New Jersey's Political and Supreme Court Whores!

Hackers have altered the spacing in this essay. I have done my best to cope with the problem. The spacing will be altered on a regular basis -- I hope -- proving much of what I am saying.

Laura Masnerus, "Witness Recovers From Overdose to Describe New Jersey Graft," The New York Times, June 7, 2006, at p. B1.
Peter Applebome, "Side Effects to a Remedy for Housing," The New York Times, June 7, 2006, at p. B1.
David Kocieniewski, "Audit Disputes $52 Million In School Medicaid Claims," in The New York Times, June 8, 2006, at p. B6.

"The case of Raymond J. O'Grady is the culmination of years of work by federal investigators, a tale opening a window on small-town graft that brought down more than a dozen public officials in a New Jersey county run by old-fashioned patronage politics." That's exactly like most New Jersey counties.

Political bosses in New Jersey's urban counties, especially, usually claiming some affiliation with big-time Democrats (who often "sell their souls" -- if they have any -- for votes delivered on election day), use local government as well as "connections" to state and/or federal government funds and influence to create fiefdoms of power and privilege. A refrain from local bosses is: "This is my territory." It may be that Republicans are just as bad. In my experience, the Democrats have been the worst crooks in New Jersey government.

Political and judicial hacks "misappropriate" funds and accumulate power for themselves and their friends, by controlling police (look up the history of the "old," and not-so-old, West New York police department), governmental administrative services and appointments to the bench. Now it appears that New Jersey schools may also have been "milked."

"School districts in New Jersey improperly billed Medicaid more than $51 million for special education programs, according to a federal audit, filing claims for thousands of speech and physical therapy treatments that they could not prove were necessary, were provided by qualified practioners or were ever actually delivered."

Where did the money go? The response to this question will be something like: "Are you a trouble maker?" As a matter of fact, yes I am. The grotesque absurdity of persons involved in New Jersey's legal sewer judging anyone's ethics is worthy of Jonathan Swift or Kafka. In a state where Supreme Court justices "field" [sic.] ethics complaints and use the mechanisms of legal ethics enforcement as weapons, against one another, the very word "ethics" acquires a foul stench. (This was the word used in a newspaper account of Mr. Rivera-Soto's troubles, as I recall.)

"You got a problem, go see Nicky or Joey. When you get to court, it'll be taken care of." This is usually followed by a deep baritone's chuckle and a puff on a cigar that looks like the Hindenberg blimp.

"No, thanks. I'll take my chances."

There are Municipal Courts where a little group of friends gathers out of earshot, right before sessions begin, seemingly working things out very nicely, long before anything is said on the record. Attorneys and litigants who are not in the club rarely get the sweetheart deals.

"Mr. O'Grady, 56, a former committee man in Middletown Township, N.J., is charged with taking $8,000 in cash to help steer municipal work to contractors, including two men who turned out to be agents of the F.B.I."

The F.B.I. has an annoying tendency to spoil everybody's fun. These "public servants" are involved in "getting" people appointed as judges and in "getting" a few "big time lawyers" on the big time bar committees. These local public servants then evaluate the ethics of others or have an influence on who gets to do so.

The opinions of such people concerning one's ethics should not be all that troubling. I am always far more critical on myself than any such person could ever be, and more entitled to make such judgments. The disgusting pimps and whores in New Jersey's legal profession and establishment are fond of altering the spacing in paragraphs in my essays. If they supply someone like Poritz with a sexual partner, they get to slide.

"Mr. O'Grady was among 15 local officials arrested in February and March 2005 in a continuing investigation called Operation Bid Rig" -- one of several unfolding in New Jersey right now, by my estimate, and the best is yet to come! -- "which started in 1998." A key witness against him is a veteran of Jersey politics, "Anthony J. Palughi," who "recently retired as Monmouth County superintendent of bridges, and agreed to tape conversations with Mr. O'Grady, among other officials, when he [Palughi] was arrested in December 2004. [Palughi] pleaded guilty in August 2005 to setting up bribes for other officials and pocketing money for himself."

Somehow New Jersey state authorities missed this criminal organization and activity for forty years or so. The reward for New Jersey Attorney Generals doing as little as possible about state political corruption is usually a spot on the Supreme Court. The powers that be in Trenton were far too busy arranging for judges to have their portraits painted (at your expense) to worry about corruption, especially their own. The corruption is also at your expense. Mazeltov.

"Along with other recordings that the jury heard when the trial opened last week, the tapes track the two men discussing their 'deals,' all in dialogue that could have been lifted from a 'Sopranos' script -- accents and expletives included."

Lawyers in New Jersey have been known to utter these immortal words: "Hey, what do you know? I don't know about this? You know about this? ... I don't know from nothin' ..." So much was left out of my law school experience, like the exact meaning of the word: "Geez."

Mr. Palughi admitted that he had no qualification for the county jobs that he held for more than 20 years. "In his $92,000-a-year job as superintendent of bridges, he said, he worked mostly as a chauffer for freeholder Director Harry W. Larrison Jr., one of the two elected officials who died." (You won't see him no more.) And here is the "bottom line" in New Jersey:

"That's how the system worked for years and years, no matter what party was in," [Palughi] said, "It's a sin [and a crime!] that it had to work that way, but it did." You said it, Anthony. Usually, the only party in power has been the Democrats. How come we never put you on the Supreme Court? You are a man of wisdom. "Take the canolis."

Meanwhile, back at the Supreme Court building in Trenton: Continuing problems of corruption, graft and incompetence surrounding the New Jersey Supreme Court's -- allegedly well-intentioned -- "Mount Laurel" decision, requiring "developers" ("Hey, Fat Tony, isn't your cousin Phil a 'developer'?") to provide specific amounts of moderate to low income housing have made New Jersey's Supreme Court and that decision the national example of judicial incompetence in usurping legislative functions. Scary, huh? How many judges are in the child porn business, Mr. Palughi?

It is one thing when judges are fearless in upholding individual rights, at the level of Constitutional principles. It is quite another when they decide to "fix" society by dictating social policy in areas where they lack economic or other technical expertise to even understand what the difficulties are, let alone to prescribe solutions. Republicans and advocates of judicial restraint -- when it comes to courts formulating public policy in general -- have a point in advocating caution; liberals are right, however, to insist that courts must not shirk their responsiblity to defend persons' rights, even when they are unpopular for doing so.

