Stephen J. Schaeffer and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey.

May 30, 2009 at 11:23 A.M. Several "errors" were inserted in essays overnight. I will do my best to make more corrections. I will focus on more judges in New Jersey by hilighting members of the judiciary sanctioned for violating the canons of judicial ethics and other judges who should be sanctioned. I understand that more Cubanoid members of the bar in Hudson and Union Counties are (or will be) facing ethics charges. Give Bob a call. Contributions may work wonders.

March 2, 2009 at 12:21 P.M. Access to MSN groups is obstructed. Notices indicate that MSN is "closed." I doubt the accuracy of these notices.

December 27, 2007 at 12:42 P.M. new "error" inserted (they're into altering my plural possessives these days) and corrected. Frustration tactics, combined with new harassment methods -- oh, boy! (See "What is it like to be tortured?" and "Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture.")

November 25, 2007 at 12:25 A.M. an essay dealing with the writings of Raymond Chandler has been severely damaged by hackers from New Jersey's illegal legal world. I have deleted it twice and will retype it elsewhere. I may post it here eventually. After I post it, it will be vandalized multiple times.

November 17, 2007 at 3:35 P.M. The updating feature of my security system has been disabled again by hackers. It was working briefly for about one day. I am blocking:

http://view.atdmt.com/iview/msnnkhac001728x90xWBCBRB00110msn/direct;wi.728;hi.90/01
Most lawyers dislike matrimonial work, except for the much-despised firms that specialize in "family law" practice. Litigation gets ugly. Animosity lingers. You will spend a year or two filing lengthy motions, arguing over discovery, ending up at your adversary's throat over who gets the prom mug.

Has spacing been affected in this essay at blogger, again? New "errors" inserted? Great. That means I'm hurting them. November 17, 2007 at 12:07 P.M. I am blocking:

http://view.atdmt.com/iview/masnnkhac001728x90xWBCBRB00110msn/direct;wi.728;hi.90/01
What a coincidence?

Divorce laws are usually stacked in favor of women in New Jersey (and in most other places in the "Age of Political Correctness," which sometimes makes sense). Financial, child-visitation, and other matters are inevitably resolved in favor of women. Lawyers do not want to represent husbands -- unless there's lots of cash up front. I don't blame them. Husbands will never be happy with how things turn out. They shouldn't be. They're usually screwed by the system, especially minority men. The same is true in most places in the N.J. legal system. (See "Driving While Black [DWB] in New Jersey" and "How to Execute the Innocent in New Jersey.")

There are lots of minority men filled with resentment at the injustices of the American legal system. I think they're right to be furious. This is a highly explosive situation for many men I know in New Jersey who lack resources and education to cope with understandable frustration, bitterness and justified rage at despicable officials, like Judge Schaeffer, along with so many others. (See "America's Holocaust" and again "New Jersey's Feces-Covered Supreme Court.")

No wonder they want to stop me from writing these truths. N.J. officials hope to cover-up the overwhelming evidence of judicial and political corruption and incompetence, while depriving a dissident of an outlet for expressions of legitimate feelings of outrage at heinous injustices, all in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Each of these essays is supported by references to statistics, news articles and other evidence that cannot be ignored or answered by ad hominem insults directed against me.

My comments concerning these judges and New Jersey law are a bouquet of roses compared to some things said about me, unsupported by statistics, and usually behind my back. Is that "ethical"? How much did you guys steal from my office again? ("Law and Ethics in the Soprano State" and "Deborah T. Poritz and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey.")

Many judges are blind to the effects on children of the horrors witnessed in juvenile and family courts, especially judges who enjoy inflicting pain and wielding power over helpless, poor, and powerless people, preferably dark-skinned ones. Schaeffer certainly fits into that category, as a joyful power-wielder. I didn't see many judges who dislike power. The judicial selection process in New Jersey features a distinct fondness for racists in enclaves of KKK power, which mostly centers on the southern portion of the state. This territory overlaps with sections of Pennsylavania and explains, I am sure, many of Mumia Abu-Jamal's troubles.

