Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Warner Bros., Motion Pictures Association and Motion Picture Lobbyists have the Nerve to go after Kim Dotcom, MegaUpload when Warner Bros. has STOLEN the iViewit Technology and in imaging and used it for over a Decade.
Demand that Warner Bros., Motion Pictures Association and Motion Picture Lobbyists are not above the law that they get Congressman and Senators to enforce on their behalf for their own personal motives and greed.
I read in the USA Today paper version, that the Motion Picture Lobbyists, Warner Brothers and the Motion Pictures Association of America are the ones who complained that Kim Dotcom was basically stealing their revenue, thing is Warner Bros. has been stealing ALL video they us in ALL imaging from the technology of iviewit for over a decade. Even in the bold face of signed non-compete agreements over a decade ago.
http://www.iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20010822%20-%20SIGNED%20Warner%20Bros%20Agreement%20AOL.pdf
Why does the DOJ, SEC, the USPTO, the Supreme Court, ALL ignore the rights of the iViewit Inventors? And protect big corpporations such as the Motion Picture Lobbyists, Warner Brothers and the Motion Pictures Association of America?
Links to the MegaUpload Story
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/story/2012-01-30/megaupload-data/52884574/1
http://www.aaronkellylaw.com/online-intellectual-property/megaupload-website-has-megaproblems/
Motion Pictures Association of America ,Jack Valenti,
http://iviewit.tv/senatecultbill.htm
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=274
Open Letter to Warner Bros. Shareholders regarding massive fraud, collusion and cover ups that one day shareholder will pay the bill for.
http://www.investigativeblogger.com/2011/03/twx-open-letter-to-time-warner-warner.html
http://www.jeffreybewkes.com/
SEC Complaint Naming Warner Bros
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/20100206%20FINAL%20SEC%20FBI%20and%20more%20COMPLAINT%20Against%20Warner%20Bros%20Time%20Warner%20AOL176238nscolorlow.pdf
iViewit RICO Complaint
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080509%20FINAL%20AMENDED%20COMPLAINT%20AND%20RICO%20SIGNED%20COPY%20MED.pdf
Yes the MegaUpload arrest was political motivated, and yet another protection of Warner Bros. and the Elite corporation and tech companies.
More Links to the iViewit Story, and Warner Bros. has the Nerve to Complain and Lobbyists get the SEC, FBI, DOJ to act on the complaint when for over a decade Warner Bros. Has been using the iViewit Technology for Free
http://www.federalricolawsuit.com/search/label/Foley%20and%20Lardner
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=274
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004%2007%2008%20RUBENSTEIN%20KRANE%20JOAO%20MOTION%20FINAL%20BOOKMARKED.pdf
http://www.deniedpatent.com/
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?tag=andrew-cuomo
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Eliot Bernstein Testimony New York Senate Judiciary on Iviewit Scandal, Cover Ups, and Corruption.
Trillion Dollar Lawsuit, Attempted Murder, Court Corruption
Patent Attorney Corruption, and Mass Fraud on the Courts in ALL
Judicial Branches, the USPTO and Multiple Supreme Courts.
Eliot Bernstein Testimony NY Senate Judiciary Part 2
Iviewit Technologies - Eliot Bernstein Testifies on
Massive Corruption Surrounding
the Stealing of the Iviewit Technology.
More on the Massive Shareholder Fraud and Major Corruption in the
Iviewit Stolen Intellectual Property Scandal ... Go to..
www.DeniedPatent.com
www.Iviewit.TV
www.KennethRubenstein.com
www.JeffreyBewkes.com
www.CEOpaulOtellini.com
Eliot Spitzer Office IGNORES Complaint over Iviewit Technologies Scandal. And there is No One to Talk to About it?
Re: Investigations of Proskauer Rose & Foley Lardner
Eliot Laurence Spitzer - Executive Chambers
This Conversation is Like an Episode of Saturday Night Live
Kind of Shocking that Eliot Spitzer IGNORED this ..
More Videos, on the Iviewit Scandal Click Below
http://www.youtube.com/user/eliotbernstein#g/u
More on iViewit and a Multi-Trillion Dollar Federal RICO Lawsuit and Massive Shareholder Fraud Coming Soon to a Pocketbook near you... go to..
www.DeniedPatent.com
www.Iviewit.TV
www.JeffreyBewkes.com
Sunday, September 19, 2010
New York Corruption - Motion to Re-Open - Court had NO Juristication Due to Appeal. Where is Andrew Cuomo, New York Attorney General?
