisdiction of the federal courts and actions involving the affairs of state government, and some of the judges involved in the Bailey matter have used the Eleventh Amendment, properly to be sure in cases, to leave litigants without a remedy in federal court.  More recent activist conservative courts, such as the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore, have gravely blurred those lines, and the Don Bailey situation reveals the evils to be avoided.  In this case, the state courts and the federal courts have deliberately crossed all jurisdictional lines, and have combined their efforts to cutoff civil rights cases that involve public corruption.

The Bailey Docket:

The first document is what is known as a petition to invoke the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s extraordinary or “King’s Bench” jurisdiction.  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is among the most powerful courts in the country, and King’s Bench jurisdiction derives, as its name implies, from the extensive powers of the courts at English common law, and essentially allows the Court to take jurisdiction of any matter pending in any of the courts of the state.  In this case it was requested because of the imminent public importance of issues of judicial corruption in light of the “kids for cash” scandal that led to former Luzerne County Judge Ciavarella being sentenced to 28 years in prison for corruption on the second day of the Bailey hearings.  The petition specifically raises issues of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct, and wholesale violations of the rights of Mr. Bailey and his clients.  It was denied less than 24 hours from its filing.  Please feel free to read it and decide if you think it should have been denied so quickly.

Kings Bench

The next document is the Complaint for Discipline that was actually filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (Killion and Fulton) initiating this public proceeding.  Please note that among the accusations being made against Mr. Bailey is that he wrote and submitted a document to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of his client Thom Lewis (since when is that a crime?) that Mr. Bailey did not even write, yet they refuse to withdraw this claim knowing it to be false.  The rest of the allegations speak for themselves, and the proof offered at the hearing will fill in the details.

Bailey Discipline Complaint

The discipline answer is Mr. Bailey’s response to the complaint, corresponding to each numbered paragraph.  It speaks for itself.

Bailey Discipline Answer


Bailey has filed a Complaint in federal court, which was filed in an effort to have the federal court stop the imminent denial of the rights of Bailey and his clients by going into the pending hearing without having any right to present the evidence that needed to be presented.  The Complaint names Bailey and 25 “John/Jane Doe” plaintiffs, his clients, and there will likely be updates to these pleadings sometime in the not-too-distant future.

Federal Complaint

The following document is the motion for injunctive relief filed by Bailey to stop the hearings.  It was denied by a Judge of the Western District of Pennsylvania, Nora Barry Fisher, who just last year was specially assigned to the Middle District (where Conner, Kane, Jones, and Carlson are located) to deal with a case against other Middle District Judges.  It was dismissed.

Motion for TRO

Again, we expect to have transcripts of the proceedings in the near future.

Don Bailey’s opening statement in defense of lawyers and your civil rights

Members of Judicial-Corruption.net, PennsylvaniaCivilRightsLawNetwork.com, and TrueDemocracyParty.net, as well as members of the Berks County Patriot Board, and dozens of loyal clients of Don Bailey, got together and united as we were all in the courtroom for the hearing of Don Bailey this morning in Harrisburg, PA for what really is, or could be, one of the most important hearings to take place in the history of our country 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.  Cali was asked by Bailey to recuse himself from the process, but Cali refused, and has never denied being under investigation at the present time.  Marty Carlson, the federal magistrate judge appointed to get Bailey, was U.S. Attorney early on in the kids for cash scandal, and has been criticized for turning a blind eye to that judicial corruption early on before it got out of control.  Chances are that Carlson’s, Killions, and Cali’s paths have crossed before.  What is Cali’s true role in the kids for cash investigations?  We demand to know.  Is he “giving” them Bailey in exchange for favorable criminal treatment? Did Carlson ‘s, Killions, and Cali’s paths cross 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 charged for saying that judges met to discuss how to get him, and that is exactly what the testimony was.  Phone calls and meetings between federal judges about Don Bailey.  Judge Conner was visibly nervous and had the “i don’t recalls” typically 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 – impeachment!

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 is the preservation of our civil rights, and our ability to enjoy due process rights and equal protection, and every other basic constitutional right that we have known all our lives, that must stand up 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:

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.

 

Harrisburg federal courthouse issues reach new lows as they go after PA attorney who is exposing public corruption

Please be advised that the disciplinary hearings for Attorney Don Bailey will proceed on August 11 and 12, 2011, beginning at 9 a.m. in the Judicial Center on Commonwealth Avenue, Harrisburg Pennsylvania.   We are asking as many of you that can to please show up for those hearings.  Furthermore, Don is in the process of filing a federal civil rights lawsuit where he and at least 20 of his clients at this point are suing these federal judges and others related to the state and federal courts and disciplinary system.