When you flush your moral toilet, the refuse flows into New Jersey's legal world. When power is wielded secretly, unaccountably, the dangers of abuse are enhanced. The standard response is to call dissidents "liars." In a state where Jim McGreevey served as Governor and Roberto "Bob" Menendez is a U.S. Senator, such an accusation carries little weight. Fair-minded readers will come to their own conclusions concerning these allegations.

Compare "America's Holocaust," "Driving While Black (DWB) in New Jersey," and "Deborah T. Poritz and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey" with "Senator Bob, the Babe, and the Big Bucks" and "Does Senator Menendez Have Mafia Friends?"

Like criminal cases, matrimonial matters require a substantial retainer up-front. Assholes at New Jersey's OAE have never been and are not real lawyers. They are usually government whores who want to know why an attorney asked for a large retainer, since OAE-serfs are on the so-called "government tit" and could never hack it in the real world, they feel no need to "bill" or collect fees from clients who tend to skip the light fantastic out of town after a lawyer has cut them loose.

Guess, you morons. Why do you think lawyers get a hefty retainer? So a lawyer can pay the bills and do the work. How many OAE lawyers have run an office in an urban setting? Very few. Right, John?

So-called ethics "officials" in New Jersey could not care less what large law firms charge for saying "Hello." This is usually several thousand dollars. When you beat these colossal firms on something, they charge their clients more money. If you're a solo or a small firm in an urban county, they want you to itemize and list all of your visits to the toilet. New Jersey will disbar any "small" attorney doing what the big firms do routinely -- bill the shit out of people for duplicate work. The simplest court appearances or motion arguments by these mega-firms usually requires a partner and several associates, including one guy in charge of sharpening pencils whose time is billed at $175.00 per half-hour, plus tax.

Why should this surprise anyone when New Jersey's Attorney General and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court have absolutely zero experience in handling "simple" matters, like criminal cases, having tried few (if any) cases at the Municipal Court or Superior Court levels, where most lawyers spend their lives? Neither of them would know what to do in street litigation nor how to run an office in the real world. Both Mr. Rabner and Ms. Milgram are fond of "demurring," no doubt collectively.

Only one "error" inserted so far? You Jersey guys are getting slow. Why don't you remove a letter from one of my words? You'll feel better. Go ahead. Does this comment explain today's attack on my security system? ("Mafia Influence on New Jersey's State Police.")

Hey, I wonder whether Anne Milgram or Stuart Rabner visited the Philosophy Cafe and got their asses kicked by me? If so, the unusual number of N.J. hackers using government computers would be "explained" -- along with the hostility towards me. Neutral decision-making? Due Process? Ethics? Get out here.

The fact that a massive criminal conspiracy involving N.J. government agencies is known to these two rocket scientists, Anne Milgram and Stuart Rabner, and nothing happens is still mind-boggling to me. Take a look at the links above. Can't find them, Anne?

Everybody knows that corruption is pervasive in New Jersey. Clients and lawyers expect the bullshit in court and the cover-ups. Few people realize how paralyzed and incompetent are the people at the top of the legal hierarchy in Trenton. Things were even worse under Debbie Poritz, New Jersey's "gay blade." How you doing, Debbie? How's the pension flowing? Moving to San Francisco? You'll love that town. (See "Stuart Rabner and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey" and "Sybil R. Moses and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey.")

How do you like it? I've had this sort of treatment and much worse for close to twenty years. Any more letters you want to take out of my essays today? The opinions of such detestable human beings concerning one's ethics are disgusting examples of the hypocrisy and injustice in American legal proceedings.

Judges in New Jersey sending people to prison for behavior that is less criminal than what is routine among powerful and corrupt officials in Trenton, gives the Garden State a Kafkaesque legal environment offensive to civilized persons everywhere in the world. The very sight of some of the "judges" I once knew makes me sick. (See again: "Maurice J. Gallipoli and Conduct Unecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey.")

