Month: January 2025

Proposal to a group of successful women to expose fabricated indictments and abusive evasion of health insurance claims

By
Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England
M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School
D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris
Judicial-Discipline-Reform
New York City
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org
tel. (718)827-9521
Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-women_leading_movement.pdf

January 7, 2025

U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
tel. (718)662-5970;
       @?
NYS Sen. Nathalia Fernandez
tel. (718)822-2049
       Fernandez@nysenate.gov		 NYC Councilwoman Amanda Farias
tel. (718)792-1140
       District18@council.nyc.govNYS Assemblywoman Karinés Reyes
tel. (718)931-2620
       reyesk@nyassembly.gov

Dear Councilwoman Farias, Assemblywoman Reyes, Sen. Fernandez, and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez,‡

  1. This is a proposal for you all to join forces to amplify and make long-term the strong and positive impact on public opinion that other women are having, to wit, NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch and Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Esq., the attorney for Luigi Mangione.
    a. This proposal, the letters to Comm. Tisch and Att. Friedman Agnifilo, an excerpt of the case filed in the U.S. District Court SDNY, supporting material, and the humorous skit “The Four Chicks and Trump”, can be downloaded through this link: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero-women_leading_movement.pdf
  2. We can bring to the attention of your constituents, the audience at your activities, and the media two related cases that provoke the emotion that most effectively drives the public, and especially voters, to protest vehemently and take sustained action: outrage at abuse of power that harms them and those they care about.
  3. These two cases deal with police corruption and denials of healthcare insurance claims.
    .           a. Indictments are fabricated on false and insufficient evidence by prosecutors, police officers, and detectives, and covered up by grand jury and NYC and NYS administrative judges, and each of the judges of the NYS Court of Appeals. Thousands of people have fallen victim to the coordinated abuse of power of these public officers, and have been deprived of their liberty or evicted, fired, and ruined financially and reputationally by having a criminal record.
    .           b. Medicare seeks to keep in its network, and increase the number of, its thousands of medical services and equipment providers. They coordinate their denial of claims of many of its 67 million insureds, who are old, disabled, sick, and cannot afford lawyers though confronting five levels of administrative and judicial appeals. If capable at all, the insureds appeal pro se, but ignorant of the law, they have little to no chance of prevailing over the lawyers of Medicare and its providers. Their coordinated abuse of power is exposed in a case filed in SDNY1.
  4. Indeed, officers in those cases engage in patterns of abusive conduct that reveal an institutionalized modus operandi. Their conduct can be exposed as so coordinated by them, and for their benefit, as a class as to make them part of racketeering and corrupt organizations.
  5. That will distinguish our joint effort from a mere sensational case of officers going rogue individually.
  6. Such exposure will exacerbate public outrage.
  7. That will motivate ever more people to participate in what we will promote to media outlets and universities: unprecedented citizens hearings. To be held at their stations and auditoriums, these hearings will enable people to tell in person or online to the national public their story2 of the abuse by those organizations that they have suffered or witnessed.
  8. Only an informed and outraged We the People can subject those who wield entrenched political and financial power to transparency, accountability, and liability.
  9. I offer to make for you and your guests a presentation in person or via video conference on leading a movement that can have transformative impact on our system of governance and turn you into Champions of the People. Cf. OL2:530

Dare shout “I accuse!“…
You may trigger history and even enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521

3 January 2025

NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisc
NY Police Department
One Police Plaza, NY, NY 10038-1403
tel. (646)610-5410; fax (646)610-5865		 Interim IAB Chief Edward Thompson
NY Police Department
PO Box 10001
New York, NY 10259-0001
tel. (212)741-8401;
IAB@NYPD.org, iabcmdcntr@nypd.org