At this point, it appears that there is a fix that is in the state disciplinary process, and we do not say that lightly.  Don’s most recent request for a continuance has been denied, and virtually all of the subpoenas that have been served to prove his allegations have been quashed – he is being completely deprived of all due process.  Our view of this is that they know that it is just Don against them, and even though Don is and has always been 100% blameless, as long as it is just Don, they can prevail and control the outcome and aftermath, because it’s all kept within the courts and its discipline system.

We believe the strength of everything here depends on people outside the system who have been hurt (Don’s clients and Attorney Ostrowski’s clients)  being involved actively in this effort.

The Unites States Senators for Pennsylvania, Toomey and Casey, are ultimately in control of this, and they know what is going on, and they must be made to know that this will become a political issue outside of the courts, and that they will have to answer for this.  They have already been specifically advised of all of this.  The evidence is increasingly clear that there is a corruption problem in the federal court here in Harrisburg, and until we can shift the balance of power, it is politically easier to sacrifice Don on the altar and to protect the individual judges.

We believe you are all aware of the impeachment sites for Judges Kane, Conner, and Jones, and/or have had your personal experiences with them and been harmed by them.  Again, it is much, much easier to get rid of Don than to admit and address a corruption problem in the courts, and public assistance and attention to this effort is critical.  Please do what you can, and show up on August 11 and 12.  We are attempting to have this organized as a protest outside the courthouse if we can get enough participants.  Regardless, any support you can provide would be helpful.

And for those who don’t know who Don Bailey is, it’s time to learn.  Don is one of our last true defenders of freedom and the Constitutional law that protects us from the abusive court system.  You can learn more about Don’s heroics at http://www.DonBaileyLaw.com and from WikiPedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_A._Bailey.

Snyder County prison inmate with information on unsolved murder case and drug trafficking involving prison officials was found dead, ruled a suicide, yet the autopsy and opinion of renowned pathologist Dr. Cryil H. Wecht suggest foul play, but Judge Jones throws out case

While incarcerated in the Snyder County Prison on April 17th, 2007, twenty-nine year-old Jeremy Wayne Dock was beaten by guards and/or others while in protective custody for “his own safety.”  Former Snyder County District Attorney Michael Sholley, current District Attorney Michael Piecuch, Coroner Bruce Hummel, Prison Board Solicitor Robert Cravitz, PSP Trooper Richard Blair and Dr. Barbara Bollinger (the county’s hired pathologist) insist he committed suicide by hanging himself with a bed sheet.  In our opinion (and based on the limited information they’ve given us access to); we strongly disagree with their consensus!

The previous summer, Jeremy was coerced by Snyder County Probation, Officer Kerry Davis into working as a confidential informant for Gary Heckman, an agent from the PA Attorney General’s Office. He was released from jail for the explicit purpose of making controlled drug purchases and did as they requested throughout the summer.  As summer ended Jeremy was expected to make buys from Jay, a heroin dealer in Allentown, which he refused to do because he feared retaliation.  Jeremy became unproductive for them, so he was again incarcerated at the Snyder County Prison on probation/ parole violations for a supposed ‘hot urinalysis’ test.

Jeremy’s girlfriend contacted Gary Heckman to ask for his help.  Jeremy was again pressured to help set up the heroin dealer in Allentown, which Gary told Jeremy would cut his impending state prison sentence in half.  Jeremy declined to provide any further assistance because he feared for his family’s safety.  It was then he was abandoned by his mentors, Kerry Davis and Gary Heckman.   After his re-incarceration in Sept. 2006, Jeremy’s “confidential informant” status was exposed by one who had the distinct responsibility of protecting his identity.

At the end of October 2006 the Snyder County District Attorney’s office alleges that a smuggling ring was operating within the Snyder County Prison involving outside persons.  An investigation was conducted by Enoch Powell, a detective from District Attorney Sholley’s office.  According to Jeremy’s letters, during interrogation on November 13th he gave Powell information on others involved in the smuggling.  He also wrote “he’s (Powell) already talked to people in here cause when they walk past or I go out in the hall they call me a snitch, plus… (another inmate) just told me today that one of the CO’s (Correction Officers) told him what I did; they (guards) are not supposed to be saying shit like that, so you and Gram need to call my lawyer John Reed about getting me transferred to Union County.”  Also present at the interrogation on Nov. 13th was Watch Commander Donald Campbell who witnessed Jeremy’s statement that implicated no less than a dozen people in the smuggling.