It might even be a good idea to protect people from interference with their free speech rights. I couldn't get into my own group today because of continuing obstructions and harassment -- harassment which is content-based in my opinion -- and certainly we should especially avoid censoring critics of political abuse. I am unable to print items from my msn group receiving only a blank page with the following address at the bottom:

http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N2998.MSNAdDirectResponse/B2304119.3;sz=728x90;ord=159625831?cli...

New Jersey's Supreme Court fails on both counts, in terms of activism and restraint. It caters to majority prejudice on the death penalty and other issues, even as it deigns to instruct others concerning construction and engineering matters, not to mention sewage treatment options. All of these are matters as to which Supreme Court justices probably know less than most people, certainly less than those in industries adversely affected by their inadequate rulings and decisions.

Mayor Cassella of East Rutherford -- that's not far from the big stadium -- was quoted as saying: "I think the obsession [is] to look like you're doing something for the unhoused poor, to use the judge's phrase, [but] there's a lack of common sense, a total lack of looking at the real world."

Sometimes judges don't want to look at the real world, Mr. Mayor, like when people are being tortured, secretly, by persons affiliated with the government -- or maybe the court itself -- so as to get information that is to be used against them. Sometimes judges can't really do much because there are behind the scenes bosses telling them what to do. David Kocieniewski, "No Title and No Elected Office But Influence Accross New Jersey," The New York Times, January 7, 2006, at p. B1 (Profile of alleged Camden Boss "George Norcross III").

Who really calls the shots at the Supreme Court? Who is the real "Chief Justice"? Who's the "boss"? If the spacing between paragraphs has been affected in this essay, then it means I must have struck a nerve. Take a look at the New York Times article cited above.

This may come as a shock to citizens of New Jersey, who never elected such figures and may not even have heard of them. Democracy? Ethics? Sure. How do people put up with this for years? Ideology. Yes, I plan to get into Antonio Gramsci soon. They simply cannot conceive of any other way of life. Government is the province of organized crime and there is nothing that one can do about it. Maybe you can get along with them, the hoods, so they'll toss you some crumbs now and then. Also, fear. People are scared and do not trust either courts or police in New Jersey. I don't blame them. The same goes for the legal ethics enforcement system, which is also controlled by political forces.

Street wisdom says that the police will pick you up one night and you'll be framed for something. Nobody sees you again. Ethics charges maybe. Media smears also work or the Jersey Syndicate. Judges may be aware of it, but they'll look the other way. "That's how it works in America." I was told this by people who understood local government much better than I did, without the benefit of a law school education.

Well, it is not how it works -- and certainly not how it should work -- in America. There is a little something called the Constitution. Sometimes you can actually get the powers that be to abide by it. There is also the FBI (Scully, is that you?) and U.S. Supreme Court. Maybe by preventing efforts to obstruct and silence critics in the "blogosphere," like me, the system can demonstrate its legitimacy. I will not allow hoods and political leeches to define the society in which I raise my child. I will not surrender my faith and trust in the U.S. Constitution because too many men and women have paid the ultimate price for that document to be something more than an exhibit under glass. We must not break faith with those who have defended it -- or with those doing so today in Iraq -- by being afraid to stand up for its principles.

You want to know what is essential to America? Remember the Revolutionary War slogan that said: "Don't tread on me"? I promise you that spirit of individual rebellion in ordinary people is still very much alive in America. That spirit is essential to what this nation is all about. That independence is the aspect of U.S. politics and culture which people everywhere in the world admire and respect. It is this quality that all people respond to in American cinema. If you want one example of what I mean, see Rodney A. Smolla, Jerry Falwell v. Larry Flynt: The First Amendment on Trial (New York: St. Martins, 1988).

"Americans tell powerful leaders to get lost. The people only do what they think is right." Some version of these statements will be found to meet with approval everywhere in the world. The fear today is that, with all the media manipulation and corruption, these statements may no longer be true. But then, there are many wonderful Americans in all walks of life -- such as myself (irony?) -- who tend to express occasional mild disagreements with governmental actions, often living to tell the tale ... for a while. This is to say nothing of our humility and the attractive fragrances we wear at parties.

This contrarian irreverence is embodied in American folklore and cinematic mythology. The American rebel persona is what is great in the "images" of John Wayne ("he breaks the rules, but gets the job done!"), Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford, James Dean, Paul Newman, Sydney Poitier, Denzel Washington or Susan Sarandon, Gina Davis, Carol Lombard, Mae West, Meryl Streep, Halle Berry and so many others. (See the ultimate "Chick-flick" Thelma and Louise.)

Independence and rebelliousness is not an aspect of contemporary America that is seen much these days. It should be. Rich and poor people have always fought in America's wars. This is an attitude that cuts across the political map, which should always be alive and well. Anybody seen Noam Chomsky? Bill Buckley? Jon Stewart? Sarah Vowell?

Let's fight to put those Jersey boys away and leave a better society to our children. No justice, no peace. A good place to start is with Ken Zisa as well as the cesspool that is Hackensack and the Bergen County courthouse.

New Jersey's Feces-Covered Supreme Court.

One of my books at Lulu seems to have disappeared from my storefront or to be boobytrapped, so that an attempt at a download this morning resulted in freezing my computer and may have damaged my system. I will struggle against this computer attack. I do not know whether I will be able to continue writing. I'll be running scans at least once a day. July 11, 2007 at 10:04 A.M. my Norton Security system's capacity to detect and identify intruders has been irreperably damaged by hackers. I can still run scans. I will do my best to keep writing.


May 15, 2007 by 9:34 A.M. there were 362 intrusion attempts against my computer. My primary attacker was 24.192.174.68. (NJ)

April 21, 2007 at 6:57 P.M., there were 10 intrusion attempts and other attacks against my computer. Primary attacker 24.7.164.155. (NJ)

Once again on March 9, 2007 at 9: 00 A.M., I was denied access to this site and was obstructed by a "security risk" that my Norton System cannot resolve. I am still working on it. I am blocking http://adq.nextag.com./buyer/dyad/160x600s.jsp I am unable to change the image in my blog profile.

On March 11, 2007 at 11:45:08 A.M. illegal connections and obstruction efforts continue: http://b.rad.msn.com/ (207.68.178.61); http: (80); 17145 bytes sent; 20502 bytes received; 1:30.600 elapsed time. Many other connections, intrusions, violations of privacy are routine. Hackers alter and deface these texts on a regular basis.

