|
Mary Kay Becker, Chief Judge Division 1, Court of Appeals, State of Washington, wrote an outrageous opinion. She decided that civil law cannot abrogate a presumed right of blood and kindred. Her sheep bleated meekly: “We concur”. She has allied herself with a sadistic misanthrope and condoned perjury. [Noblesse Oblige] [Croak]
Washington Court of Appeals procrastinated for three years then waited another seven months after oral argument to make a decision. Becker buried its finding as an unpublished opinion which contained deliberate inaccuracy, smacked of political expediency, and begs a challenge in a higher court. [Introduction]
Moreover, she neglected to consider the transcript and hundreds of defense documents that relate to a trial court hearing (20 Mar 01) which irrefutably expose judicial misconduct. Becker, apparently in a consort with trial court Judge James A. Doerty, buried sworn affidavits of supporters who attended that hearing which under cross-examination would disprove most of his assertions. [Commentary]
Becker’s conduct echos and probably replicates Doerty’s judicial misconduct. Her opinion certainly ratifies his biased and draconian decisions. One lawyer called it "a travesty" and another said "the court should be ashamed". Yet another reacted with just one word: "fuck". Other comments support those contentions. [Judicial Misconduct and the Law]
Several Seattle attorneys who have appeared before Doerty have variously described him as "running amok", "out-of-control", "unstable", "vicious", and "evil" - that sounds reasonably accurate. Another Seattle lawyer, who claims to have appeared before Doerty many times, says: "He does not strike one as having both oars in the water".
Yet Becker supports Doerty without reservation. A former legislator, she acts more like a sleazy politician than a judge. Give her the respect that her behavior deserves.
Fear her tyrannical power. Ignore the fact that she tramples the constitutional rights of others. Remember, what your mother told you: "If you cannot say something nice then don't say anything at all”. That's the politically correct way and as basic as apple pie to real Americans. Then judges and politicians can do precisely what they want without accountability.
Write to Becky’s Boutique to say something truthful about Becker that will persuade voters not to elect her to the Washington Supreme Court. Who knows, you may positively affect the fate of the world that these tyrants hold in their hands.
Nmesis
Responses to Croak and Comments on Appellate Opinion.
The Editor has withheld email addresses to stop Fellipe Jacques, self-appointed President, Council House Residents' Association, in a consort with Stephen Mitchell, Executive Director, Council House, from harvesting addresses. They have repeatedly used them to distribute hate mail and propaganda to Contra Cabal correspondents also to harass them. Readers wishing to respond to anything published in Contra Cabal should email the editor with a request to forward the message to the author.
Janet Lanterman
04-1011-1801. Becker is a liberal woman who does not care about the law!
Mary Kay Becker- A lazy opinionated woman , who uses the judge’s bench to promote her own beliefs instead of following the law.
In July 2003, Becker and Schindler and Kennedy, refused to read a lengthy brief that was complicated – so instead they marked the case affirmed as is in all 12 points. The attorneys involved in the case were stunned, and felt betrayed by the judicial system and especially Becker who was supposed to be smart. In this one case - Becker took 24 million dollars from an educational fund and gave it to a greedy and horribly dysfunctional couple who spend their lives cheating people. But Becker used her liberal power to hurt the "rich Guy" or so she thought.
Becker served in the Washington State Legislature for years as a very liberal Democrat and then pretends to be non partisan on the bench. She hates the business world, envies successful capitalists and does her best to take from the rich and give to the lazy as do most liberals.
Frank Frederick to Croak
04-0623-1806. You speak of democratic values but yet you condemn dissent. Is this not hypocritical?
Your senseless rambling and poor grammatical expressions only depict your own intellectual inadequacies. The U.S. Constitution a moral document? It asserts all men are created equal but the U.S. Constitution was in place just shy of one hundred years and slavery was legal under the almighty stars and stripes. Slavery was then followed by almost another hundred years of segregation and bigotry, was it not? There is no objective basis for morality, men of antiquity invented it via religion. Therefore, I am free to invent my own morality. Your assertion of morality is fallacious.
Judges have far too much power and it is abused on a daily basis. Most people, like you, have a vague and ambiguous notion about justice until they have been deprived of it! Judges with their favorite son attorneys violate State Constitutions, the U.S. Constitution, and substantive law all the time and why, because they can do it and get away with it, i.e., an appeal costs on the average 25K to 35K and the judges and attorneys know most people cannot afford that kind of money. Shakespeare was only partially right in Henry VI, part 2 in stating: "first lets kill all the lawyers", he should have included judges giving them full equality. Lord Acton stated: "if power corrupts then absolute power corrupts absolutely" and this depicts the American judiciary, does it not?
You have no concept concerning freedom of speech, expression, and dissent. The judge jailed a man who did not commit a crime, and found him in contempt of court for nothing other than exercising his First Amendment rights, i.e., continuing to tell the truth offended the judge and an individual's inherent constitutional rights and privileges be damned! The judge was wrong in every sense of the word!
Your name has a French ring to it. Why don't you spend some time reading Voltaire and perhaps then you may come to understand the meaning of freedom and liberty. A quote from Voltaire to Rousseau: " I am in total disagreement with you, but I shall defend your right to think it, speak it, and write it with my life." This is a Frenchman that understood freedom of speech and expression and the tolerance of the right to dissent being essential to liberty and freedom. Spinoza, like Voltaire fully understood that liberty and freedom go hand in hand with freedom of speech. Spinoza stated: " laws against free speech are subversive of all law; for men will not long respect laws which they may not criticize."
I fought and bled in the mud for this Country and how dare you insult my right to freedom of speech & expression. The judge was wrong! The judge had an obvious conflict of interest but refused to recuse himself. This is home cooking my friend and the prima donna judge has placed himself in public contempt for his flagrant abuse of power by totally disregarding the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Yours truly: a freedom loving American!
Dwight Hines
You need to get your second wind. A lot of people are pulling for you.
Seattle Attorney #1
I am of course saddened and shocked by the politically expedient and intellectually dishonest opinion of the Court of Appeals.
Seattle Attorney #2
Needless to say, I am disgusted with the appeals court decision!
Seattle Journalist
What a cowardly and corrupt finding. . . . You're up against the club. Lawyers and judges protect themselves and their own private little order. Best of luck.
Hal G. Warth
Stay with it Paul; lots are rooting for you!
|