Dear Commissioner Tisch and Chief Thompson,‡

  1. This is an appeal to the sincerity of your statement repeated on various occasions that no task is more important to you than to restore ethical behavior among police officers and earn back public trust in the NYPD.
  2. This appeal concerns fabricated indictments based on false and insufficient evidence presented to grand juries by prosecutors, police officers, and detectives, and covered up by judges. I witnessed such fabrication first-hand as a grand juror at the Supreme Court, Bronx County Criminal Term, 265 East 161st Street, Bronx, NY 10451, on May 23 and 24, 2022.
  3. After their presentation, ADA Burim Namani and supervising ADA Diana Jetta asked the jurors whether they had questions.
  4. I asked some pointing to the lack of evidence that a crime had taken place at all, let alone a murder, much less by the two indictees:
    a. There was no witness to the crime; no footage of the crime or photos of the victim or the street crime scene, or incident or autopsy report.
    b. The footage of the restaurants flanking the street did not show a crowd of onlookers or CSI vehicles.
    c. The indictment was sought for plea bargain leverage in reliance on grand jurors’ indifference and uncritical judgment: “An ADA can indict a ham sandwich”.
  5. On May 25, I was summoned before Grand Jury Judge Laurence Busching, who discharged me on the spot without even bringing in the people who supposedly had complained that ‘my questions were making the other grand jurors uncomfortable’.
  6. I wrote a 4,743-word, 8-page sworn statement and mailed it on May 27, to Administrative Judge Alvin Yearwood, who only forwarded it to Judge Busching. Order a copy from me.
  7. For more than 2½ years, I have made numerous phone calls, whose dates I have, as I do the names of those who have given me the runaround; and mailed letters requesting an investigation, including those to former NYPD Commissioners Keechant Sewell and Edward Caban, and IAB Chiefs Miguel Iglesias and David Barrere.
  8. I have emailed public officers daily, now more than 30, sending more than 11,500 emails!
  9. To no avail, for I have not received even an acknowledgment of receipt from the NYPD, not even after my letter to the Civilian Complaint Review Board was forwarded by its Director of Case Management, Eschwarie Mahadeo, to IAB, a complained about party.
  10. This is the most propitious time to expose NYPD corruption that has sent thousands to jail and/or ruined them financially and reputationally based on indictments that police officers from the top down have fabricated and covered up in coordination with ADAs and judges:
    .           a. Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Esq., attorney for Luigi Mangione, has complained that police and other public officers are engaging in conduct that deprives her client of due process.
    b. She will depict them as so corrupt and unreliable that the jury pool and the seated jury should deem their charges of terrorism inflated; and blame the health industry’s greed for his temporary insanity. That will lead to jury nullification.
  11. I will expose the link between the fabricated indictments and the Mangione case -see my Medicare case– on my website, Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post some of my articles1. They have attracted so many webvisitors and impressed so positively so many educated and influential ones willing to read 1,000+-word articles that as of 7 January 2025, the number of those who had become subscribers was 53,032.
  12. You can complicitly join the cover-up of fabricated indictments, as your colleagues have, or get ahead of our exposure.
  13. I offer to make a presentation on the latter to you and your guests.

Dare shout “I accuse!“…
You may trigger history and even enter it.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521

December 27, 2024

Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Esq.
Marc Agnifilo, Esq.
445 Park Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10022		 Mr. Luigi Mangione
Metropolitan Detention Center
80 29th Street,
Brooklyn, NY 11232