In a letter dated 11/15/06 Jeremy writes “I’m down here in f…… Protective Custody now” and “since I’m only PC (Protective Custody) I get a whole 2 hours of rec. instead of 1, Oh!!! The benefits of being a snitch you got to love it (not)!  Do you have any idea what it’s like to go out in the hall now when they escort me and don’t have any inmate movement they (guards) are basically telling the whole jail I’m a snitch, are they going to come home with me, and protect me and my family?”

As a result of the harassment; followed by a beating by guards, Jeremy made a written request, intended for Warden Ruth Rush, but that was intercepted by, and responded to by Watch Commander Donald Campbell in which Jeremy writes “I am writing you in regards to my housing status, how is it that I have to be housed down here, when I can be placed on G-Wing.  There have been child molesters that have been placed up there simply by Mr. Reade (the Deputy Warden) telling the wing that if anyone touches them they will be criminally charged.  I am willing to take that chance!  And if not I request that I be transferred to Union County in accordance with a violation of my 14th Amendment.  Thank you.  Jeremy W. Dock. ”  The response from WC Campbell reads “You know why you are locked up you will remain where you are located.”

In another letter dated 11/24/06 Jeremy said, “I’m in P.C. (Protective Custody) because of telling them what they wanted to know” and later “because there is supposedly so many people in this jail pissed off at me.”

On 11/27/06 Jeremy writes “I spoke with the Warden (Ruth Rush) and she is going to see about getting me out of the hole and housing me but I don’t know if that’s going to work, because supposedly there are so many people pissed at me and if they can’t figure out a way to house me then I’m probably going to Union County.”

Shortly thereafter, he was transferred to Union County Prison where he was in the general population for an uneventful 4 1/2 months.  During that time Jeremy told his girlfriend and/or his father on at least three separate occasions that if he was returned to Snyder County Prison he was “a dead man.”

Jeremy was returned to Snyder County Prison and again placed in so-called Protective Custody on April 13th, 2007.  This was six days prior to a scheduled appearance at a court  hearing where he planned to reveal information about guards and other inmates involved with the drug trafficking within the prison.  Jeremy had also acquired information about the unsolved murder of Donald E. Seebold III, which he planned to reveal to his newly appointed attorney.

Less than four days later he was dead!

                A cover-up followed Jeremy’s death that continues to this day, leaving his family and friends with many questions?  Why would Enoch Powell indiscriminately divulge the name of anyone cooperating with him in an investigation?  Why was Jeremy given up as a ‘snitch’ by the very people who had a distinct responsibility to protect his identity as a confidential informant?  Who made the decision to return Jeremy to the unsafe environment at the Snyder County Prison;and why?  Who made the decision to control the situation ‘in house’ and do extremely lengthy CPR at the jail as opposed to transporting Jeremy to a hospital, which was only minutes away?  Who decided they needed to re-create the crime scene (for photos by Trooper Blair) by hanging the sheet back on the cell door and placing Jeremy’s personal effects back in the cell after they had been moved immediately to the Deputy Wardens office an hour earlier?  Why was the evidence not properly secured?  By their own admission Deputy Warden Donald Reade and Watch Commander Donald Campbell handled scene evidence and placed items into storage later.  Why are there so many discrepancies and errors within PSP Trooper Rick Blair’s report and the incident reports given by those present during Jeremy’s death? Why did officials feel the need to mislead and lie to family members from that first day?  Is it not a clear conflict of interest for former District Attorney Sholley and current District Attorney Piecuch (both sitting members of the Snyder County Prison Board) to be responsible for investigating a murder at the county prison?  Why do law enforcement and medical professionals, not involved with this case, view this information in a different light than do those who should be held accountable for the decisions made that day?  Is there a connection between Jeremy’s death and that of Alan M. Willow, a friend and fellow inmate, who also met an untimely death, shortly after being released from the Snyder County Prison, just three short months after Jeremy’s death?  What really happened to Jeremy at the Snyder County Prison?

Judge John E. Jones threw this case out without even giving the Dock family the chance for discovery, and in typically abusive fashion.  Why?  Judge Jones is from Schuylkill County, and is believed to have political friends in Snyder County.  Was he protecting them by his decision?

Visit http://www.JeremysJustice.com to discover more about this story dedicated to the memory of Jeremy W. Dock and the hope that the truth will finally come to light.

