Sunday, October 11, 2015

It Goes On and On and On...!

And the latest from the Appellate Court that oversees the Bully on the Bench has found yet another issue with his court actions and the actions of the district attorneys that practice there.

Not surprisingly, once again an "underdog" is victimized in his courtroom.

All your political opinions regarding illegal aliens aside, what type of justice do we have as a nation when we deny due process rights to any person?

Yet this judge has now added a whole new category to his bullying victims. Previously it was those with depression (Jon Massey), those with developmental disabilities (Paul Priest), and children with disabilities (Nick Nicorvo Part I and Part II). Now he has been shown to use his power to bully illegal aliens (Juan Medina).


This is just part of the Appellate Court decision that returned the case to the judge to be reopened. (The full Appellate ruling can be read by clicking on "Juan Medina" above.)

Who is the "County Court"? That would be the judge himself. Part of his duties are to fully explain the consequences of any guilty plea. Yet the judge failed to do so.

Which means, if nothing else, additional taxpayer cost.

But let's look at this in the perspective of the previous four articles. This is the same judge who has repeatedly violated state statutes in order to prosecute defendants beyond what is allowed by law.

Once again, incompetence or arrogance? You be the judge!

It is time to stand up, speak out, and expose corruption!

Friday, October 2, 2015

Oops! He Did It Again!

In "Bully on the Bench" I wrote about a judge who either is so incompetent that he doesn't know what he is legally able to do, or is so bound and determined to make a name for himself (by persecuting prosecuting those least able to defend themselves) that he ignores the statutes which he is supposed to uphold.

However now it appears that the second option is more likely, as it has happened once again. (Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice, shame on you!)

There is an all new postscript to the story of Nick Nicorvo. The original entry about Nick's story, "Echoes", gives the details of how this victim of bullying was subjected to further abuse by the same judge who presided in "Bully on the Bench".

Since that point in time, Nick was sentenced by this judge AS AN ADULT, to serve 1-3 years in state prison. His offense (the only one on his record, not even having school disciplinary issues to his name) was at age 15, and despite the fact that he went on to graduate from high school early with a Regent's Honor Diploma while he was incarcerated, the judge decided to "throw the book" at him.

Interestingly enough, during the process of carrying out the sentence, something unusual happened. In New York, those sentenced to state prison are normally sent for a few days or more to a facility for processing and evaluation before ending up at their final destination.

When Nick was sent to Auburn Correctional Facility (a maximum security state prison) for this phase of his sentence, a records review demonstrated that he was a child in the eyes of New York State at the time of his crime and arrest, and the judge was NOT ALLOWED by statute to sentence him as an adult, especially to serve time in state prison.

So Nick is being returned to Jefferson County for more appropriate sentencing that reflects his juvenile status.

Now if this were a one-time incident of a judge making a mistake, it wouldn't be so worthy of notice. However, as detailed in "Bully on the Bench", this same judge who violated the rights of this autistic boy, also violated the rights of a developmentally disabled man.

And both of this incidents occurred after he violated the rights of Jon Massey. This same judge misapplied the "Rape Shield Law" to prevent Jon from presenting a true defense. He is also the same judge who allowed multiple issues arise during the course of the prosecution of Jon's case (see "Nerd Law and Legalese") that were questionable at best.

And finally, this is the same judge that dismissed the indictment and sealed the record upon Jon's death (as is appropriate under state law), yet once the time period had passed for Jon's family to file an appeal on his behalf or to file a wrongful death lawsuit, he selectively unsealed the "guilty" verdict to further abuse Jon's family (and under state statute such an order is supposed to come from a higher level judge).

At this point, the citizens of Jefferson County, NY should be questioning every case that has come before this judge. It has become crystal clear that his actions don't arise out of ignorance, they are the product of his arrogance.

It is time to stand up, speak out, and expose a corrupt system!

Nick Nicorvo's family is hoping to bring him home for Christmas. Click here for a link to their GoFundMe page.

Monday, August 24, 2015

How Far Will They Go? (Snitch Part Two)

On Friday, October 17, 2014, the largest weapons arrest in Jefferson County, NY history was made. (Click to read the full article.)

The only reason these weapons did NOT end up in the hands of drug dealers or other criminals was because of the efforts of a long-term "snitch" for the local police agencies. (This was actually the same CRI mentioned in the blog entry Snitch.)

The two "gentlemen" attempting to broker the weapons had contacted him to find them a buyer.

The snitch promptly began contacting anyone and everyone he knew in law enforcement in an attempt to set up a sting to get these "fine upstanding citizens" and the weapons off the streets.

