► Judicial BRIBERY and due process Print E-mail

Judicial bribery and due process

Nothing is more violative of the due process clause of the U.S. Constitution  then when a judge accepts a bribe from one party without inviting a counter offer from the other side.


I really get upset when judge's knowingly deny a litigant his/her due process rights, which is the bedrock of our constituion. Make no mistake; I'm not attacing the efficacy of judicial bribery as long as it's a fair and competitive process.

We have all ready about judges engaged in the "time-honored sport" of accepting and/or demanding bribes. In some instances the bribes are offered by attorneys; however, in many instances the judge actually solicits a bribe.

Judicial bribery is an unlawful ex parte communication (one-sided), meaning the other side's due process rights were trampled upon.

An egregious case of a judge violating a litigant's due process rights involved former New York Supreme Court Judge Victor Barron. In 1999, Victor demanded a $115,000 bribe from a plaintiff's attorney in exchange for awarding him and his client $4.9 million in a personal injury case.

Contrary to the oath he took to uphold the law and constitution, Judge Barron never gave defense counsel any opportunity to make a counter offer to the $115,000 bribe he demanded. Patently, defense counsel who was representing a "deep-pocket" insurer could have easily uped the ante (bribe) so to speak.

Judge Barron's solicitation was quite reasonable to say the least! Plaintiff's counsel would have received at least $1.6 million in fees from the $4.9 million judgment. The $115,000 that Judge Barron agreed to accept amounted to about 7% of counsel' fees, proving Barron was a cheap whore.

Because Judge Barron was a state employee, he was required to engage in "competitive bidding" when soliciting a bribe, and his failure and that of similarly situated judges to so act, violated well-settled New York state law.

And finally, Judicial Bribery provides many benefits to an ovetaxed citizenry. It allows for judges to reduce their workload (more time for and and paramours) and eliminates the need for costly jury trials. As long as the "bribery process" is fair, then everybody wins!


The Committee to Expose Dishonest and Incompetent Judges, Attorneys and Public Officials, Powered by Joomla!; Joomla templates by SG web hosting
web counter
web counter