Jump to a list of key articles  

Dear Dean,

 I am a lawyer and researcher-writer and would like to propose teaching The DeLano Case, a hands-on, role playing, fraud investigation and expository course. I developed it based on a cluster of cases that I have prosecuted from bankruptcy court to the U.S. Supreme Court and that reveal the harmful effect on judicial process of the two most insidious forces of corruption: lots of money and unaccountable power to dispose of it.

So, in the 220 years since the creation of the Federal Judiciary in 1789, of the thousands of judges that have served –2,153 federal judges and magistrates were in office in 2008-, only 7 have been impeached and removed.

(http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf >Judges of the U.S. Courts>Impeachments of Federal Judges; as to the number of judges)

Likewise, of the 9,466 judicial misconduct complaints filed in the reported 1oct96-30sep08 12-year period, 99.83% were dismissed with no investigation and no private or public discipline. (http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/

DeLano_course/14Law/

1DrCordero-Dean.pdf >Dn:12; see also the graphs infra.)

 Moreover, the federal courts of appeals get rid of about 75% of the appeals by summary order: a form with mostly a mere “Affirmed” and not even a reference to the issues presented.

(Dn:13-14; e.g. Ricci v. DeStefano)

 The course’s significance is revealed by the fact that I argued DeLano before then CA2 Judge Sotomayor. (Dn:11) She found that case so incriminating that she withheld it from the Senate Judiciary Committee. (Dn:7-10)

A Judiciary that unaccountably disregards the law to allocate annually $10’s of bls. exercises absolute power, which corrupts absolutely, and mocks every professor’s R&W and teaching. The students should be prepared to deal with, and try to correct, this situation.

 DeLano key documents from a record of over 2,500 pages constitute the core teaching materials. Teams of students are taught to apply ever-greater perceptiveness, inquisitiveness, and discernment as they compete with each other to pierce apparently lawful acts and statements so as to find the facts behind them and realize their generating force: a bankruptcy fraud scheme run

care-free by insiders of the bankruptcy and legal systems that assure their own immunity.

(http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/

JNinfo/25Committee/2DrCordero-petition

 _25feb9.pdf >N:51¶¶1-4; N:39 and 47)

The course instructs students also in collaborating to organize a public presentation to expose how judges with unaccountable power over people’s property, liberty, and even lives wield it in coordination as cause or effect of the vicious circle of abusing it in some judicial acts and having to cover it up in others, thereby denying both litigants and the public at large due process of law and economic rights.

Thus, the presentation will endow the students’ course experience with the moral and practical value of work in the public interest. The stakes warrant considering the course as preparation for a test case over the Judiciary’s commitment to “Equal Justice Under Law”.

To evaluate The DeLano Case course, please see also at  http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ DeLano_course/14Law/1DrCordero-Dean.pdf:

● The Salient Facts of DeLano for instructors (Dn:2);

● the Course Description for students (Dn:3); the table of contents of the Instructions for the Instructor (Dn:4-5); and

● online the Syllabus with work for the classroom and the organization of the public presentation for each of a semester’s 15 weeks.

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/DeLano_course/

14Law/5DrCordero_syllabus.pdf

● Based thereon you may consider my offer to make a presentation of the case and the course to you and your colleagues and students. (Dn:6)

While this is my application to teach the course -and Legal R&W- at your law school, its materials and instructions can be bought for another instructor to teach it. You may assess my academic and professional qualifications by reviewing my posted writings and resume herein.

 Hence, I look forward to hearing from you to arrange an interview.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Dr.Richard.Cordero.Esq@gmail.com

Dr. Cordero is available to teach

the DeLano course and/or legal research and writing (R&W)

even on short notice should the opportunity present itself or

is deliberately created through

enlightened self-interest and genuine concern for that of the public.

 Indeed, part of the course is the public presentation by law, journalism, and/or accounting students in their university auditorium of their findings upon taking the course. The latter includes studying the submitted evidence of how the Federal Judiciary tolerates, or participates in, withholding material information, concealment of assets, and peer partiality.

Cf. http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/DeLano_course/14Law/1DrCordero-Dean.pdf >7-10

 Their presentation can have a significant positive impact on the millions of debtors and creditors that are party to over one million new bankruptcy cases filed annually as well as on the general public to whom they pass on their losses and everybody else who is affected by judicial wrongdoing. Id. >13-14.

 In addition, the DeLano materials lend themselves quite appropriately for an R&W course. They can be used for the students to express not only their understanding of a complex case, but also to condense and clarify it in order to convince a professional public of what its evidence shows and even persuade that public to take action in behalf of what the case reveals is at stake, namely, the integrity of both the Judiciary and its judicial process. The students would aim to accomplish that feat of effective communication by designing, writing, and producing a professional brochure that at the end of the R&W course could be mailed to the target public. Id. >2.