He texted a Sheriff's deputy, but she was on the way out of the country on vacation and unable to do anything.

He called his probation officer, who initially ignored the report/request. (Interestingly enough, one of the young men arrested on the weapons charges is the nephew of that probation officer.)

He continued to contact any and every law enforcement contact he could, until finally he received a response.

But in the meantime, the two young men were getting suspicious and anxious. They told the snitch that they wanted him to prove that he was capable of doing the buy, and that he only had a few hours or they would go elsewhere.

So he borrowed $200 from a family member, bought an unloaded gun for "Mr. Big" to inspect, and put it in the locked gun safe at his house.

Before he had a chance to blink, the local task force produced the $5K for the rest of the buy and had him set up a deal. The snitch was the third man in the car, sitting in the front seat with a loaded hand gun pointed at him from the rear by one of the two arrested.

When the arrest went down, as part of his statement he informed the officers about the gun in his locked safe and he took them to retrieve it.

However, the "snitch" had unfortunately testified on behalf of his mother three and a half months earlier in the Family Court aspect of the Jon Massey Case.

As retaliation for his efforts in exposing the fraud, false allegations, and wrongful prosecution that resulted in the death of Jon Massey, the district attorney and the judge decided to "throw the book" at the snitch. In fact, they "fast-tracked" his case.

Meanwhile, the two weapons thieves are still in jail awaiting trial. And the primary witness against them? The "snitch" who is well within his rights to plead the Fifth Amendment and refuse to testify for the people responsible for ongoing harassment of his family and friends.

That could result in two high level criminals going free.

Or maybe this was the plan all along - after all, it wouldn't look good for the nephew of a probation officer to be convicted of the "largest weapons bust" in Jefferson County history. Far better to continue to harass a family to cover up a wrongful action that resulted in the death of an innocent man, as well as irreparable harm to multiple children.

It is time to stand up, speak out, and expose corruption!


Monday, August 17, 2015

Suicide Survivor

I am a suicide survivor and this is one of the most deeply personal blog entries that I will write.

A suicide survivor isn't someone who has attempted suicide and lived, it is one of the people left behind after a suicide.

On February 28, 2014, my partner and best friend killed himself. Apparently, he took a dose of cyanide, and although he "lived" for three days until March 2, 2014, he died that Friday when he heard the "guilty" verdict from a jury that was prevented from hearing the full story.

One of the struggles that many suicide survivors go through is thinking that the one gone didn't love them. I'm here to tell you that isn't true.

Often, the only reason a suicide has lived one more hour, one more day, is out of love for those around them and a desire to not cause them pain.

Jon and I had many discussions about his depression and suicidality. I had no illusions that he spent much of his time wanting to die, especially after the lies that destroyed his faith in many people.

What I never doubted either was that his love for me (as well as his mother and sister) was what kept him going for almost two years.

We both knew that the verdict that came down would be used by the same corrupt individuals to try to destroy my life and that of my children. Oddly enough, the lesson that Jon indirectly taught my children was that true family stands together, even through the bad times; and that love and faith in truth and justice is more important than money and power and desire for fame.

So I know that his love for me kept him going, kept him strong, kept him wearing his "mask" to appear as though he was okay.

But there are so many other ways that he expressed his love for me.

At the end of the day, I would come home to dishes washed, dinner ready or planned, and a relatively clean house. If you think this is "no big deal", keep in mind that Jon's depression would keep him in bed curled up in a ball on many days, and the energy he expended to get up and do those things would make him sleep for hours later.

Jon would be the one to say - "let's go...(fishing, out to dinner, to the movies)" because he knew that I wasn't ashamed of him and wasn't scared of what other people would think. To accomplish this, he had to muster up all his strength because every time he went in public he was frightened that people would point their fingers or believe the worst of him.

Depression is a dark and ugly and scary world, and one that I had problems dealing with...so I had to frame it in the abstract, make it hypothetical. I did this out of my love for Jon, because it was part of him that I had to deal with in order to stay by his side.

And it got very dark and scary at times - but Jon's love for me is what kept him on the straight and narrow path.

Depression was part of Jon when he returned into my life. We had known each other from seventh grade through graduation, but had lost touch along the way. In the intervening years, life had dealt him some nasty turns, and that's when the depression really grabbed hold of him.

His love for me was what made him listen when all he wanted to do was wreak havoc on those who had worked to destroy him.

His love for me was what kept him from utilizing all his resources to take down those corrupt individuals who decided that money, power, job security, political position, were far more important than five children, two adults, and their friends and family members.