PA Governor Tom Corbett and members of his executive team covered up millions of dollars of fraud, corruption, and gross mismanagement in the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) of Pennsylvania.

From CorbettGate.com:

Thomas Kimmett, Corbett’s former Senior Deputy Attorney General, sued Corbett and members of his executive team for covering up millions of dollars of fraud, corruption, and gross mismanagement in the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) of Pennsylvania.

Rather than ordering an investigation of the matter, Corbett and his team fired Thomas Kimmett, the lawsuit alleges.

In thousands of pages of court documents, Kimmett – a Republican attorney and an accountant – alleged that Corbett’s office paid Private Collection Agencies (PCA’s) millions of dollars they were not owed and gave favored debtors sweetheart deals.

In one example, a “favored” collection agency received a $300,000 commission to collect a debt that had been paid before the agency received the case, Kimmett alleges.

In another case, the OAG reduced a nearly $1 million debt to only $20,000 without proper authorizations or backup documentation.

More than 2,000 cases were never assigned to a collector, hundreds of accounts sat inactive with the collections agencies beyond their designated 6-month limits, and millions of dollars of accounts went without any collection activity for more than two years, Kimmett alleges in a July, 2010 filing of the Statement of Facts. Furthermore, collection agencies failed to pay interest on hundreds of thousands of dollars, as required by their contracts.

Many payments could never be located, he alleged.

Bigger than Bonusgate, details on the Corbettgate scandal are still emerging.

Federal Judge Yvette Kane lists approximately $80,000 in gifts of jewelry, an automobile, interest, trips and other gifts

Original Story from YardBird.com author Bill Keisling, follow this link if you wish to view all of the links and evidence Mr. Keisling has taken the time to compile.

Posted August 4, 2010 — A chief federal judge in Pennsylvania received more than $80,000 in gifts from three Pennsylvania attorneys from 2003 to 2008, according to financial disclosure statements Judge Yvette Kane filed with the court.

Yvette Kane is the chief judge for the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

In six successive Financial Disclosure Reports filed by Judge Kane from 2004 to 2009, covering the years 2003 to 2008, Kane lists approximately $80,000 in gifts of jewelry, an automobile, interest, trips and other gifts from “John R. McGinley, Jr, Esquire.”

A John R. McGinley, Jr., is a member of the board of directors, and Chair of the Executive Committee, of the law firm Eckert Seamans, of Pittsburgh, according to that firm’s website.

Kane was appointed to the federal bench in 1998. She became Chief Judge of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in 2006. The chief judge is charged with sweeping administrative and appointive duties.

Kane’s financial disclosure statement for 2003 lists $10,000 in “Jewelry, Personal Gifts,” from “John R. McGinley, Jr., Esquire.”

Kane’s report for 2004 lists $17,800 in “Jewelry, Personal Gifts,” and “Steeler’s Playoff Tickets” from McGinley.

Also in this report for 2004, Judge Kane lists a $750 gift of a “Guided Fishing Trip” from James E. Nevels.

In 2006, in addition to $3,000 in “Jewelry, Personal Gifts” from McGinley, Judge Kane listed her receipt of an additional gift of $1,200 in “Jewelry” from David W. Sweet.

Having initially listed $36,000 in gifts of “Jewelry, Personal Gifts” from McGinley in 2007, Judge Kane filed later an amended report with the federal court’s Disclosure Office.

“Please accept this letter as an amendment to my Annual Report dated May 14, 2008,” Judge Kane wrote. “Both amendments relate to the donor John R. McGinley. During 2007 Mr. McGinley and I exchanged many gifts. He has assisted me with a more detailed accounting of those gifts and has reminded me of two instances of travel that should be reported.

“Part IV addressing Reimbursements should be amended to add the following travel, with John R. McGinley listed as the Source:

“May 25-28 –Boston, Mass.-Attend wedding-Airline travel, Accommodations, Meals

“July 5-8–Wolfville, Nova Scotia-Vacation trip-Ferry travel, Accommodations, Meals

“Part V of my report should be amended to itemize gifts from John R. McGinley as follows:

“520 Household Items
514 Stationary cycle
800 Recreation (Golf, Fishing, Concert)
1216 Clothing
8895 Jewelry
9100 Payoff of auto loan
17,500 (interest in automobile)

“The last item involving the automobile is unresolved. Mr. McGinley and I purchased a vehicle together, but as I am now enjoying exclusive use and possession of this vehicle, I am treating it as a very generous gift and have listed it in Part V,” Judge Kane declares.