After being blocked from this group and struggling against a major attack against my computer on February 18, 2007, I am able today -- February 20, 2007 at 12:12 P.M., for a while -- to access the site and try to post items. I am unable to print essays, receiving only a blank page with the following address at the bottom: http://view.atdmt.com/MSN/iview/msnnkhac00172x90xWBCBRB00110msn/direct/01

For any state legal system and its operatives to be complicit in criminal conspiracies to violate fundamental U.S. Constitutional rights, like the right to free speech, then for those same people to judge the ethics of others, is a foul and disgusting corruption and betrayal of the very idea of law. This is what I object to, among other things, in New Jersey's legal and political cesspool.

Just as any self-described "physician," who serves as a torturer and information-gatherer for powerful interests is no longer a therapist, only a Mengele-like servant of evil (Terry Tuchin, Diana Riccioli), so legal functionaries in black robes can no longer be called judges -- much less "justices" -- when they disregard violations of fundamnetal rights and conspiracies to violate rights taking place under their auspices and in their name. As I read these words, hackers have made it necessary for me to revise this text yet again. July 8, 2007 at 10:11 P.M.

After forty-five minutes of struggling against viruses, I am in the mood to re-post this angry comment on the New Jersey Supreme Court. I am still unable to see my blogs on a regular basis, but I hope that they are available for others to see. I will keep running scans. The effort not to give in to anger at the moment is exhausting, leaving little energy to write. I continue to make the same corrections numerous times. Readers may experience difficulties in viewing this item, as a result of viruses and spyware problems. I will continue to transfer the essay here from other sources/sites.


David Kocieniewski, "Report Finds Patronage Rife At a University," in The New York Times, April 4, 2006, at p. B1:

"Patronage hiring was so pervasive at New Jersey's state medical school that job applications were marked with a numeral indicating the potency of the applicant's political connections, according to a report released on Monday by a federal monitor."

Many citizens "have reason to believe" that the same system of political and other biases exists in the state's courtrooms. It is simply not the same experience for a politically connected lawyer walking into a New Jersey courtroom as it is for, say, a solo practitioner, who is challenging the system or wants no part of the political clubhouse.

Judges in New Jersey Superior Court are usually (almost always) products of the same politically connected firms from which those influential lawyers, mostly representing banks and insurance companies and/or organized crime, slither out every morning. Thus, judges will be inclined to "take care" of former colleagues. "What do you need, Joe?"

When a judge greets your adversary by his -- and it is usually "his" -- first name and mentions a recent golf outing, you should worry about your chances of winning your motion, whatever the law and facts happen to be. None of this is spoken, or even hinted at by lawyers. It was left out of my law school experience. They usually can't say these things. "Remember, you'll see that judge again." Yet everyone knows what's going on. This is demonstrated by their public denials of these truths, even as they secretly cheer for me to "give 'em hell."

I was told that "taking shit from judges is part of being a lawyer." It seems that the lawyers who are asked to "take shit" fall into the "politically powerless" category and rarely look like -- or socialize with -- the sort of judges who delight in abusing them, usually publicly. An exception is the sold out minority attorney who makes the Faustian bargain of trading his or her identity for professional and political success. http://www.nj.gov/oag/images/ag-ph-act-gov-7-04.jpg (swearing in ceremony for former N.J. Attorney General Peter C. Harvey.)

Tried and true responses to independence in New Jersey will always include anonymous smears, preferably disseminated by "domesticated" minority attorneys willing to lend themselves to such loathsome violations of colleagues' or anyone's rights to due process, typically in a behind-the-back, cowardly fashion. "Anonymity" in a smear campaign is a sure sign that you are dealing with the lowest level of hoodlums or some prominent members of New Jersey's Bar Association. Are these overlapping categories? (See my essay "Chomsky Publisher Jailed in Turkey.")

"While political appointees had received favorable treatment at the school for decades, the report says, the practice became so ingrained by late 2004 that it had evolved into a formal ranking system. Candidates who were recommended by then-United States Representative Robert Menendez, State Senator Raymond Lesniak or a handful of others received the highest ranking: 1."

I wonder whether those grateful recipients of favors found a way to show their appreciation? "A little kickback for the boys who brung ya to the party, eh? Whadda-ya say?"

Maybe there are tapes with such statements on them. Stay tuned to this station.

Those referred by less powerful officials, like members of the medical system's board, would receive a 2 or 3."This revelation -- which does not come as a shock to anyone who has experienced life in the flower-fragant neighborhoods of the Garden State -- makes explicit a system of "favors" which transforms power and law into something that really happens in dirty backrooms, filled with smoke, from which public and litigants are mostly excluded. (See "Psychological Torture in the American Legal System.")

For such foul purposes, dangerous idiots and sadists -- like Terry Tuchin and Diana Riccioli -- will always be available at the drop of a fee. Perhaps lawyers in New Jersey should be assigned a similar number on the basis of their political clout or unofficial "access" to judges, based on their political friendships, so litigants would know which lawyers are in a better position to "take care of things" for them, officially or unofficially. Many lawyers in New Jersey walk around with envelopes filled with cash. They usually win their cases. It may be that some of the recipients of that cash are behind the smear campaign against Jon S. Corzine or the earlier one against Zulima Farber.

Secrecy is the enemy of freedom and always undermines legality. A system of secrecy is preserved only through intimidation and social pressure in the legal profession or government, usually "legitimated" by token minority group members used as frontpersons for a corrupt system. Refuse to play that role. Decide not to be a flunky.

Such a tainted system is designed to teach a single lesson: "You gotta go along to get along." It will work until that day when you decide not to "get along."If you are a young lawyer or police officer in New Jersey -- or anywhere -- make today the day when you decide "not to get along." Don't do anything other than the right thing because it is the right thing. Given recent allegations of torture and murder in New Jersey jails, make it a point to treat people with decency and respect no matter what your superiors tell you to do.

"The document is a kind of Rosetta Stone of New Jersey politics, offering a vivid glimpse into a way of doing business ['it's nothing personal'] that is widely assumed but rarely confirmed."

"But the report also details a broad range of financial irregularities that it said plague the university, including influence-peddling, abuse of expense accounts, and sweetheart deals to steer contracts to politically powerful vendors."

