MLK said: "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere"

End Corruption in the Courts!

Court employee, judge or citizen - Report Corruption in any Court Today !! As of May 15, 2014, we've received over 137,835 tips...KEEP THEM COMING !! Email: CorruptCourts@gmail.com

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Fallout from Corrupt Commission on Judicial Conduct Continues

High Court Removes One Judge But Reduces His Brother's Penalty to Admonition
The New York Law Journal by Joel Stashenko - October 21, 2009

ALBANY, NY - The state Court of Appeals today removed Joseph S. Alessandro of Westchester County as state Supreme Court justice, but reduced to an admonition a removal recommendation against his brother Francis M. Alessandro, a Bronx Civil Court judge. In a pair of 6-0 rulings in one per curiam decision, the judges distinguished the severity of wrongdoing by Joseph from that of his brother Francis. The brothers ran afoul of ethics rules in connection with a loan Joseph took out while seeking a Westchester County judgeship in 2003 and subsequent omissions on loan applications and financial disclosure forms filed by both brothers. Joseph failed to repay the $250,000 loan to his former campaign manager Barbara Battista within the promised time period, "strung ... along" the manager's lawyer about meeting the obligation and failed to accurately disclose the loan as required by law, the Court concluded today. "His failure to disclose the Battista mortgage in these documents is consistent with an ongoing pattern of shirking his obligation to repay her," the Court held.

The judges said they agreed with the state Commission on Judicial Conduct that Joseph's actions were far worse than "mere carelessness" and should result in Joseph's removal as judge. As to his brother, the Court held that Francis was not obligated to repay the $250,000, Joseph was. Omissions on Francis' subsequent financial disclosure forms and loan applications did not appear to be intentional or designed to conceal obligations to gain Francis any advantage, the Court held. "We emphasize that judges should adhere to the highest standards of honesty and integrity in all matters; however, we are unwilling to remove a Judge from office for completing loan applications in a sloppy fashion where there is no evidence of intent to deceive," the Court held. The Commission on Judicial Conduct had voted 9-0 to recommend Joseph's removal and 8-1 for Francis' ouster. In separate decisions containing nearly identical findings, the commission determined that the two men's actions had "irretrievably damaged" their ability to remain as judges (NYLJ, Feb. 24). Francis co-signed for the 30-day loan brother Joseph accepted from his campaign manager. But Joseph told the commission he renegotiated a 15-year loan—which he alone signed—when he realized that not repaying the obligation within the 30-day period would represent receipt of a campaign contribution far in advance of acceptable limits. The campaign manager ultimately sued and Joseph settled for $274,000.

Both brothers subsequently were charged by the Commission on Judicial Conduct with failing to report the loan and the suit on various loan applications and court financial disclosure forms they filled out from 2003 to 2005. Joseph won the 2003 election and, in 2005, was elected to the state Supreme Court in the judicial district covering Westchester, Putnam, Dutchess, Orange and Rockland counties. Francis, 70, has been a Civil Court judge in the Bronx since 1990. At oral arguments before the Court of Appeals in September, Francis' attorney Robert P. Roche noted that Francis is facing mandatory retirement at the end of this year due to his age. Mr. Roche pleaded with the judges not to allow Francis' judicial legacy to be overshadowed by removal from the bench in the twilight of his career. Counting today's rulings, the Court of Appeals had upheld 66 removal recommendations by the commission and in 10 other instances reduces removals to lesser sanctions. Both brothers had been suspended with pay since appealing the commission's removal recommendations. jstashenko@alm.com

2 comments:

fed up said...

The Commission on Judicial Conduct is completely corrupt when it protects certain judges and only goes after certain select others. Two sets of rules are unacceptable, one for the connected and one for those who have been targeted. Bring in the feds. NOW !!!

Anonymous said...

Maybe the brother from the Hudson Valley can strike a deal by talking about the criminal enterprise taking place the Orange COunty Supreme COurt--maybe he'll talk about Justice John K. McGuirk and his backroom dealsssssss....

Blog Archive

See Video of Senator John L. Sampson's 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption

The first hearing, held in Albany on June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:


               Video of 1st Hearing on Court 'Ethics' Corruption
               The June 8, 2009 hearing is on two videos:
         
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 1
               CLICK HERE TO SEE Part 2