Analyzing your odds of winning by suing in court versus going out of court to have other victims of judges’ abuse join you in shouting the rallying cry: Enough is enough! We won’t take judges’ abuse anymore

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

Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, Corderoric@yahoo.com

You may share and post this article in its entirety,
without any addition, deletion, or modification,
with credit to its author, Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.,
and the link to his website:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org.

This article is also at:
http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >OL2:693

A. Analyzing your odds of winning by suing in court

  1. Thank you for your emails to the previous article containing a template to address judges and their clerks (see below). To the question whether I can recommend lawyers, in general, and bankruptcy lawyers, particular, I do not recommend lawyers.
  2. Parties who want to retain a local lawyer to represent them in a case in which they are charging judges with judicial misconduct are asking the lawyer to commit professional suicide by becoming the target of the many forms of retaliation by judges(*>Lsch:17§C) and their abuse-executing clerks(†>OL2:687).

The materials corresponding to the (blue text references) are found in my study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus:

Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and
Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing:
Pioneering the news and publishing field
of judicial unaccountability reporting* †

* Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >all prefixes:page number up to OL:393

† Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf >from OL2:394

1. Bankruptcy judges are appointees and thus protégés of circuit judges

  1. The retaliatory power of bankruptcy judges is particularly frightening for a lawyer because there may be only one such judge in a bankruptcy court so that if a lawyer challenges her authority, never mind accuses her of dishonesty or incompetency, the lawyer’s future before that judge becomes bleak. But even if there is a handful of bankruptcy judges in a bankruptcy court the solidarity among them and the instinct of survival of each of them are likely to prevail and cause them to ensure an equally bleak future for a lawyer with the reputation of being a ‘disrespectful troublemaker’.
  2. Bankruptcy judges’ instinct of survival is particularly strong due to the way in which they come onto the bench and can be removed from it. They are not nominated by the U.S. president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Rather, in a much local and personal way, they are appointed for a 14-year term by the circuit judges of the respective U.S. court of appeals(*>jur:43fn61a). Similarly, they are removed, not by the cumbersome and practically useless impeachment process in Congress, but by their respective circuit and district judges.
  3. Therefore, so long as a bankruptcy judge is doing what she is supposed to do to show her appreciation for her appointment and earn goodwill for her reappointment, she can do whatever she wants. In 2010, bankruptcy judges exercised their power to decide the allocation of the more than $373 billion(*>jur:27§2) in controversy between debtors and creditors in only the personal bankruptcies of consumers; they also allocated additional scores of billions of dollars in controversy in commercial bankruptcies. To learn about the mechanics for bankruptcy judges to divert unlawfully money over which they wield power of allocation, see “How a bankruptcy fraud scheme works”(†>OL2:614).
  4. It follows that if an appeal from a bankruptcy judge’s decision ever reaches the respective court of appeals, it will be heard by the very circuit judges who appointed her. Have you ever heard of appointers turning against their own appointees to hold them incompetent or dishonest, thereby incriminating their own vetting procedures and judgment of character, and casting doubt on the company that they keep?
  5. In fact, the bankruptcy system has the same “cronyism”(*>jur:32§2) still today that Congress found in 1979 and which was cited as the factual justification for the ‘reform’ of the bankruptcy system.
  6. This bias against bankruptcy appeals and bankrupts’ lack of money to appeal explain why a minute number of bankruptcy cases reach the courts of appeals (jur:28§a; OL2:647fn5):
    .
    a. 2 of every 3 cases enter the Federal Judiciary through its bankruptcy courts annually.
    .
    b. In the fiscal year ending on September 30, 2017, 790,830 bankruptcies were filed; but only 729 bankruptcy cases (whenever filed) were appealed to the courts of appeals: 0.092% or 1 out of every 1,085.c. That year there were 50,506 appeals to the court of appeals, and those 729 bankruptcy appeals represented only 1.44% of them.d. Bankruptcy judges are aware of the insignificant risk that their decisions may be appealed. What they say sticks; that is the basis of their enormous power when allocating the most insidious corruptor: money!