Jon was brilliant, far too smart to have ever done what he was accused of doing, and able to accomplish pretty much anything he set his mind to do. This is the same man who somehow manufactured cyanide and was able to kill himself while in court custody - something that most other people wouldn't think was even possible.

I learned far more than I needed to know about the Silk Road, the upper echelon of Anonymous, zero day apps, honey pots, LD50, and more. And none of those was utilized, because Jon listened to me out of love, and realized that it wouldn't be the right thing.

So at the end of the day, love wins.

Jon didn't commit suicide - he was issued a death sentence. The verdict didn't come from the misguided jury, it came from the judge who chose to suppress all evidence of Jon's innocence. It came from the District Attorney and Assistant District Attorney that denied him justice, persecuted and prosecuted an innocent man, and harassed his family and friends. It came from the DSS attorney who repeatedly stated to OUR attorneys that he knew all the charges were "BS", but that he had been "ordered" to proceed by the county government to avoid a lawsuit.

I'm not sure how any of you sleep at night, but kiss your integrity goodbye. You lost that when you deliberately, and with malice aforethought, sent an innocent man to die.

Stand up, speak out, expose corruption!

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

Bully on the Bench!

What do you call the kid in school that deliberately picks on the autistic students?

What do you call the kid in school that deliberately picks on the "emo" kids who appear to have depression issues?

What do you call the kid in school that deliberately picks on the "special class" students that are "slow"?

The name that probably comes to mind for all three of these situations is "bully", and you would be right. Anyone who picks on those who are unable to adequately defend themselves due to these characteristics is in fact a bully.

And what happens when you put a bully on the bench? Allow an adult to be in a judicial position where some of the defendants that come in front of the court are autistic, or depressed, or of low IQ?

A leopard doesn't change its spots, and an old dog doesn't take to new tricks.

Maybe the judge justifies this behavior as "culling the herd"...after all, wouldn't society be better off without these people? They drain public resources and are a potential nuisance. (All of this is stated with heavy sarcasm from my end, BTW.)

In Jefferson County, NY, we have a judge who is demonstrating quite a track record lately. The decisions handed down from his bench in cases that involve individuals with disabilities do not conform to case law, are designed to suppress evidence and secure convictions, and most of all, do not hold up under scrutiny.

I've already detailed a lot of the disingenuous behavior and malfeasance by DSS, the District Attorney, and the Judge in the Jon Massey Case. Jon had long term depression that predated any knowledge or involvement with "Ruby" by around ten years, yet the depression was used as "proof of guilt" in her false allegations. The judge also willfully misapplied the "Rape Shield Law" in order to cover up Ruby's true motives and continue the persecution.

I've also blogged about Nick Nicorvo's Case. Nick has Asperger's Syndrome, and although extremely bright (he graduated with a Regents Honor diploma a year early, despite being incarcerated) he does not have the appropriate social skills and is characterized with a strong desire to please others. These qualities were capitalized on during the course of his case.

The latest in the saga is Paul Priest's story. Paul is an adult who has learning disabilities that diminish his capacity. Paul is extremely willing to please others, and is very compliant with those who he perceives as authority figures.

Paul was arrested based on the allegations made by a teenage girl (sound familiar to the Jon Massey case?). There was a subsequent "trial", and Paul was allowed to plead guilty and totally waive his right to a Grand Jury. The odd thing is, the charges against Paul meant that he was not legally able to waive these rights.

You would think that an experienced judge (on the bench for 15 years) and an experienced DA (at least the same amount of time) would know that such a waiver of rights is not allowed. It wasn't up to Paul Priest to know.


What's interesting is that this case immediately followed on the heels of the Jon Massey case. The appellate decision in Paul's case means that everything starts over at square one. There was the initial expense of the first trial, the expenses involved in the appeal, and now there will potentially be a new trial for Paul. More taxpayer expense simply because the judge, and the DA, thought that they would be able to railroad Paul simply because he wasn't bright.

Given that Jon's, Nick's, and Paul's cases all went through within a year and a half of each other, this is a disturbing pattern. A judge who should be ensuring justice appears to be padding his resume by denying justice to those who are least able to defend themselves.

These days, there is constant discussion about bullying in the classroom. Unfortunately, it is a something that isn't limited to one area. In Jefferson County, NY, there is a bully on the bench, hiding behind his judicial robes and using his position to deny justice and assert power.

It is time to stand up, speak out, and expose corruption!

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Til Death... (Oh Captain, My Captain)

I was watching an episode of Elementary the other day, and Sherlock said something to the effect of "when you frame someone, the best result is for the framed person to end up dead, that way they can never prove their innocence".