Contesting one of the routine applications for custody and restraining orders -- both are tactical moves in divorce litigation having little to do with anything husbands and wives have actually done -- is usually an exercise in futility. Judges err on the side of caution. It is always easier to find husbands at fault and grant protection orders. Ass covering, legally speaking.

The harm to husbands and wives, men and women, destruction of relationships between fathers and children bores judges. You'll be seeing the same kids again a few years down the road in municipal courts and criminal matters, because destruction of relationships with fathers will produce anticipated criminal pathologies in their sons. Maybe that's what they want. This is also a matter of indifference to New Jersey judges who are well-aware of this fact. I have never been divorced. I say this as an observer of the system. (See Andrew Jacobs, "Statistics on Children in Newark: Grim, With a Ray of Hope," The New York Times, December 20, 2007, at p. B3: "High drop out rates, and a median income half the state average.")

Psychobabblers on staff in family courts are ignorant of psychology and just about everything else, spouting a femi-Nazi newspeak that is beyond my powers of description: "They have to start positive healing by relating, relationally, relationship-wise ..." Right. (See "Psychological Torture in the American Legal System.")

I don't remember one of these "psychobabblers" siding with a man. Not once. Not ever. Unless, of course, they were greased under the table by being retained as "private" experts, if they were in "private practice." Adding to the joy of this litigation experience are obnoxious adversaries and unpleasant judges, like Steve Schaeffer. I have no idea if that guy is still around. I hope for the sake of lawyers and clients seeking to avoid ulcers that he isn't. Schaeffer was only mildly unpleasant to me. He was usually obnoxious to most others. Mere unpleasantness was Schaeffer's way of being nice. Schaeffer was "spoken to" on several occasions for public displays of ethnic and racial prejudice, allegedly.

Even worse are judges who combine obnoxiousness with mind-numbing stupidity. (See the forthcoming "Judge Tolentino and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey.") Since I discovered new "errors" inserted in my writings overnight, hackers, obstructions of all sorts, I hope to send the message that you can expect my criticisms of New Jersey judges to escalate in intensity in reponse to such tactics.

Since "Errors" have been inserted in this essay since this morning. I will focus on the corrupt behind-the-scenes workings of the Hudson County prosecutor's office by way of response.

I encountered one of Schaeffer's former law clerks in a preliminary motion argument in a family case. Maybe she thought she had an edge by going before Schaeffer. He tried to help her, but not much could be done with her incoherent papers. Schaeffer shouldn't have heard the matter at all. She lost the motion, kept the abusive fee that she charged for losing, then criticized me to the parties behind my back for reimbursing the fee that I had received for winning the motion when the parties (sensibly) decided to reconcile. Ethics? That particular lawyer or firm may have enjoyed contacts with my support staff in order to steal information or clients.

It is never a good sign when a judge's law clerks are considered stupid by members of the bar. It is also never a good sign when the judge is considered even more stupid by colleagues and lawyers. This backstabbing was typical. In a crowded legal profession, lawyers bad-mouth each other, steal cases right and left, pay off officials, and sometimes they do much worse. There is very little honor left among thieves -- better known as "senior counsel" -- in New Jersey's legal profession.

How you doing, Mr. Ginarte? Everything is coming up roses? Mr. Ginarte was not my adversary in that matrimonial matter.

Schaeffer was reprimanded (it was said) by the powers that be about his visible disdain for minority LAWYERS, especially Latinos. Yes, they have Latinos available in New Jersey to say how wonderful everything really is and how delightful all judges are. Meanwhile, those same Latino spokespeople have been heard in the courthouse cafeterias to complain about the "bullshit from Trenton" and judges who don't live in the real world. I will be happy to quote them, including several of these Latinos who are now judges.