Article Courtesy of Expose Corrupt Courts @
http://exposecorruptcourts.blogspot.com/2010/09/federal-court-asked-to-reopen-another.html
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Federal Court Asked To Reopen Another NY State Corruption Case
Plaintiff,
-against- 08 Civ 2391 (SAS)
PLAINTIFF’S AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION TO REOPEN
THE STATE OF NEW YORK; THE OFFICE OF COURT
ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM;
THE N.Y. STATE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT;
THE N.Y.S. 1ST DEPT., DEPARTMENTAL DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE;
THE N.Y.S. GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE, 9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT;
THOMAS J. CAHILL, in his official and individual capacity; AFFIRMATION
SHERRY K. COHEN, in her official and individual capacity; IN SUPPORT OF
GARY L. CASELLA, in his official and individual capacity; MOTION TO
NANCY J. BARRY, in her official and individual capacity;
REOPEN
FRANCIS A. NICOLAI, in his official and individual capacity;
JOSEPH M. ACCETTA, in his official and individual capacity,
ROBERT M. DIBELLA, in his official and individual capacity;
ANTHONY A. SCARPINO, in his official and individual capacity;
ROBERT A. KORREN; JEFFREY A. MCNAMARA;
PATRICIA BAVE-PLANELL; GIULINI & GIULINI, ESQS.;
CHARLES A. GIULINI, individually and as a partner of
Giulini and Giulini; CHRISTINE GIULINI, individually and
as a parter of Giulini and Giulini; CATHERINE M. MIKLITSCH
MCQUADE & MCQUADE, ESQS.; JOSEPH F. MCQUADE,
individually and as a partner of McQuade & McQuade;
MICHAEL D. MCQUADE, individually and as a partner of
McQuade & McQuade; and JOHN and JANE DOES, 1-20,
Defendants.
————————————————————————x
Plaintiff Kevin McKeown, pro se, respectfully moves this day, September 11, 2010, for an order reopening the above captioned matter based upon new facts, a fraud upon this Honorable Court and pursuant to F.R.C.P. 60 (b) and (d)(3), inter alia.
As this Honorable Court is aware, this case concerns $140,000.00 stolen from American Red Cross 9/11 donation money- still unpaid; What this court has not known, until now, is that the defendants have defrauded this court as they have knowingly acted without required jurisdiction, inter alia, thus void of any immunity.
Background
1. The operative 1st Amended Complaint was filed on May 12, 2008 (Attached hereto as EXHIBIT “A”) On August 8, 2008, this Honorable Court dismissed the action (EXHIBIT “B”).
On May 12, 2009, this Honorable Court found that the Court had no jurisdiction since the matter was on appeal; the appeal was only finalized on August 12, 2010 (See attached 08cv2391 Docket Sheet EXHIBIT “C”).
All filings in this application are respectfully herein incorporated as if fully annexed. As this Honorable Court has only again had jurisdiction less than 30 days, the herein request is timely and, in the interest of justice, must be granted.
A Knowing and Deliberate Fraud Upon This Court
2. The defendants were stripped of jurisdiction in the underlying action on November 4, 2003 by well-settled New York State Law. Their filings and actions are VOID under New York State law. And since they acted without jurisdiction, they cannot by law assert any type of immunity.
CLICK HERE TO SEE FILED DOCUMENT WITH EXHIBITS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
————————————————————————x
KEVIN MCKEOWN,
3. The defendants were aware that as a matter of New York State law, all proceedings had been stayed since November 4, 2003 when a party interested in the underlying proceeding committed suicide. Defendant attorneys Patricia Bave-Planell, Frank Streng, Robert Korren and Joseph McQuade, among others, have knowingly failed to file the only Motion that could ever be filed or accepted: a required on-notice substitution of party papers. (Weber v Bellinger, 124 AD2d 1009). It is uncontested that the required substitution has never been filed.
The New York State law is simple: without party substitution upon the death of an interested party, there is no jurisdiction.
Accordingly, Immunity of any kind does not apply in this matter. All attorneys and State actors had an ethical obligation to advise this Court.
4. Even the state defendants, and their attorneys, have ignored their own obligation to follow state law and to report or take action against those who were violating state laws and attorney ethical codes and, further, who were improperly acting without jurisdiction.
5. This Court must look very dimly upon the attorneys in this action who have failed to bring to this Honorable Court’s attention the fact that laws and ethical codes of conduct had been violated by attorneys and state actors in this very proceeding.
All attorneys were aware that the state law has always been clear regarding the lack of jurisdiction upon the death of an interested party. But these attorneys advanced known void rulings to this Court, or fraudulently asserted immunity claims when such protection had been stripped by the lack of jurisdiction.