Those "politically powerful vendors" will then (probably) kickback some of the loot to their political patrons, right before they are appointed to serve on an ethics committee. Eventually, those "vendors" may also become elected officials and/or judges. Eighteenth century British judges and lawyers wore robes with a discreet pocket in the rear of the garment for convenient depositing of bribes. Perhaps this is a practice that will soon make a come back in New Jersey? Maybe it already has?

The New York Times, May 31, 2006, at p. B4:

"Paul A. Coughlin, the former mayor of Hazlet, admitted in Federal District Court yesterday that he took a $3,000 bribe to help a vendor obtain a town contract, federal prosecutors said."

This is known in New Jersey legal and political circles as "business as usual." Somehow the state authorities missed this situation. There are many ways of bribing judges, including some that are probably legal or difficult to establish as illegal. When the litigant in a case is in a position, someday, to nominate the judge to higher office or to arrange other goodies for him or her, it has an amazing way of focusing a judge's attention on the merits of his or her argument -- even when that argument lacks or has no merit.

It must be a comfort to the citizens of New Jersey, at a time when the "gimmicks" (Gov. Jon S. Corzine's term) of the past have resulted in the disappearance of millions -- or even billions -- of public dollars, to provide oil paintings of judges at public expense, as schools in poor districts are asked to make sacrifices. Despite the expense, these paintings are not exactly "museum quality." Luckily, we also have nice large color photographs of these distinguished jurists, both individual and collective photos (also paid for with your tax dollars), that we can all treasure.

Posting "Anonymous" and false Internet smears about me, inserting "errors" in my essays, will not change the anger many residents of New Jersey feel towards their corrupt institutions and the sold out persons inhabitting them, like maggotts growing in a moldy piece of cheese. "What goes around comes around," is another bit of Jersey wisdom.

I wish to be just as fair in my comments -- indeed, more so -- as "others" in the past, acting for the state of New Jersey have been to their adversaries, or to me. I realize that I am making myself a target for reprisals and that most people in the system are intimidated. No doubt additional "anonymous" smears will be next. It is possible that I will experience an "unfortunate accident" after saying this. I seem to be blocking, every day, something called http://www.doubleclick.org/ ?

I may be accused of violating the "Wildlife and Hunting Act of 1735" by stepping on a centipede, so as to be prosecuted accordingly, only to suffer another unfortunate accident while incarcerated. (Has anyone seen Zulima Farber, Esq.?) I may be accused of urinating in public. If so, I won't say where I hope that will be. I may have to put up with continuing insults and threats directed at family members and friends, or at me. Daily obstructions and virus troubles are a feature of my writing experience.

These are standard methods for dealing with critics in the Garden State, violence or frame ups. Nothing surprises me when it comes to New Jersey's power-structure, official and unofficial. The fawning acquiescence in oppression by some minority and other attorneys concerned for their prospects is understandable, if sickening. Somebody has to say these things, in other words, and I am well beyond being intimidated at this point in my life.

I have experienced great difficulties in accessing this blog/group today, yet again, changing my password several times to do so. The format may be defaced by "cyber attacks" on my blog, so that my profile will be moved to the bottom of the page. I fully expect more such difficulties in the days and weeks ahead. An effort will be made to deny me an audience or prevent publication my work. (See the "Publish America" episode in the Literature section at Critique.) The number of my books' readers is not being reported accurately. I can not think of a better confirmation of what I am saying about the need to remove the thugs who now control so much of New Jersey government and law than these sophomoric antics, harassment efforts and censorship.

Why are you afraid of ideas, if you have confidence in your own?

It is impossible to respect any person or institution -- especially a U.S. tribunal -- capable of remaining indifferent (at best) to the continuing violation of any human being's rights taking place under their noses -- especially the right to freedom of expression and/or physical safety -- while hypocritically invoking the same Constitution, which is violated by them or their agents, on a daily basis, to judge the actions of others. (See "There comes a time when silence is betrayal.")

"Last week ... a final draft of the report was given to the United States Attorney Christopher J. Christie [ -- who must be the busiest federal prosecutor in the country. Mr. Christie, who has already earned a place in heaven,] ... said he may prosecute some school employees for abusing taxpayer funds, two high-level officials of the school resigned: one an administrator who is accused in the report of using an expense account to pay for personal travel, the other Dean of the School of Osteopathic Medicine, whom the report accused of misallocating tens of thousands of dollars for personal gain."

There is more:

"University officials dole out HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS in no-bid contracts each year, and the monitor is still investigating reports that millions went to firms that were POLITICALLY CONNECTED, had questionable qualifications and -- in some cases -- DO NOT APPEAR TO HAVE PERFORMED ANY TANGIBLE WORK."

Mysteriously, these law firms that do no work for their huge fees, paid for with public funds -- and not because they are prevented from doing it through license suspensions -- or that bill hundreds of thousands of dollars (allegedly) for copying a file, do not concern the Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE), which prefers to "solicit" grievances (usually secretly) against apolitical solo practioners, preferably those with few resources. As they probably whisper with a smile in Trenton, "What the hell, it's only our old law firm. After all, aren't they taking us all out to lunch later? Who cares if they overbill?" (See "Is New Jersey Chief Justice Deborah T. Porritz unethical or only incompetent?" Both?)

Ronald Smothers reports in "Group Sues Over Security Records," The New York Times, May 5, 2006, at p. B4:

"The American Civil Liberties Union's New Jersey office filed a public records law suit yesterday to discover how municipalities determined potential political threats in their applications for federal Homeland Security grants. The A.C.L.U. wants to know whether anyone was singled out because of legitimate political activity. The group also accuses former Attorney General Peter C. Harvey of misleading them in his response to an earlier law suit seeking the information. ..." (emphasis added).

Isn't "misleading" an adversary in sworn pleadings "unethical"? How shocking that the OAE is not concerned about this. I wonder why? Maybe this publicity will force them to take an interest in Mr. Harvey's actions. Who is selected for SECRET harassment in New Jersey? Is the OAE being used as a weapon against "controversial" or overly "independent" attorneys? Is the OAE a private army against legal professionals who "don't play ball" with the powers that be? Is there a secret "enemies-of-the-boys-downtown-list"? Who is secretly selecting these "enemies" to be "monitored"? What is the secret role of "therapists" (like Terry Tuchin and Diana Lisa Riccioli, or has she married and changed her name, despite her self-proclaimed gay life-style?) in these clandestine "operations"?