2. Role playing to realize the harmonious and conflicting interests in an interpersonal system

  1. The above illustrates the application to a given situation of dynamic analysis of harmonious and conflicting interests(†>OL2:593¶¶15-16; OL2:445§B, 475§D).
  2. This analysis is applied to understand the interpersonal relations in a system of people e.g., the bank borrowers, bank investors, bank managers, banking supervisory authorities, lawyers, plaintiffs, defendants, judges, bankruptcy trustees, politicians, etc., who compose the legal and judicial system. Who is an ally and who is a foe? Who owes loyalty to whom? Who has power to abuse and who is in a position in which he can be abused(†>OL2:465§1)?
  3. There is a highly enlightening, convincing, and entertaining exercise that a group of people can engage in to understand the dynamics of conflicting and harmonious interests: role playing(*>OL:359§F) in a theater of improvisation the several kinds of members in the system.
  4. Since you and your associates are charging ‘public corruption’ too, when playing you need to cast one or more associates in the role of the very politicians who recommended and endorsed the appointment of their cronies as bankruptcy judges and who recommended and endorsed the nomination and confirmation of the district and circuit judges. They are all players in their power game and the game is rigged, as the analysis of the DeLano bankruptcy case shows(*>jur:xxxv–xxxviii).
  5. Rushing to file a case in court without analyzing the dynamics of interests among the players there to determine whether they will let you, a party with a single case, have a fair chance to win by disrupting their steady relations of power and loyalty built over time is like crashing the party of the neighborhood bully to induct new members into his gang. Soon the partygoers will make you aware that you have nothing to look for there and are not welcome. What do you think their reaction will be when you let them know that you want the bully to order them to give back to you what they took from your store after slapping you around to make you feel the need to pay protection money? “Are you crazy?!”
  6. You certainly are out or your mind and your depth. No judge is going to incriminate his or her peers, colleagues, and cronies, for all of them hear the same warning shout: “I know enough of your own wrongdoing and abuse. So, if you bring me down, I’ll take you with me!”(*>jur:88§§a-c).

3. A suit against judges is lost before being filed

  1. Suing in court while expecting judges judging judges and their cronies to be fair and impartial despite their conflicting interest in their individual and class survival is not a reasonable expectation. Stubbornly pursuing its realization only leads to years of futile struggle, enormous waste of money, disappointment, and bitterness.
  2. Consequently, if you are charging “bank fraud, public corruption and judicial misconduct”, especially involving bankruptcy judges, you and your associates have already lost your case…although you have not even filed it yet.
  3. Nevertheless, your question remains: “How do we recover our money?”

B. The out-of-court strategy to inform and outrage a public intolerant of any form of abuse and preparing to vote

  1. There are several actions that you and your associates can take to expose judges’ misconduct through their abuse of power and to have a chance of recovering your money and being compensated for the harm that the judges have inflicted and continue to inflict upon you. These actions are based on three principles of strategic thinking(†>OL2:635, 593¶15, 475§D):
    .
    a. You are in a position of strength when you choose the battlefield.
    .
    b. There is strength in numbers.
    .
    c. A person works hardest when he or she works in her own interest.
    .
  2. In brief, this is how you apply these principles:

1. Going out of court to battle judges

  1. The courts are the turf of the judges. There they disregard the rules that they do not like and make others up as they go.
  2. By contrast, out-of-court they are most vulnerable because they are required by Canon 2 of their own Code of Conduct ‘to avoid impropriety and even the appearance of impropriety’(*>jur:68fn123a) and his Canon is applied to them by outsiders susceptible to becoming outraged at them.
    .
    a. Supreme Court Associate Justice Abe Fortas was made to appear by Life magazine to have committed improprieties Public outrage was such that he first had to withdraw his name from the nomination to become chief justice, and then had to resign from the Court on May 14, 1969(*>jur:92§d).
    .
    b. Circuit Judge Robert Bork on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit never made it to the Supreme Court because he was seen by senators and the public during his Senate confirmation hearings to have behaved improperly when years before he even was a judge and was only the Solicitor General he participated in the Saturday Night Massacre by firing Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox, who was investigating the Watergate scandal, after the attorney general and deputy attorney general refused President Nixon’s order to fire Cox.
    .
  3. Hence, it is out of court that you want to expose the misconduct of unaccountable judges who risklessly abuse their power.