Telephoned at their offices, neither Judge Kane nor McGinley responded with a comment about the listed gifts, or their relationship.

We were instead referred by a secretary in Judge Kane’s chambers to the federal court’s Office of Financial Disclosure.

Habeus corpus: Beyoncé advises, ‘put a ring on it’

Richard Carelli, spokeman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, explained that the law requires federal judges to disclose “anything of value over $335 from a non-family member.”

Gifts to judges from spouses or fiancés are exempt from reports, Carelli said, but not gifts from others.

“It’s pretty much summed up by that Beyoncé song, ‘Put a Ring on It,'” Carelli explained.

Carelli says that the financial disclosure of federal judges was mandated by Congress in the Ethics in Government Acts of the 1970s.

Judge Kane’s report for 2009 has yet to be published by the court.

Steve Conklin/York County race issues and treatment by the federal courts

Stephen Conklin owns a 112 acre farm in Warrington Township, York County, tucked between Gifford Pinchot State Park and the Conewago creek. Steve calls his enclave “Satori Farm”, and has been called to life as a servant. He has opened his farm up to countless people over the years, has hosted festivals, and has provided a small refuge at times for urban children who yearn to enjoy nature.

On the other side of the hill from Satori Farm is a farm where KKK cross-burnings had been known to occur in the not-too-distant past (1970s). Steve’s saga began when the Township started an ordinance enforcement crusade against him, perhaps motivated by a racial animus spurred on by some developers’ interest in acquiring a prime piece of real estate.

Steve had been through numerous attorneys, and mortgage payments of his mysteriously disappeared, causing him an arrearage, leading to a series of fraudulent and ongoing attempts to foreclose on his property, and ultimately leading him to Don Bailey in 2004. Bailey filed a federal case on Steve’s behalf, which was assigned to Judge Conner, and led to the May, 2006, 4-page opinion, which is linked below that Steve, and others, believed reflected racial animus, or insensitivity at least, on the part of Judge Conner, and which later became a matter of sanctions, and the first known referral of Bailey by Conner to Killion/ODC.

Steve has a story to tell about the York County Courts as well, as does author Bill Keisling through yardbird.com, and Steve is continuing to fight in federal court, representing himself pro se, in a case in which Judge Kane has mistreated him for raising claims that he has been mistreated because of his association with Don Bailey. We will continue to provide updates on all of Steve’s courageous efforts, and for now link you to the following documents from his federal civil rights case where represented by Don Bailey – Conklin v. Warrington Township, et al..

The following files are provided for your review to familiarize yourself with the case:

Conner May 06

Conner sanctions 6.06

Conner SJ Order

Motion Reconsider Conner 5.06

Motion Recuse Conner

Order Conner Recuse

Conner 9.06 sanction

The Thom Lewis Case (case involving dog rescue client which lead to the discipline against Bailey)

The Thom Lewis case really tells a large part of the saga of Don Bailey, and others being the direct target of specifically alleged and provable judicial misconduct.  This case also reveals the political and personal interconnectedness of Judge Jones with some individuals who are involved in some sort of cults/healing centers, and dog trafficking, who were running parts of their operations out of the PLCB offices when Jones was the Chairman, and were in business and/or affiliated with Office of Disciplinary Counsel personnel.  This case lead to the underlying federal court sanctions proceeding, which in turn led to the referral of the document linked below to Disciplinary Counsel (Killion and Fulton) and to the charges being discussed throughout this site.

Application_for_Rehearing_En_Banc

Miles Thomas and Baron the Dog

In this case of the homeless man and his dog, Judge Jones threw out 2 federal cases where the man had his dog stolen by some humane society folks.  The case went through two injunction hearings, and Thom Lewis became a real issue and obstacle, despite being a competent and dedicated collie rescue.  For some strange reason, the humane society folks, who are believed to be connected to defendants in the Lewis case, as well as to a local news channel personality, would not simply give the man his dog back. Mr. Thomas was originally represented by Andrew Ostrowski, who fought the humane society and the lawyers, and even the judge, and ultimately got the dog returned to Thomas.  Judge Jones, nevertheless, dismissed the two cases.  Mr. Bailey is representing Thomas in the appeals.  Many of the connections that were the basis of the allegations of Bailey in the Lewis case were revealed throught the bizarre handling of the Thomas case.

Motion for Reconsideration

Motion for Summary Relief

Thomas Complaint