Usually, Latino apologists for the system are "successful" personal injury lawyers with offices that resemble assembly lines -- get the files in, then get them out. Sell everything short to make a quick buck in a so-called "volume practice." Standardized representation for generic clients. One shyster said this to me, while munching on a lit cigar and sporting egg salad stains on his necktie. He was returning from lunch with a judge. I wonder why his wallet was a little thinner. How are the bookeeping problems, boys? Trust account issues, eh? There's more of that sort of thing on the way to several of you. This would be a good time to insert more "errors" in this essay. ("New Jersey's Third World Ethics.")

A Verona Municipal Court Judge, as I recall, liked to interrogate Latino attorneys concerning their immigration status, despite knowing that every one of them is a U.S. citizen. One such interrogated attorney -- whose partner is (was?) an Appellate Division judge -- mentioned such an "unpleasant encounter of the third kind." I also discussed it with that judge. Both the attorney and judge will now probably lie and say that it never happened. I wonder how those two "gentlemen" live amidst their complicity with a legal system capable of the disgusting criminality detailed in hundreds of essays quoting The New York Times, Washington Monthly, New Republic, Ingle & McLure, New Jersey & New York Law Journals, and many other publications.

Do you feel no shame about what New Jersey law has come to represent to the world, "gentlemen"?

Insults were usually followed by an instruction to minority counsel in many municipal courts to "sit in the last bench in the courtroom." How are things in Clifton, Diana? Paramus, eh? You're moving sideways in the world. "Can we settle this case?" These are words that should be written on the foreheads of most urban lawyers. You hear a cash register ringing when they talk to you. You want to talk about ethics? In New Jersey? No problem. (See "New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System.")

Schaeffer supervised a "put-through" uncontested divorce matter (no issues, so who cares?), where an older Latino attorney represented a person who spoke with an accent, the attorney also spoke with an accent. "Next time," Schaeffer intoned in a booming baritone voice worthy of Fidel Castro in his rebel-rousing days, "get a lawyer who speaks English!" Mind you, Schaeffer can barely speak English. A crowded room filled with lawyers laughed loudly at a colleague about to retire. This was a touching display of New Jersey's professional ethics and courtesy when it comes to minority professionals. Right, Debbie? How are the "chics," Deb?

This is going to get a lot more vicious, folks. If you plan to commit more crimes against me, this is the time to do it. There are daily insults and humiliations like that experience that stay with you, for life, as a minority attorney in New Jersey. A few unfortunate persons can also count on memories of torture and violation, victimization and trauma, theft "licensed" by the authorities, added to such lingering vestiges of injustice and cruelty, insults, denigration, incompetence and corruption -- all to the delight of men like good old Steve Schaeffer or women like Sybil R. Moses, who get to decide on the "ethics" of others. I wonder how they split up the loot from the Prisco bribery?

Deborah T. Poritz is also said to love the power. Maybe it helps Debbie to impress young ladies. How does a Jew become Mengele, Debbie? See again: "What is it like to be tortured?" and "Terry Tuchin, Diana Lisa Riccioli, and New Jersey's Agency of Torture" and "We don't know from nothing" and "Guttenberg Mayor and Wife are heading to the Slammer." (Fourteen year-olds made to "dance" in bars with the assistance of an indicted mayor of Guttenberg, New Jersey.)

Knowledge of the law and general learning was almost non-existent among these legal eagles. I remember a dinner with an appellate judge where I mentioned being asked about Immanuel Kant. In response, I alluded to the "Copernican revolution in philosophy" only to find myself explaining all about Copernicus and the role he played in the history of science. True, none of this is likely to be on the bar exam. Besides, in New Jersey, those who don't pass that "stupid test" just have to talk to one the bosses. Badda-bing, badda-boom.

"Oh, you're Joe's kid. No problem. Just tell them the boss says you're a lawyer."A judge who is now on the Appellate Division had never heard of Michel Foucault. (Finally, they inserted one measly "error." I have corrected it.) I suggested that Foucault was somewhat important for criminal psychology and the understanding of power. I provided him with Discipline and Punish. The book was returned unread. I don't know if he can read. Probably not. One more "error" since this morning. Keep it up fellas.