 Just as in school clinics students litigate cases in court, draw up contracts, and mediate disputes, an R&W course using the DeLano materials could be taught as a clinic intended to have a concrete and significant impact on our legal system through a written exposé. Its objective would be high, justified, and inspiring: to bring about relief from systemic denial of due process of law by de facto unimpeachable judges who assure their own immunity from discipline. Id. >12. If the DeLano course is taught too, the writing would also include the promotional materials for, and individualized invitations to, the presentation.

 Either scenario includes teaching an essential skill in today’s business world: how lawyers, financial experts, other professionals, and their clients collaborate through electronic means of communication to draft, comment on, and produce a single, ‘team piece’ of writing on a tight schedule, such as an annual report, a prospectus, or a regulatory filing.

 Likewise, the writing and presenting students with the courageous support of their dean and faculty could enhance considerably their school’s reputation as the one that took responsible action of enduring civil merit by performing fraud and forensic accounting, evidentiary analysis and a ‘closing argument’, and an in-depth journalistic investigation and reporting in order to expose the undermining of, and propose safeguards for, the integrity of both our legal system and the fundamental tenet of its process: Equal Justice Under Law.

 Therefore, prior and with a view to the school reaching an appointment decision or for the purpose of informing the members of an entity or the public at large, Dr. Cordero can make a presentation of the DeLano course and the case. Id. >6.

   1. Pro-forma justice through summary judgment orders and unpublishable opinions.   

  2. Non-publication of orders and opinions protects their cursoriness.  

 3. T-1080 Motion Information Statement to avoid reading by circling DENIED or GRANTED.

  4. Incrimination in tolerating or running a bank-ruptcy fraud scheme.  

5. Systematic self-exemption from judicial discipline.  

 6. Judge Sotomayor’s participation in a bank-ruptcy fraud scheme cover-up.

1. The Dynamics of Organized Corruption in the Courts: How judicial wrongdoing tolerated in one instance gives rise to the mentality of judicial impunity that triggers generalized wrongdoing and weaves relationships among the judges of multilateral interdependency of survival where any subsequent unlawful act is allowed and must be covered up

2. The Supreme Court Justices and the Chief Judges Have Semi-annually Received Official Information About the Self-immunizing Systematic Dismissal of Judicial Conduct Complaints, But Have Tolerated It With Disregard for the Consequent Abuse of Power and Corruption

3. The official statistics of judicial complaints filed and action taken that the judicial councils have produced and the Administrative Office published for 1997-2006 show that federal judges have engaged in the systematic dismissal of the 7,462 complaints filed, out of which they have disciplined only 9 peers! (page 8§III) Thereby judges have become unaccountable in their exercise of judicial power subject to no control, which is the hallmark of absolute power that corrupts absolutely.

 4.  Such unaccountability encompasses both judicial and non-judicial acts and thus, the whole of a judge's conduct. It also includes the meetings of the Federal Judiciary's highest court administration policy-making body, namely, the Judicial Council of the United States, composed of the 13 chief circuit judges, the chief judge of the Court for International Trade, 12 representative district judges, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who is its presiding member.

5. Unimpeachable judges are judges above the law, Yet  the Constitution provides judges with no immunity, nonetheless through the self-exemption from discipline judges have managed the feat that in the 218 years since the creation of the federal judiciary the number of judges impeached and removed from the bench is 7!

6.  The Judicial Conduct and Disability Study Committee and the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States had access to, and actual or constructive knowledge of, the official statistics showing the systematic dismissal by judges of complaints against them, yet they issued the Breyer Report and the Draft Rules Governing the Processing of Complaints, respectively, that pretended that the system of judicial self-discipline has worked effectively and can even be improved through the Draft Rules as if judges had ever been and were now willing to risk self-incrimination through the exercise of self-discipline...a sham!

a. The Revised Rules Governing the Processing of Judicial Misconduct Complaints Adopted by the Judicial Conference of the U.S. on March 11, 2008, Will Not Stop Judges From Systematically Dismissing Them. Rule 2(b) provides that the rules are mandatory unless there is a finding of "exceptional circumstances," which is an easy finding to make since no two cases are ever identical. Through that pretext, “a chief judge, a special committee, a judicial council, the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability, or the Judicial Conference”, that is, any judge or judicial body that handles complaints can suspend the application of any rule. In practice, the rules will be optional. The “mandatory” nature of the rules is illusory!

Detailed analysis of the revised rules is available at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_complaints/ DrCordero_revised_rules.pdf.

See what to do about the rules at  http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_

complaints/ how_petition_redress.pdf.

b. Why there is a need and how to join forces to inform the public as well as members of Congress that the Revised Rules in effect authorize the systematic dismissal by federal judges of judicial misconduct and disability complaints against their peers. A new and effective system of judicial accountability and discipline must be adopted to replace the current system of judicial self discipline set up by the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28 U.S.C. §351-364). This Act of Congress has been in practice abrogated by the Judiciary through such the judges' systematic dismissal of complaints against them:  The official statistics of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and the graphs based thereon (supra) show that in the 10-year period 1997- 2006, there were filed 7,462 judicial complaints, but the judges disciplined only 9 of their peers!, thus dismissing  99.88% of all complaints!