This is the same goal for a parent who sets out to deliberately alienate a child (children) from the other parent. If the alienated parent ends up dead, the alienator wins. There is no way for that parent to prove their innocence and love for the child(ren).

After all, when an alienator sets out on their path of destruction, they don't just target the parent, the entire circle of family and friends gets drawn in to the abuse. Either others become supporters, or they also become secondary targets of alienation.

For the longest time, the saying "it takes a village to raise a child" was legitimately recognized as a valid concept. It takes both parents (whether together or apart) and both sides of the family, as well as the extended network of friends on both sides to truly help a child grow into a productive member of society. This is how our society once grew and prospered, and it was revisited again as recently as this past decade in educational circles.

Yet this whole idea is totally contrary to the interests of a sociopathic, psychopathic, or narcissistic parent. A parent who alienates the other parent and/or all family members and friends is not interested in raising a healthy child. They are interested in being the center of the universe, and the focus of their child's attention.

Saddest of all is when the alienated parent dies.

I witnessed just such an episode. In this case, the parent was custodial and able to minimize the negativity and attacks by the other parent simply because it could only occur during visitation.

However, once this parent died, the alienator was given custody and immediately kicked into overdrive - making up for years of lost time.

The children were completely isolated from the network of family and friends that they had once enjoyed. Any requests for contact or visits was rebuffed or given conditionally. (The alienator was placing financial demands on others - employment or outright requests for money) as the terms for "possibly" seeing the children.)

It is time to take a stand - to promote awareness of this form of psychological and emotional abuse directed at children and parents. It is time for the "family" courts to recognize that it is a real phenomenon and to enact appropriate evaluative techniques to minimize or prevent its occurrence.

It is time to stand up, speak out, and expose the flaws in our system!

Thursday, July 16, 2015

A Judge Speaks

Judge Alex Kozinski has detailed 12 reasons why the criminal justice system is "worrying". (Click here for the full text of the article)

We encountered quite a few of these issues first hand during the Jon Massey Case.

As there was absolutely NO evidence in our case, it being completely a "he said/she said" situation, the first four situations didn't really apply.

However issue number 5 - the topic of human memory being reliable, was a central issue in the case. (See the blog entries (Her Own Words!, Doctor, Doctor, Give Me the News, and ADAs (Apparently Dumb Attorneys) for more details on what occurred in our case.)


This finding has troubling implications for criminal trials where witnesses are questioned long and hard by police and prosecutors before the defense gets to do so — if ever. There is thus plenty of opportunity to shape and augment a witness’s memory to bring it into line with the prosecutor’s theory of what happened. Yet with rare exceptions, courts do not permit expert testimony on human memory.
We had a judge and a District Attorney ignoring all the interview evidence that had taken place, and those parties actually PREVENTED the jury from hearing about this testimony in both the criminal trial, and the Family Court trial. It is fairly apparent that the falsity of the allegations was well-known, yet the judges and prosecutors were determined to get a "guilty" verdict at all costs.

Point number 7 - that juries follow instructions, was also an issue in our case. Twelve jurors reported out that the ONLY reason they believed a 16 year old girl (who was known to be sexually active and who had received fairly comprehensive health and human body instruction in school) was because she could describe the difference between a circumcised and uncircumcised penis. (See the blog entry Beyond a Reasonable Doubt for details.) There should have been no doubt that she could have gotten that information elsewhere, and there should have been no conviction.

Point 8 - "Prosecutors play fair" also came into play. I can tell you that prosecutors do NOT play fair.

We had witness tampering and intimidation occurring throughout the duration of the case. (Blog entries: Witness Tampering? and Coincidence?) This in addition to blatantly ignoring all testimony that had occurred at the suppression hearing from the county's own expert witnesses.

The prosecutor additionally used an "expert" witness to testify regarding a widely discredited theory, CSAAS. (Blog entry: Junk Science)

Finally, there was the active suppression of evidence and testimony by wrongfully applying a statute. (Blog entry: Wolf Cry!)

The police are NOT objective (point 10). (Blog entries: Pick and Choose! and This Isn't CSI Folks!) We had police officers intimidating witnesses and interfering with actual criminal matters - if the 21 year old boyfriend were charged, that would discredit the case against Jon Massey.

Judge Kozinski also spoke out about the fallibility of the Grand Jury system - which we also experienced: A Grand Jury Ain't So Grand!

Then end result is that Ruby not only got what she wanted (What a Girl Wants!) but also taught her friends how to manipulate the system to their own ends (Ruby Slippers).

It is time to stand up, speak out, and reform a system that is broken and corrupt beyond retrieval.