Dear Ms. Friedman Agnifilo, Mr. Agnifilo, and Mr. Mangione,‡

  1. This is a proposal to join forces to help your client Luigi Mangione. While the evidence that keeps being found against him makes it ever more probable that he will be unable to win his freedom, we can help him save his objective: expose the healthcare industry’s abusive claim evasion tactics, pithily described in the paraphrase ‘delay, deny, defend’.
  2. Mr. Mangione’s use of that description has provoked in the public, not condemnation of him, but rather outrage at the industry. It can gain him the extenuating sympathy of the public, the jury pool, the jury, and perhaps even the judges.
  3. We can jointly exacerbate that outrage by using the complaint/appeal that I have written with that word triptych illustrating those tactics. I just filed it in the U.S. District Court SDNY, i.e., Cordero v. Secretary of HHS, EmblemHealth (health insurer), Maximus Federal Services, and many of the top officers of the Medicare Appeals Council (Council) and the Office of Medicare Appeals and Hearings (OMHA), 24cv9778.1
  4. Emblem medically insures more than 3 million people in NY and the tristate area.
  5. Maximus performs for Medicare reconsiderations of the denial of medical services by health insurance companies.
  6. These entities have their own but harmonious interests:
  7. Medicare wants to attract to, and retain in, its network the largest number of medical insurers, whose decisions affect the options of millions of people.
  8. Emblem, like the other insurers, wants to pay as few claims as possible.
  9. Maximus, a so-called qualified independent contractor, works for Medicare in a principal-agent relation, but not for long if it routinely reconsidered disapprovingly claim denials, thus causing the other two entities to be liable for the claims.
  10. The typical Medicare insureds whose claims were denied are old, disabled, sick, and ignorant of the law. They can hardly afford a lawyer or muster the energy needed to go through levels of complaint and appeal until reaching the fifth, the district court. So, they just take the abuse. If able at all, they scribble a whining personal anecdote with no legal arguments…and are wiped out.
  11. By contrast, my filing analyzes the functioning of the system rigged through coordination by Medicare and the other entities to implement their abusive claim evasion tactics (see the excerpt next), which likely represent those of similar entities in the healthcare industry; and discusses causes of action.
  12. This functional exposure can benefit you, your client, and me by turning him and my complaint into a rallying point through self-reinforcing cycles:
  13. The more the complaint is described at press conferences, in press releases, at interviews, and in published articles, the more it will inform the public about the industry’s abusive tactics, the more people will become more outraged and many will scream, “That happened to me too!” They will want to advance their quest for justice and compensation by telling their story2.
  14. We will promote the holding by media outlets and universi-ties at their stations and auditoriums of unprecedented citizens hearings. There people will be able to tell their story in person or online to the national public. Your client and my complaint can rally ever more people that demand the hearings. A more informed and outraged public will energize another self-reinforcing cycle.
  15. So can my site at Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. There I post articles of my study of abuse of power, which have turned countless visitors into 53,032+ subscribers as of 7 January 2025.
  16. I offer to make in your office a presentation to you and your guests on this proposal and my cases abstracted infra, e.g., indictments fabricated on false and insufficient evidence, which can influence the jury’s attitude to the U.S. Attorney, the District Attorney, the NYPD, your “unfair trial” complaint, and nullification.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521

Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement;
none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money 

Put your money
where your outrage at abuse of power and
quest for justice are.

Support the professional law research and writing, and
strategic thinking
conducted at

Judicial Discipline Reform

DONATE

by making a deposit or an online transfer through
either the Bill Pay feature of your online account or Zelle

from your account
to TD Bank account # 43 92 62 52 45, routing # 260 13 673;
or Citi Bank account # 4977 59 2001, routing # 021 000 089.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Dare shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it as
a Champion of Justice.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506
tel. (718)827-9521


Excerpt from the complaint-appeal
in the U.S. District Court, SDNY

Cordero v. Secretary of HHS, Medicare, EmblemHealth, et al.;
docket no. 24cv9778
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/ALJ/24-12-15DrRCordero-v-Medicare_EmblemHealth_et_al.pdf

L. Delay, deny to wear down the insured and cause him to abandon his claim

  1. Plaintiff’s statements show that the conduct of Emblem’s people when they pass an insured from one supervisor to the other and to the other and so on (in his case 19 supervisors!, see SDNY: 12§3), constitutes Emblem’s institutionalized way of doing business: Those supervisors were not rogue employees; rather, they are the face and body of Emblem. They make up what Emblem is. They were implementing Emblem’s first abusive claim evasion tactic: “delay, delay, delay”.

  2. Their purpose is to drag out the claim for coverage for so long, raise so many obstacles, disrupt the insured’s life so profoundly, and cause so much frustration, that he, sick, old, and financially exhausted, will be worn out. Then he will abandon his claim.