6. As alleged in the 1st Amended Complaint, and as accepted as true in the Court’s August 8, 2008 dated order of dismissal, a wide-range cover-up was put in place to hide the improper filings of attorney Frank Streng- a publicly advertised friend, supporter and insider of the judge who accept his improper filings and who himself would subsequently make rulings without jurisdiction.
Without the Proper Substitution of a Party, The State Actors Lacked Jurisdiction
7. It is well-settled law that the lack of the proper substitution of a party in an action renders all subsequent orders null and void as the court lacks jurisdiction (see, Bossert v Ford Motor Co., 140 AD2d 480; Silvagnoli v Consolidated Edison Employees Mut. Aid Socy., 112 AD2d 819) None of the state actors had jurisdiction since November 4, 2003.
Each and every order since November 4, 2003 is VOID as a matter of law (see, Byrd v Johnson, 67 AD2d 992). The defendants’, and their attorneys’, knowing failure to act without jurisdiction is the essence of the denial of due process. And their silence of the violations of the known laws are a fraud.
8. I have no other remedy of law. My filings to: state administrative judges; all higher state courts; all court, attorney and judicial ethical bodies have only resulted in retaliation and threats against me.
Meanwhile, not one entity, including the New York State Attorney General’s Office, has disputed the lack of jurisdiction since November 4, 2003.
The collective silence by the defendants, state actors and attorneys on what I now know as basic New York State Required Party-Substitution law begs this Court’s immediate action.
9. The state actors improperly continued proceedings with the full knowledge that as a matter of law all proceedings were stayed upon the death of an interested party- all in complete violation of my rights concerning due process.
(Brown v Konczeski, 242 A.D.2d 847; CPLR 1015, 1021). Indeed, the attorneys involved have never disputed their collective failure to file On-Notice Substitution of Party papers since all matters were stayed, by law, on November 4, 2003. Notably, not one defendant disputes that all matters have been stayed since November 4, 2003, and by operation of well-settled state law.
10. If the 1st Amended Complaint is taken as true, then the thereto-annexed timeline of the illegal court filings confirms the lack of the required party-substitution submission.
While I am not an attorney and did not know this law when I filed my complaint, surely the defendants were aware of the state law requiring party substitution. Indeed, the involved attorneys (who financially benefited from the fraud), court clerks (who were friends of the attorney who filed the fraudulent assignment) and the Surrogate Judge (who would later recuse himself because of his admitted and advertised closeness with the attorney who filed the fraudulent assignment)– were aware of the state law requiring party substitution.
THE UNDERLYING FRAUD
11. Ronald P. McKeown, Jr., purportedly executed an “Assignment of Share in Estate” and an “Affidavit Re Assignment of Share in Estate” (hereinafter collectively as the “ASSIGNMENT”), dated October 30, 2003, with knowledge that its purpose was to defraud creditors of the assignor, the IRS, the State of Texas, to advance a deception upon the Surrogate’s court, and violate various state laws of New York and Connecticut.
12. In is uncontested that within days after Ronald’s death on November 4, 2003, Frank W. Streng, Esq., attorney of record for Ronald, presented the purported assignment for filing in the Surrogate’s Court. In Addition, Mr. Streng subsequently filed his own attorney affidavits in the Surrogate’s Court referencing and relying upon that fraudulent assignment.
13. Irrefutable evidence exists of collusion between the state actors, state agencies, and certain “influential” lawyers who sought to improperly profit at my expense, and who have damaged me and violated various federally protected rights. The lawyers against whom damages are sought had numerous ethical complaints filed, all of which asserted similar violations of the mandatory disciplinary regulations. But they were protected by Corrupt NYS Attorney Ethics bodies.
14. Testimony before this Honorable Court in Anderson, began the process of unmasking State employees, and others, who have improperly acted under the color of law. Without a fair and objective trial in U.S. District Court of the substantive Constitutional and Civil Rights issues, including demonstration of offenses with the evidence, systemic State corruption becomes Law of the Land, superior to all Constitutionally guaranteed rights and contrary to all U.S. Codes.
15. The actions of the defendants violate my equal rights and other guaranteed rights that are explicitly protected by the U.S. Constitution and U.S. laws cited in the complaint and herein. Such violations are federal questions correctly before this U.S. District Court. The Eleventh Amendment no longer applies as the new fact of action by state actors without jurisdiction is now known to this Honorable Court.
16. I respectfully requesting that in addition to re-opening the instant case, that the Honorable Court sua sponte appoint a federal monitor to oversee the day-to-day operations of the New York State Attorney and Judicial Ethics bodies for an indefinite period of time.