2. Strengthening your association by searching for other victims of judges’ abuse and helping to develop a clearinghouse and a research center

  1. The MeToo! public that can be traced back to the Women’s March and began with more definite demands by asserting its refusal to tolerate sexual abuse anymore has strengthened its numbers by bringing and admitting into its fold other kinds of abusees, whether they have suffered pay inequality, exclusion from the top boardroom positions, police brutality, mishandling on an aircraft, gun violence at school, misuse of their personal information entrusted to or collected by Facebook, discrimination at a Starbuck shop, etc. Its outrage is now swift, visceral, and taken seriously; its shared rallying cry is:

Enough is enough! We won’t tolerate any form of abuse anymore.

  1. Likewise, you and your associates want to find as many other victims of your judges and their cronies as possible and persuade them to join forces with you. They share your outrage and are passionate about vindicating their rights and being compensated for the abuse that they have suffered.
  2. All of you together will strengthen your ‘lonely whining’ about your judges into a roaring clamor that will give the rest of the public reasonable cause to believe that those judges and their cronies have engaged in misconduct resulting in the parties being abused. So they too will join your association. Your clamor will become a rallying cry that further strengthens your association.
  3. To find those other victims:
    .
    a. search for other parties to lawsuits who have been or are before the same judges as you and who may likewise have cause to believe that those judges abused them. There is a detailed method for identifying those parties(*>OL:274-283, 304-307). Together you are going to detect points of commonality that reveal the most convincing type of evidence: patterns of abuse.
    .
    b. Then you donate to further develop the website of Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, which already has more than 24,075 subscribers, not just visitors(†>Appendixes). The objective is to turn the website, among other things, into a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by the public and a research center where people can search them for patterns of judges’ abuse (see the Business Plan summary at †>OL2:560, and its Table of Contents at 563).

3. Giving journalists and media outlets an interest of their own in investigating your case as a means of exposing a bankruptcy fraud scheme

  1. The stronger the shown patterns of abuse are, the weaker the claim of judges that you and your associates are only “disgruntled losers” and as such dismissible.
  2. The strongest patterns are those that show how through coordination of abuse and wrongdoing the judges and their cronies have formed and are running a bankruptcy fraud scheme(*>jur:§§1-3).
  3. If you and your associates produce reasonable cause to believe that there is such a scheme, you can grow your numbers with an indispensable ally: journalists and media outlets.
  4. If you go to a journalist with another claim like those of millions of parties who lost in court, you are nothing but another whiner.
  5. Instead, do your homework in a professional way and make a persuasive presentation on a pattern of abuse so coordinated and extensive that it reveals a bankruptcy fraud scheme run by the judge(s) in your case, the judges of your court, and even the judges of a judiciary. That is how you and your associates can attract the attention and respect of journalists and media outlets. They will realize what is in it for them if they investigate your story: the personal and professional recognition of a Pulitzer prize and its concomitant commercial benefit.
  6. That is precisely the prize that The New York Times just won for the exposé of Reporters Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, among others, of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse; and what earned women with the courage to expose their sexual abusers the coveted recognition of becoming TIME’s Persons of the Year: “The Silence Breakers”.
  7. Those are but two of the many moral and material rewards(*>OL:3§F) in store for the ambitious and principled journalists and media outlets that realize that it is in their interest to investigate your story; and for those victims and whistleblowing judges and clerks(*>jur:106§c) who agree to be interviewed for the record.
  8. This third principle of strategic thinking explains why if you ask a lawyer to help you pro bono, thus offering to pay him nothing, you get what you pay for: No legal help of value, for he who asks for alms only gets pocket change.