  3. Their pattern of conduct started to manifest itself with the first level Emblem people in The Philippines that picked up the phone when Plaintiff called Emblem’s so-called Customer Service at (877)344-7364.

  4. These phone picker uppers did not have the faintest idea how to answer Plaintiff’s question about what to do with the crown that had fallen out of tooth # 19. Hence, they would put Plaintiff on hold every time he asked a question so that they could write an email to their supervisors to describe to them Plaintiff’s question.

  5. The first level phone picker uppers did not have access to a floor supervisor or manager.

  6. One clear reason for this is that many, if not all, phone picker uppers worked from home, not in a building that houses Emblem’s offices in The Philippines.

  7. It is in the self-interest of the phone picker uppers to make up all sorts of excuses not to put callers in direct contact with their supervisors: The more the phone picker uppers connect callers and supervisors directly to each other, the more they inevitably reveal that they do not have answers to the questions of yet another caller.

  8. It is reasonable to infer from their work setup that such revelation would put their Emblem job at risk, i.e., the job of the phone picker uppers because they have not learned enough to know the answers; and that of the supervisors because they have not taught them sufficiently well for them to figure out the answers based on the information that they have. This deficiency in critical thinking may be traced back to how the Philippine educational system in the grades educates children.

  9. Critical thinking allows jurors to draw inferences from facts known to them before they become jurors, making them ‘peers of the parties’; the verbal statements and body language of parties at the tables and witnesses on the stand; and the physical evidence introduced at trial.

  10. No wonder it was so exasperating and time-consuming for Plaintiff to prevail upon phone picker uppers to stop emailing their supervisors and transfer his call to the supervisor at the time.

  11. Soon Plaintiff realized that it was a total waste of time to speak with the first level Emblem Philippine people. Consequently, he would systematically ask to be transferred to a supervisor.

  12. The supervisors did not know what to do either. So, they told Plaintiff that they would have to do some “research” to find out what to do.

  13. The supervisors never mentioned that the “research” that they had to do was on anything other than Emblem’s own advertisement and evidence of coverage.

  14. The supervisors never mentioned that they had to do “research” on Medicare rules.

  15. Nor did they mention anything about Medicaid, let alone about “Medicaid COB”, for they did not know what “COB” meant. It means “Coordination of Benefits”. Of course, they did not know with what Medicaid had to be coordinated, how, and to what extent.

  16. The supervisors never mentioned anything remotely similar to the above-quoted (SDNY:18¶33) technical description, which includes even medical coding, of ‘the requested pre-authorization’ for treating tooth # 19 after its crown fell out.

  17. The recorded phone conversations between Plaintiff and Emblem people would bear that out, which explains why Emblem never produced them during discovery.

  18. When the Emblem Philippine supervisors could not find out what Emblem would cover to deal with the fallen-out crown, they would stop communicating with Plaintiff.

  19. After a cost-benefit analysis it is highly likely that Emblem has determined that it is not cost-effective to try to teach their Philippine people to think critically or learn anything other than the basic.

  20. That analysis may be confirmed by the very high employee turnover that Emblem has to deal with. Why spend an enormous amount of money to properly train people for months on end given that after only a very short time on the job they will suffer under crushing intellectual demands and quit?

  21. Emblem’s Customer Service in The Philippines is staffed with people who are neither trained to deal, nor intellectually capable of dealing, with the problems that insureds bring to them.

  22. For one thing, the Emblem Philippine people are required to repeat the question that an insured asks of them in order to obtain confirmation from the insured that they understood the question.

  23. That requirement shows that Emblem itself does not trust their capacity to even understand what insureds are talking about.

  24. Emblem Philippine people so often appear to be reading from a script when speaking with an insured while disregarding what the insured is asking or saying. If taken off-script by the questions of an insured, they do not know what to say. They repeat the script or have to ask a supervisor.

  25. This may also explain why the Emblem Philippine people either do not have the authority to solve the problem that the insured brings to them or do not feel confident in exercising that authority.