Are people being questioned under hypnosis and in an otherwise impaired state -- what drugs are they being given? -- and are they questioned by paid forensic psychiatrists, on behalf of the OAE or other state agencies or entities, about matters that could expose them or others to liability? Is it possible that the OAE participates in or is aware of such criminal inquiries, in violation of the subject's rights to silence, to counsel, and not to testify against him- or herself? What do you say, John? Does the OAE engage in cover-ups of such illegalities? Does the OAE engage in criminal conspiracies to violate federal civil rights, disregarding federal civil rights law? What does the "E" stand for in that acronym? Perhaps it is a "means and ends" kind of a thing.

The time for cover-ups and threats is over. Victims of psychological torture in New Jersey now stand before that state's tainted and sold out tribunals, demanding the truth about what has been done to them and by whom -- along with the right to face their tormentors -- while insisting on justice.

How many others sitting in New Jersey prisons, with damaged or destroyed lives have been secretly questioned by good old Terry and Diana, or even sexually violated by those two pillars of the community? I am asking this question on all victims' behalf as well as my own, publicly. The judiciary's lingering silence is only further proof of a cover-up of what can no longer be concealed -- the feces-stained New Jersey Court that presides over the lives of Garden State residents is corrupt.

Have you no decency? Do you still call yourselves "justices"?

Surprise, surprise ... "Karen Golding, 36, the former state lobbyist and campaign aide to Gov. Jon S. Corzine who was charged with stalking Joseph Cryan, ... will not be prosecuted by being admitted to a Pretrial Intervention Program (PTI), which will have the effect of keeping the truth in this case, whatever it may be, out of the public record." John Holl, "Trenton: Lobbyist Will Not be Prosecuted," The New York Times, May 5, 2006, at p. B4.

This will ensure that the public will never know what was really going on or who was behind this little episode of possible political spying, or worse. Who will be the next attorney, politician, or judge victimized by use of these tactics? Who is behind them? Mayor Healy, Ms. Farber, Governor Corzine and now allegations against a New Jersey Supreme Court justice, finally, whose tap dance is wearing a little thin. Will Corzine be next? Or will it be a federal judge? I guess Corzine was next. Federal judges may be future targets. N.J.'s U.S. Attorney better wear his seat belt.

"According to John Inglesino, Esq., an attorney working with federal monitor and former federal judge, Herbert Stern, Esq.: 'The auditing and compliance were grossly deficient, and that aided in creating an environment where U.M.D.N.J. has been used as a political patronage machine.' ..."

Get this:

"The most pointed findings in the 80 page report concern the use of the school and its $1.6 billion budget as a 'vehicle of patronage and favor-peddling.' ..." (How much went to judges?)

$1.6 billion is what I call stealing. The report suggests to many readers that an "unholy alliance" existed (or exists?) among psychologists, mental health facilities, as well as official and unofficial political-criminal power structures in New Jersey. Psychologists play "Igor" to the politicians' "Dr. Frankenstein," probably even providing torture services for a small fee. Maybe supplying sexual victims under hypnosis or drugging.

Of course, this is only speculation -- at this point -- but continue to check this blog (assuming viruses and other attempts to silence me fail!) for more revelations in the days and weeks ahead, based on anticipated news accounts:

"... investigators found evidence that the school's mental health clinic may have inflated costs and received as much as $70 million in unwarranted reimbursement [for what? torture?] from the state and federal government." (See "Tuchin, Riccioli and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "An Open Letter to My Torturers: Terry Tuchin and Diana Riccioli.") Nina Bernstein, "9/11 Detainees Describe Abuse Involving Dogs," The New York Times, April 3, 2006, at pp. B1-B2 (allegations of psychological and physical torture in New Jersey jails equal to the horrors at Abu Gharib and Guantanamo, of persons awaiting trial).

Where did the $70 million go? How do you live with yourselves or call yourselves judges? How come no one noticed anything "amiss" for years in New Jersey law enforcement? Am I capturing your likeness Chief Justice Poritz? I think so.

Well, intelligence had a way of leaking out or getting to politicians ahead of time, so Governor Corzine who will also make it to heaven -- especially if he gets on the Parkway again and is driven by a state trooper or Richard J. Codey -- has sought to remedy this problem by creating a Homeland Security Czar (HSC) with real power.

Whoever is appointed to that position has my sympathy and should expect to put in a little overtime. Wisely, Mr. Corzine has selected a person for that position without ties to the criminal-political organization that has secretly "run" things in New Jersey for decades, by claiming an affiliation with the Democrats. (See "Same Old, Same Old," "Let's see what he's got under his fingernails.")

This may be a moment of truth for New Jersey Democrats. Where do they stand? With the political machines and the boys in the smoke-filled rooms? Or with the advocates of much-needed reforms that will benefit the people of New Jersey? "On the one hand; but on the other hand ..." Bob Menendez said.

"Corzine created the $141, 000-a-year post in the wake of an acrimonious turf war between state police and the Office of Counter-Terrorism over control of New Jersey's anti-terrorism efforts. Corzine signed an executive Order designed to put an end to lingering jurisdictional disputes." See Michael Maddux, "Corzine Names Homeland Security Czar," March 17, 2006, North Jersey.com http://www.begen.com/print.php

A follow-up piece by David Kocieniewski is pretty blunt, "New Jersey Medical School Gives Blatant Lesson in Spoils System," The New York Times, April 5, 2006, at p. B1:

"... Ross Baker, a political science professor at Rutgers, said that even in New Jersey's checkered political history, it was shocking to find that government officials had 'taken an institution of higher learning, and a source of health care for thousands of people, and filled it with hacks.' ..."

"In New Jersey," a Hudson County politician explained to me: "Everybody's on the government tit." Except for minority people and poor residents in need of services, of course.

"When asked whether the current investigation would provide the school with lasting insulation from political influence, Mr. Baker replied: 'I'm always hopeful. But I always end up disappointed.' "

Guess what just happened at U.M.D.N.J.?

"Computer hackers gained access to the social security numbers and other confidential financial information of almost 2000 students and alumni of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, university officials say. The breach first reported by the Star Ledger yesterday, was discovered on February 24, although university officials did not say when the hacking occurred. ... the information included aid and loan data for about 700 students and 1,150 alumni." The New York Times, April 10, 2006, at p. B4.