These highly thoughtful people decide whether others are "retarded," "intelligent," or "competent." It was explained to me, for example, by a "connected" psychobabbler that I am "retarded." O.K., well, now I know. This New Jersey-level of cultural ignorance and illiteracy among legal professionals is impossible anywhere in Europe or New York. (See again and memorize: "Sybil R. Moses and Conduct Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey.")

New Jersey's Supreme Court has been described by Thomas Sowell as "corrupt" -- which it is -- also by many commentators as inept, ethically tainted, jurisprudentially primitive, sometimes brutal and insensitive, always "hapless" like the state's politics. (N.Y. Times.)

The N.J. Supreme Court has upheld death penalty sentences, despite the inability to exercise the penalty in the state for 45 years -- an inability resulting from federal appeals and the failure of lower state courts to comply with federal due process and other Constitutional guarantees. I suspect that this failure was, and always will be, deliberate. (They finally inserted another "error" which I have now corrected.)

New Jersey's judicial incompetence has actually benefitted defendants to such an extent that the legislature has sought to end the embarassment by doing away with the death penalty. Jeremy W. Peters, "New Jersey Moves to End the Death Penalty," The New York Times, November 19, 2007, at p. B1.

A smart move, by the way, is to get rid of the death penalty. (One more "error" since Tuesday.) I am also "for" increased health care for children between politicians' stealing sprees -- only two "errors" since my previous review of this essay? Come on, take a letter out of this essay. I'll put it back in. I will then be remined of further criminality and incompetence, inflicting even more P.R. damage on the feces-covered cranberry fields of the Garden State.

Do you really think that these defacement tactics are smart? I don't. Come on fellas, you're helping me out here. You gotta keep playing stupid.

Schaeffer came across as a combination of a slightly demented Mr. Rodgers from "Mr. Rodger's Neighborhood" and Pee Wee Herman, in a non-perverse mood -- as far as I know. Nothing surprises me about these so-called "judges." Every attorney had a Schaeffer story. Some routinely created their own vodoo dolls bearing his image, complete with large spectacles, then inserted many needles into them.

"That's attempted murder!" Why only "attempted"? Anything less than complete success in your murder plans is "unethical," if you plan to do in Steve Schaeffer, according to an advisory opinion of the New Jersey Supreme Court. "Make sure you do it right!" said Debbie. Lawyers hoped Schaeffer would come down with a terminal illness that would produce a slow and excruciatingly painful death -- and said so, with a snicker, over coffee and a tasty croissant in the corner Diner by the Brennan Courthouse. (They forgot to insert an "error" in this paragraph. Next time, I'll find a few more.) I am told that this has now actually happened by persons delighted to receive the news.

Schaeffer's moods were unpredictable, like the fates. You might submit your papers and have him say: "They are not the kind of papers I like. Do them over." Alternatively, Schaeffer might smile and suggest that you forget papers entirely, disregard the law since: "We're all friends here." Insanity was not deemed any problem for Schaeffer because he was hearing matrimonial cases. No other judges wanted those cases anyway. If Schaeffer were locked up or sent to the looney bin, then Judges Bovino or Fuentes might get stuck with the matrimonial calendar. Both of those guys were always singing Schaeffer's praises, explaining (nervously) why a crazy judge could be a plus. They're probably both on the Appellate Division by now.

Why someone who detests Latino litigants and attorneys would be assigned to Hudson County is a matter for speculation. Perhaps the New Jersey Supreme Court has a sense of humor. Even more bizarre were the tantrums Schaeffer indulged in on a daily basis, the insults directed at Latino attorneys -- or anyone who looked Latino -- rudeness, loudness, brashness, arrogance, contempt, offensiveness that made a trip to his courtroom a disgusting betrayal of the very idea of a judge or legality. Schaeffer is a typical New Jersey lawyer and judge.

Any more sabotage, boys and girls?