  26. The Emblem Philippine supervisors did not have a direct phone extension.

  27. The Emblem Philippine supervisors did not return the phone call messages that Plaintiff left on their general voice mailbox.

  28. The Emblem Philippine supervisors did not return the messages for them that Plaintiff would leave with the first level telephone picker uppers.

  29. If a supervisor transferred the case to another supervisor, the latter did not know anything about the case either.

  30. If a previous supervisor wrote notes on Plaintiff’s chart -forget about a phone picker upper doing so-, the next supervisor would not have read it, either because it was poorly written or because he or she was not competent enough to understand what was going on or responsible enough to make the effort to understand. After all, “why sweat it?!“

  31. It is unlikely that higher supervisors were listening or would listen in on the conversations to realize what was happening and hold anybody accountable. Having them listen in would be costly.

  32. After being dropped by the latest supervisor, Plaintiff had to begin all over again with another supervisor…after wrestling with phone picker uppers to have his call transferred while hearing in the background dogs barking, chickens crowing, and children crying or adults laughing or talking all at the same time. Oh, life in the countryside is so convivial with fowl and folks around!

  33. This unaccountability on which phone picker uppers and supervisors alike can rely accounts for the fact that for them callers are nothing but a transient nuisance. Inconsequentially, they can be dropped and forgotten if they demand reliable information….or simply information.

  34. Since they are unsupervised and thus held unaccountable, the Philippine people do whatever they want. They are a ship cast onto the ocean and forgotten by the Emblem U.S. captains.

  35. After a while, Plaintiff refused to deal with the Emblem Philippine people. He requested to be transferred to the Emblem people in the U.S.

  36. It took the Philippine people more than an hour to get connected to somebody in the U.S. to whom to transfer Plaintiff. After a shockingly long time, he found somebody in the U.S. who would deal with him. It was not a great improvement, except for the absence of domestic animals’ noise.

  37. This indicates that Emblem’s Customer Service call center in The Philippines is not in constant contact with their counterparts, much less their superiors, in the U.S. The Philippines call center is in practice left to its own devices by Emblem officers in the U.S.

  38. Running a call center with phone picker uppers in The Philippines, some of whom have been elevated to supervisors, may cost a pittance of what it costs in the U.S. But what they offer is only a mockery of Customer Service.

  39. It follows that Emblem Customer Service call center in The Philippines is a sham. Its purpose is to pretend to satisfy the Medicare requirement that its network members have such a Service, at least in name and appearance.

  40. Medicare knows, and by exercising due diligence in supervising and controlling would know, that such a Customer Service is a sham.

  41. Plaintiff would not give up his demand for an answer to his question about crown repair coverage even after months of Emblem’s “delay, delay, delay”. Hence, Emblem proceeded to implement the second tactic of claim evasion: On December 12, 2021, Emblem denied Plaintiff’s claim. Like a poker player, it pulled out from under its sleeve the excuse that Medicare did not cover the repair of tooth # 19 after its crown fell out.

  42. It is not possible that nobody in Emblem knew what Medicare did or did not cover, or with due diligence could have found out during Plaintiff’s first call.

  43. Emblem’s delay was in bad faith: part of a racketeering scheme to wear Plaintiff down and cause him to abandon his claim without Emblem having to issue yet another denial and enter it on its records…assuming it keeps such records.

  44. Emblem, Maximus, and Medicare must know it. But how many sick, old, and law-ignorant insureds are going to survive four levels of appeal and still have the stamina to climb to the fifth level to appeal to a U.S. district court for judicial review of the administrative proceedings below?

  45. Insureds are likely scared away from appealing to a court by the specter of what awaits them there: A hyper-technical, protracted, and unaffordable battle with an army of corporate lawyers determined to crush the insureds with the third and merciless tactic of abusive claim evasion: “defend”.

Dare shout “I accuse!”
You may trigger history and even enter it as a Champion of Justice.

Sincerely,

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.
Judicial Discipline Reform
2165 Bruckner Blvd.
Bronx, NY 10472-6506

tel. (718)827-9521