If federal officials come to the door asking for financial information to prove that students, who were allegedly receiving financial aid, actually got the money they were due based on paperwork -- as opposed to having that money go in someone else's pocket -- it may now be impossible to "verify" all records. These are very convenient "hackers." I wonder what other records "disappeared" and why it took two months for the university to mention this strange theft of financial information.

A new surprise has been provided to us by Ronald Smothers, in "Reports of Shredding Lead to Subpoenas for University," The New York Times, May 19, 2006, at p. B4:

"Federal prosecutors subpoenaed a wide range of documents on Thursday from the southern campus of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey as part of their investigation into allegations of corruption and patronage at the institution, a lawyer for the university said."

Get this next move:

"... FBI agents raided the state university ... to stop the shredding of documents in the office of Warren S. Wallace, the senior Associate Dean for Academic and Student Affairs at the School of Osteopathic Medicine."

I wonder who gave them a "heads up" on which documents to shred? A hot line has been installed by the feds to encourage phone calls any time further destruction of prospective evidence is about to take place or new information of bribery, corruption and theft in New Jersey is available. In other words, they expect daily calls on that number, some (I hope!) concerning the state's well-fed and well-paid judges, who even now are pondering the need for life-size statues of each of them to be placed in state buildings. Maybe equestrian statues.

It is anyone's guess how much of this loot that disappears from the state's coffers gets back to specific judges or elected officials under the table. The feds seem to be turning over a lot of governmental rocks in New Jersey, with all sorts of disgusting and slimy things turning up in the process. And there is said to be MUCH MORE still to come!

I wonder what's up with the pension funds? In fact, I wonder they're still in existence?

Tina Kelley, "Dismissed Chief Accused of Breaching Ethics," in The New York Times, June 6, 2006, at p. B4:

"... Mr. Wallace arranged for a friend to receive a catering contract outside the required bidding process. He also ordered some of his employees to report about $2,500.00 of his expenses as theirs then reimburse him later, [allowing] him to approve his own expenses and make them look smaller than they were."

Everything from arranging medical school admissions to falsifying records to get bonuses took place at the school, with the protection (I believe) of New Jersey judges and politicians, who probably shared in the loot. In a follow-up piece by David Kocieniewski, "Medical School Chief Starts With Triage for Its Image," The New York Times, April 23, 2006, at METRO Section, N p. 36, the new President of U.M.D.N.J. seemingly admits that:

"Medicaid fraud might actually have involved $70 million. Since that money would have to be repaid, [guess who gets to pay it back?] it could mean that the school will face a budget crisis along with its legal, organizational and public relations problem."

New Jersey politicians not only "misappropriate" (is that kind of like stealing?) public money, apparently, but they get the public to reimburse the institutions they took it from, so they can "misappropriate" it again. That's what I call "moxy," among other things. Appointed judges, for some reason, never see a thing. They have parties to attend. Their law clerks are busy. We must not ask too much of them. They want a raise. And their pensions. How about this year's portrait?

I urge New Jersey's current elected or former officials and judges -- especially those who happen to be Catholics, but who have not attended confession in a while -- to think of your sins and pray, since the feds seem to be pretty serious this time about rounding up the usual suspects. For once -- at least so far -- it appears that "the fix is not in," which is an unprecedented situation in New Jersey litigation.

If you live in New Jersey and wish to see this sickening corruption and hypocrisy finally halted and punished, then please provide any assistance that you can to FEDERAL authorities investigating political and legal corruption in your state.

Also, let the judges and courts know how you feel about them. Tell them that you think that torture is unethical and so are many of them. Tell them how repugnant their hypocrisy and imbecility is to you. Tell them that you would like them to reflect a little more on their moral responsibilities before they judge others. Tell them to have the decency to provide victims with the truth concerning the tortures to which those victims have been subjected.

Give 'em a call in Trenton. Don't let them feel lonely.

Political Skullduggery in Trenton Over Budget Battle.

A lot of computer harassment today makes writing difficult. The following essay should be sufficient explanation for these familiar developments.

Ronald Smothers, "In a Return to Normal in Trenton, Sniping Over Ethics in Budgeting," in The New York Times, May 6, 2007, at p. 38.
David W. Chen, "Corzine Plans to Resume His Duties Tomorrow, 25 Days After Crash," in The New York Times, May 6, 2007, at p. 39.


It is alleged by some that the motive for any attempt against Corzine or the undisguised delight on the part of many of his fellow Democrats after his recent accident had to do with the upcoming budget battle and expected indictments by federal prosecutors of numerous New Jersey machine politicians. Two billions dollars have been "misplaced" in budget calculations. New Jersey is painfully "short," financially speaking. Yes, that is 2 BILLION guacamoles.

The Chief Justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court faces mandatory retirement on June 17. The Jersey Boys are dreading the possibility that someone outside their "family-like" group will be appointed to that office. The goal, allegedly, was to keep Corzine out of the picture until after the budget "shenanigans" and appointment of a new Chief Justice. Perhaps Wayne R. Bryant might head the court. Good old Wayne takes care of his friends. "Just let us wet our beaks a little," the Jersey Boys say.

An honest or competent person in charge of New Jersey's judiciary would be highly dangerous to "their" interests. Luckily for the Trenton Syndicate, this possibility has always been remote in the past. With Corzine returning to office today, such a thing might actually happen.

"Honest judges in Jersey? Nah ... Wadda-ya-kidding? Badda-bing, badda-boom."

"TRENTON, May 4 -- On both sides of the political divide, Gov. Jon S. Corzine's life-threatening injuries from his traffic accident three weeks ago seemed to suck much of the energy from the everyday political battles here -- except for a few stray elbows thrown among the staffs of the governor and his stand-in, Senate President Richard J. Cody."

I have attached a safety belt to every seat in my home, including my toilet.

See what I mean? Corzine's people did not take kindly to the smear campaign against their boss while he was incapacitated, a campaign which was allegedly orchestrated by "fellow-Democrat" Richard J. Cody. Questions have been raised concerning the shifting facts in the story about the Ford pickup truck that turned out to be a Dodge Ram, allegedly, or the hyping on the lack of a seatbelt, while downplaying the causal factors in the accident: careless driving either by a state trooper or by another driver, not by Corzine. Hints that Corzine was not competent or never remained in the state on the weekends were salt on Corzine's wounds and offensive to many citizens, regardless of party affiliation.