C. The concrete, realistic, and feasible action that you and your associates can take now in your own interest

  1. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. Empower yourself by reading the template(†>OL2:681) that can be used to persuade judges and clerks to admit to, whistleblow on, or be confidential informants about, unaccountable judges’ and clerks’ riskless abuse and thus become the Champions of Justice(*>OL:201§K) of a public intolerant of any form of abuse.
  2. Continue reading my written presentation of how you can strengthen your position out of court and in the midst of the public with the help of journalists and their media outlets pursuing their personal, professional, and commercial interests(†>OL2:688). Go on reading as many as you can of their (blue text references) that provide supporting and additional information.
  3. SHARE this email and the article below with all your associates as well as your friends and family. Whether they are parties to cases or not, they are all affected by judges’ decisions because the latter bear on everybody’s property, liberty, and all the rights and duties that frame everybody’s life.
  4. Then, Put your money where your outrage and heart are. DONATE to the work of Judicial Discipline Reform of exposing unaccountable judges’ riskless abuse of power as the national public prepares to wield its strongest power: the power to vote politicians out of, or not into, office in the primaries and mid-term elections.
    .
    a. It is now when a national public must be informed about judges’ abuse so that the public becomes outraged and demands from politicians that they take a stand on that issue in their political platforms and at every rally and townhall meeting. That is how the national public can assert its status as We the People entitled to hold all their public servants, including judicial public servants, accountable for their duty to comply with the requirements of due process and equal protection of the law; and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse.
    .
    b. It is now when you and your associates can become the originating impulse for the formation of a MeToo!-like civic movement –the People’s Sunrise *>OL:201§J– that grows to be powerful enough to force the adoption of judicial reform to end the privileged status that judges have arrogated to themselves: Judges Above the Law.

Donate here

or
at the GoFundMe campaign

https://www.gofundme.com/expose-unaccountable-judges-abuse

Visit the website at, and subscribe for free to its articles thus:
http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org> + New or Users >Add New

Dare trigger history!(*>jur:7§5)…and you may enter it.
* http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b

(If a link does not open a webpage, copy and paste it into your browser’s web address box, and click ‘enter’.)

  1. Should you and your associates deem that you and others would benefit from my holding on your premises a fee + expenses paid presentation(cf. OL:197§G) or one-day seminar(cf. OL:191, 202; OL2:622, 623) of the strategy laid out here, please let me know. Time is of the essence: the primaries and the campaigning for the mid-term elections have started in which it is in your interest to insert this issue.

To retain Dr. Cordero’s law consulting, research and writing, and representational services or request that he hold a presentation or seminar for your group, see his model letter of engagement(*>OL:383; †>OL2:667).

NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at * >ggl:1 et seq., when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

 

Published by

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq., is a doctor of law and researcher-writer attorney. He is a member of the New York State Bar and lives in New York City. He earned his doctorate of law from the University of Cambridge in England, where his thesis dealt with the integration of the banking industry in the European Union. He earned a French law degree from La Sorbonne in Paris, where he concentrated on currency stability and the abuse of dominant positions by entities in commerce, similar to American antitrust law. He also earned a Master of Business Administration from the University of Michigan, where he concentrated on the use of computers and their networks to maximize workflow efficiency and productivity. Dr. Cordero worked as a researcher-writer at the preeminent publisher of analytical legal commentaries, Lawyers Cooperative Publishing, a member of West/Thomson Reuters. There he wrote commentaries on the regulation of financial activities under federal law. Currently at Judicial Discipline Reform, he is promoting the creation of a multidisciplinary academic and business team to advocate judges’ accountability and discipline reform. The need for such reform is based on his analysis of official statistics, reports, and statements of the Federal Judiciary and its judges, who are the models for their state counterparts. That analysis is set forth in his study of the Federal Judiciary and its judges, the models for their state counterparts: Exposing Judges’ Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Wrongdoing: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting; http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf Dr. Cordero offers to make a presentation at a video conference or in person to you and your colleagues of the evidence of judicial wrongdoing so that you may learn how to join the effort to expose it and bring about judicial reform. Contact him at Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net. Dare trigger history!(* >jur:7§5)…and you may enter it. * http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero-Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf

Leave a Reply