7.  Evidence of AG Michael Mukasey's incapacity to investigate former colleagues in the judiciary engaged in wrongdoing, lest he incriminate himself.

Go back to the top

Part II. A judicial misconduct complaint that illustrate judges' disregard for the law resulting from their unaccountability

1. The corruptive effect of unaccountable judicial power is illustrated by the judicial misconduct complaint against Bankruptcy Judge John C. Ninfo, II, WBNY [1], for his bias and abuse of judicial power in his support of toleration of a bankruptcy fraud scheme. It was filed, as required by the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act of 1980 (28 U.S.C. §351), with the chief circuit judge of the federal circuit court that reappointed that judge to a second term of 14 years (cf. 28 U.S.C. §152).

That constitutes an insurmountable conflict of interests, for if the chief circuit judge were to investigate the bankruptcy judge, the chief and his circuit judge peers could end up being incriminated in having supported or tolerated the bankruptcy fraud scheme. That conflict derives from, and in turn reinforces, the dynamics of corruption in a close-knit group of people. As a result of such disregard for legality and conflict of interest, the complaint has been lingering with CA2 Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs since June 8, 2008, despite the requirement under the Act and the Rules for Conduct and Disability Proceedings, that such complaints be dealt with "promptly" and "expeditiously" [1]

[1] http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ JNinfo/10status_inquiry

_15aug8/ 5toCJ_Jacobs_15aug8.pdf

See also Open Letter to Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., as presiding officer of the Judicial Conference of the U.S., the highest court administration policy-making body of the Federal Judiciary, which on March 11, 2008, adopted the revised rules for processing misconduct and disability complaints filed by any person against a federal judge:

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_ complaints/DrCordero_CJRoberts_ 27mar8.pdf

http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_ complaints/DrCordero_CJRoberts_9feb8.pdf .

Part III. In re DeLano or the case of a judicially supported bankruptcy fraud scheme

1. The Salient Facts of The DeLano Case showing a bankruptcy fraud scheme as well as the support or toleration of bankruptcy, district, and circuit judges that show how a bankruptcy fraud scheme works

2. Judges that  impair even the appearance of justice administered in public by disposing of motions with the circling of the words "Denied"      or "Granted" and of cases with a summary order form of  "Affirmance"  or "Reversal" under Local Rule 0.23 and without any oral argument under Local Rule 34 of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

3.  Issues Presented For Review to the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Dr. Richard Cordero v. David and Mary Ann DeLano, docket no. 06-4780-bk, CA2; appellant's brief

4.  How a court of appeals runs into a disqualifying conflict of interests when asked to review the decision of a bankruptcy judge, its appointee under 28 U.S.C. §152, who has supported or participated in a bankruptcy fraud scheme.

Go back to the top

Part IV. A Plan of Action to Counter Judicial Wrongdoing

1. Analysis of Judicial Misconduct by Identifying Motive and Strategy to Expose it Through the Joint Effort of Judicial Misconduct Complainants and Citizens Concerned About Judicial Integrity

2. Two Approaches to Reforming the Judiciary: from inside the courts and from the outside

3. Programmatic Proposal to Unite Entities and Individuals to Use Their Resources Effectively  in Our Common Mission  to Ensure Integrity in Our Courts by Engaging in Specific Activities and Achieving Concrete Objectives 1/ 2/ 3/ 4/ 5/ 6/ 7/ 8/ 9/ 10;  all in PDF

4. Synopsis of the proposal for a Watergate-like Follow the Money! investigation from the mandatory annual financial disclosure reports of judges, filed in Washington, DC, through the public property registries of county clerks' offices, to wherever concealed assets are found and can help answer the question whether for lack of accountability and discipline a federal judgeship become a safe haven for the coordinated wrongdoing

5. How You Can Help to Take the First Concrete Step Toward the Implementation of the Programmatic Proposal Through the Formation of the Virtual Firm on the Internet of Investigative Journalists and Lawyers to Expose Judges Engaged in Coordinated Wrongdoing and Thereby Cause Official Investigations that End Up in the Enactment of Judicial Discipline and Accountability Legislation

a. Table of Division of Labor for the Formation of the Virtual Firm of Investigative Journalists and Lawyers described in the Programmatic Proposal

b. Summarize your judicial misconduct complaint in 350 or fewer words to convince newspapers and bloggers of the need to investigate how judges engage in misconduct and self-exempt from any discipline

6. Proposal for a Citizens Board of Judicial Accountability and Discipline, composed of individuals unrelated and unresponsive to judges and not appointed by them, to process in public judicial conduct and disability complaints by requiring judges to account for their conduct and meting out discipline

7. Why editors and investigative journalists should investigate the use by federal judges of the new rules that became effective on April 10 for processing misconduct and disability complaints against their peers which will allow them to continue both to exempt themselves from any discipline and to support or tolerate with impunity their coordinated judicial wrongdoing (also at http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/judicial_complaints/to_editors _investigators_17apr8.pdf ).

Go back to the top