If only they can get a picture of Corzine with a woman wearing a beret, they'd have it made.

"If accusations of Christmas tree spending sound familiar, it may be because such charges are at the heart of an investigation by the United States attorney, Christopher J. Christie, into possible corruption."

"The subpoenas served by Mr. Christie on legislative offices, however, indicate that he is looking only at items inserted in the budget after 2004, when Democrats controlled the Legislature. Republican lawmakers have taken great pleasure in pointing to those subpoenas as evidence of what they say is ethical bankruptcy among their Democratic colleagues."

The smear campaign against Christopher Christie to one side -- Mr. Christie is an "equal opportunity corruption buster," as Republicans in Monmouth County discovered -- this limitation of the inquiry may be only a result of scarce resources. No help from the N.J. Attorney General is likely to be forthcoming. Stuart Rabner continues to "demur." Needless to say, Mr. Rabner is a leading candidate to be appointed as new Chief Justice upon Mr. Zazzali's forthcoming retirement from the bench. Hey, let's send Zazzali a fruit basket. Whatta-ya--say?

The smears against U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales may not be entirely unrelated to these events. Every U.S. president seeks to appoint U.S. attorneys whose politics are compatible with his or her own. Persons tend not to be shocked at the allegation that politics entered into the decision to fire U.S. attorneys, which is wrong and inexcusable.

When a Democrat is in the White House the same political firings will occur in a more subtle form. People will use code words to get rid of those suspected of disloyalty to any Administration's agenda. The struggle for legal independence is unending. The best policy is to do what Mr. Christie is doing: be very effective at getting important convictions, regardless of politics, and you are sure to be reappointed.

Bluster among the Jersey Boys has led to the confident pronouncement from Roberts and Cody that it's all "business as usual." Whenever you hear that from Jersey politicians, hang on to your wallet.

"Mr. Corzine said that before the crash, he was not aware of the vehicle's speed because he was working on some papers."

" ... 'I was engrossed in that which I typically am, sending off a to-do list to whoever I happened to be picking on at that moment, and editing papers,' he said, 'I trust the people who are driving the car, so I wasn't paying attention to what [the driver] was doing.' ..."

Trust in people around him may be unwise in Trenton. Mr. Corzine may wish to hire some personal bodyguards and to avoid prolonged visits to the Camden Area in the future. This time it was Corzine. Who will be the next target of the Jersey Boys? A federal prosecutor? An honest judge? You? Me?

Democracy "sleeps with the fishes" in New Jersey.

David Kocieniewski, "Cost of Inquiry in New Jersey Draws Criticism," in The New York Times, August 9, 2006, at p. B1.

The federal monitor appointed to set finances in order for New Jersey's troubled medical school -- where a $1.5 billion budget was used as a source of political patronage and graft -- has now billed the state $5.8 million dollars for his services. The residents of that "hapless" jurisdiction (as described by The New York Times) will now have to shell out this sum. The cost of this federal monitor's services is money well-spent:

"Lawyers involved in the investigation said on Tuesday that the monitor's charges were justified because of the size of the university, which considers itself the nation's largest health care university. It has 15,000 employees, more than 5,000 students and a $1.5 billion dollar budget, and bills patients for hundreds of thousands of medical procedures each year."

Furthermore,

"John Inglesino, a lawyer who works for Mr. Stern [the federal monitor], has said that the monitor's investigation has uncovered $100 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL FRAUDULENT BILLING and wasteful spending at the school, and that calling attention to the practice will spare tax payers from that kind of financial abuse in the future." (emphasis added!)

The Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE) had no questions about this bill or the hefty legal bills for services "provided" to the university by lawyers, or to other quasi-public entities by connected law firms, because the office was too busy asking a Latina solo practitioner somewhere in Hudson County why she charged $500 as a deposit for a no-fault divorce.

It took a federal monitor to straighten out this mess because New Jersey's politicians and hacks (redundancy?) in state government were probably "dipping their fingers in the pie" or too incompetent to do anything about theft of public money adding up to millions of dollars. The typical response in Trenton to allegations of disappearing public money is: "Can I get some?"

Many records at the university were destroyed or lost as a result of the efforts of convenient computer hackers, possibly paid for by "behind the scenes political operatives" shielding -- and shielded by -- elected officials. (See "Same Old, Same Old," at Philosopher's Quest.)

I was not surprised at the unpleasant experiences of Senator Lieberman in the recent Connecticut primary, running against a candidate supported by the same faction of the Democratic party, which is allied (it is said) to the boys from New Jersey. Birds of a feather run for office together, especially if they're self-proclaimed "Democrats" from Jersey clubhouses or their friends from neighboring states or allies in the mob.

"When Senator Joseph I. Lieberman's campaign web site crashed in the hours leading up to yesterday's Democratic primary election, it was hard not to read some deeper meaning into the problem."

Michael Cooper & John Markoff, "Claim of Dirty Tricks Fuels Web Volley," The New York Times, August 9, 2006, at p. B5.

Senator Lieberman's campaign complained of tactics identical to what I experience nearly every day: "... we believe this is the result of a coordinated attack by our political opponents." You don't say?

I think Senator Lieberman is right to suspect foul play. Political bosses hire Internet goon squads to harass opponents or do worse. I have probably been victimized in this blog (and elsewhere) by the same hired geeks. Evidence of this sort of crime is now in possession of more than one state Attorney General, which may explain calls by some in New Jersey's political circles to use A.G. attorneys to help with the federal monitor's work. Allegedly, this will cut down on costs. More likely, the crooked politicians' goal is to distract Trenton's outnumbered honest prosecutors from any on-going inquiry into cyber-political-crime or other graft by the Jersey boys. Unfortunately -- for them -- (I hope) neither Ms. Farber, her likely successor, nor Govenor Corzine can be easily distracted. I said "I hope."

Complaining of "insults" (I know about that!) and "partisan polarizing," Senator Lieberman vowed to run in the Fall, as an independent. He should. Patrick Healy, "Lamont is Victor," The New York Times, August 9, 2006, at p. A1.

Meanwhile, back on the home turf of the Trenton Syndicate: "People inside the university have been used to doing things their own way for years, and have been accountable to no one regarding the waste, fraud and abuse that went on ..." Times, August 9, 2006, at p. B6. Appointed judges could not comment, of course, and the state Supreme Court justices are busy scheduling new appointments to have next year's portraits painted at taxpayers' expense. Business as usual.

What happened to the U.S. Constitution?

I live in a society that tortures people. I do not mean only that people in secret prisons are tortured -- and it is becoming increasingly clear that this secret torture must be a matter of policy at some level -- but also that ordinary persons in the United States (or at least in New Jersey) are routinely subjected to horrible physical and psychological tortures in prisons and jails, even in their own homes. (See "Psychological Torture in the American Legal System" and "An Open Letter to My Torturers, Terry Tuchin and Diana Lisa Riccioli.")

Worse, persons are secretly subjected to questioning under hypnosis and in a drugged condition -- something which is clearly illegal under existing U.S. law -- and the information obtained in this manner is then used against them by state governments, even in civil proceedings, provided that government officials can later claim to have obtained the information from some "other" source. This activity may be accompanied by daily destruction and defacements of written or dreative work of victims, interference with any prospective advantage for victims, "anonymous" slanders and other behind-the-back attacks against victims. (See my essay on the jailing of Chomsky's Turkish publisher and also http://www.phrusa.org/research/torture/i/psych_torture.jpg .)

Many victims of psychological torture will not be told the truth concerning what has been done to them or by whom. Eventually, they can be made to "do" something (the legal equivalent of not wearing a seatbelt perhaps) that can then be used against them to justify the torture's producing the sanctioned conduct. The reality of the harm done to victims and their loved-ones -- for life -- will be ignored, so long as "plausible denial" (a believable lie) can be maintained by the very authorities, who then judge the ethics and legality of their victims. All requests for information will be ignored. "Let's pretend that nothing happened." I don't think so. "Maybe it was for your own good." I doubt it. What is for my own good is not for some state bureaucrat to decide.

A person experiencing such surrealistic torments and crimes -- even falling apart as a result of torture or the after-effects of trauma -- is expected to find some way to reconcile long held political and legal ideals with the reality of daily and cynical betrayals of those ideals by politicians and judges, who will criticize him for failing to live up to those ideals.

It will be necessary for victims to find a way to keep from throwing up when contemplating the overfed types sporting judicial robes along with shaky and insincere smiles for newspaper cameras in the ultimate example of cognitive dissonance that is now, much too often, the truth concerning America's judges, even as they comment (with a satisfied belch) on the need for ethics on the part of others in government and law. (See "Senator Bob, the Babe, and the Big Bucks.")

Are these the best people we can find to put on the judicial bench? They can't be.

If you become an attorney hoping to find Brennan, Brandeis, Holmes, Cardozo, Douglas, Bazelon, Marshall or any of the other great jurists associated with U.S. legal decisions that you studied in school, then you are in for a major surprise and disappointment when you finally get into a law practice. Most of the time, you will encounter political hacks and former "C" students in law school, who are now wearing judicial robes and pompous smiles in county courthouses. It is your job to pretend that each of them is Oliver Wendell Holmes, something which they secretly (or not-so-secretly) believe anyway. Most of them are provided with a small office for themselves and another, much larger, office for their egos.

These disgusting realities are KNOWN to state appellate tribunals producing legal opinions that are ostensibly concerned to protect Constitutional rights of citizens -- rights which those same tribunals ignore every day. Much of American law has become an elaborate FRAUD, seemingly designed to deceive or persuade a population, in Orwellian terms, that "slavery is freedom." This is accomplished with the assistance of persons calling themselves "therapists," who are all-too often sadistic torturers. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo are events that have a history in the shadow-world of "control" of domestic dissent in the United States. You may be the next victim.

For those of us who continue to believe that the U.S. Constitution is the best document of its kind in the world and that much of the case law interpreting that text is magnificent, the only possible conclusion is that we live in a dual reality: a pretense at compliance with Constitutional provisions is often given lip service publicly; even as a private and well-known reality of torture and secrecy, denials of access to information and exploitation, is winked at by powerful officials growing rich on the people's money, while wielding disproportionate power.

Why do we put up with this situation?

Much of this cruelty and exploitation is only made possible by a stupefied and apathetic population which feels no need to keep faith with the men and women who have died to preserve our Constitutional guarantees. So long as the Constitution exists as a hope, if nothing else, this is not a situation which should be tolerated. It is time to hit the streets again with a little protest, sixties-style. It must be possible for Americans to recognize the horror and obscenity of this grim reality.

As July 4th approaches, the idea that torture is O.K., if it is done secretly (which I call the "Tuchin/Riccioli" doctrine, at least in New Jersey), must not be allowed to succeed, not even in that unfortunate state:

... Should we create a professional cadre of torturers, of interrogators who have been trained in the techniques and who have learned to overcome their instinctive revulsion against causing pain? Medical executioners were [traditionally] schooled in the arts of agony. ...

Should there be a medical sub-specialty of torture doctors, [they're called "behaviorist psychologists"] who ensure that gasping captives don't die before they talk? Recall the chilling words of Sgt Ivan Fredericks, one of the abusers at Abu Ghraib, who saw the body of a detainee after the interrogation went awry: "They stressed the man out so much he passed away." He was referring to Manadel Jamadi, whose ice-packed body was photographed at Abu Ghraib before the CIA spirited it away. ... Who should teach torture doctoring in medical school? [How about Terry and Diana?]

Professor David Luban asks:

Do we really want to create a torture culture and the kind of people who inhabit it? The ticking bomb distracts us from the real issue, which is not about emergencies, but about the normalization of torture. Some might argue that keeping the practice of torture secret avoids the moral corruption that might arise from creating a public culture of torture. But concealment does not reject the normalization of torture. It accepts it, but layers on top of it the normalization of state secrecy. The result [is] a shadow culture of torturers and those who train and support them, operating outside the public eye and accountable only to other insiders of the torture culture.


Remind politicians and judges that they work for you. (I use the word "work" to refer to most politicians' and judges' lucrative activities with some irony intended.) Tell them, as fans of the movie Network will recall, that after a disastrous war and occupation in Iraq, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, Katrina, widespread corruption in state governments, rising oil prices and diminished expectations: "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more!"