Continuing Evidence of Plaintiff’s Allegations of Widespread Corruption
17. Plaintiff also respectfully renews the request for this Honorable Court to immediately schedule a hearing to take the testimony of two New York State judges, and who at all times have wanted to appear before this Court to discuss the widespread corruption as herein alleged. (The Judges’ affidavits are attached hereto as EXHIBIT “D” and EXHIBIT “E”)
18. Taking all the allegations in plaintiff’s Amended Complaint as true, plaintiff has properly alleged that the individual defendants acted in numerous instances to deprive plaintiff of his constitutional rights to due process, equal protection of the law, and other constitutional violations. Because these individual defendants are state actors, and have blatantly used “the badge[s] of their authority to deprive [plaintiff] of [his] federally guaranteed rights” under the United States Constitution, § 1983 is the vehicle by which plaintiff may seek and obtain his much-needed relief. Wyatt, 504 U.S. at 161.
Because § 1983 is a federal statute, this Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate plaintiff’s claims. And because it is now known that the state actors knowingly acted without jurisdiction, this case is now ripe for immediate discovery and trial.
19. Indeed, just like this federal court, the courts of New York State (including the DDC) are entrusted with the responsibility of adjudicating the merits of cases without self-dealing, corruption, and illegality.
However, plaintiff’s complaint states that such courts have not so performed their duties; rather, plaintiff’s complaint alleges numerous acts of corruption, illegal activity, and obstruction of justice in the operation of the courts of New York State.
Given that the allegations in plaintiff’s complaint are taken as true, plaintiff’s allegations state legitimate claims for relief, and ones now known to have been void of any immunity.
20. Indeed, because this Court has already stated that the DDC is “an arm” of the NY State Courts, and is “the court” itself, plaintiff maintains that he merely requested an unbiased, fair and honest court system to adjudicate his claims. Simply put, plaintiff simply requested that the courts of New York State honestly do their job.
Plaintiff has alleged that he was deprived of this very basic right, which necessarily deprived him of his right to due process of law, a free and fair court system, and the right to petition his government. These constitutional violations demand federal redress, and plainly provide this Court with federal jurisdiction.
21. The United States Constitution does permit this Court to review the decisions of the EMPLOYEES of New York State (and other lawyers).
The Supreme Court found in Jett v. Dallas Independent School_District (491 U.S. 701 (1989)), that 42 U.S.C. §1981 by its terms prohibits private discrimination as well as discrimination under color of state law.
The Court considered whether §1981 created a private right of action to enforce that prohibition against state actors.
The Court concluded that, “the express cause of action for damages created by §1983 constitutes the exclusive federal remedy for violation of the rights guaranteed in §1981 by state governmental units.” (Id. at 720-721, 733).
22. “A plaintiff may sue a state official acting in his official capacity - notwithstanding the Eleventh Amendment - for prospective, injunctive relief from violations of federal law.” (Opinion and Order, p36). And as now known, the Eleventh Amendment does not apply here.
23. The U.S. Supreme Court in Scheuer v. Rhodes (416 U.S. 232 (1974)) held: “The Eleventh Amendment does not in some circumstances bar an action for damages against a state official charged with depriving a person of a federal right under color of state law, and the District Court acted prematurely and hence erroneously in dismissing the complaints as it did without affording petitioners any opportunity by subsequent proof to establish their claims.”
24. Further in Scheuer v Rhodes, the Court noted “If the immunity is qualified, [416 U.S. 232, 243] not absolute, the scope of that immunity will necessarily be related to facts as yet not established either by affidavits, admissions, or a trial record.
Final resolution of this question must take into account the functions and responsibilities of these particular defendants in their capacities as officers of the state government, as well as the purposes of 42 U.S.C. 1983″. Now known is the fact that even qualified immunity cannot now be asserted as jurisdiction had been stripped.
25. “[G]overnment officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” (Harlow v. Fitzgerald (1982) 457 U.S. 800, 818 [73 L.Ed.2d 396, 410]). Here, state actors knew they lacked jurisdiction.
26. I assert violations of civil rights and other rights of which so-called “legal professionals” “would have known”. The state actors and the “legal professionals” also should have known that their jurisdiction had been stayed upon the death of an interested party.
I also asserted evidence to demonstrate that such violations of guaranteed rights are planned, intentional, and organized for profit to the chosen few who are lawyers and officials benefiting at my expense. I also assert that discovery would further verify the civil and criminal allegations made by me are already confirmed as plausible.
27. Title 42 U.S.C. §1988 in relevant part confers on the district courts “protection of all person in the United States in their civil rights, and for their vindication, shall be exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into effect; but in all cases where they are not adapted to the object, or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable remedies and punish offenses against law, the common law, as modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil or criminal cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the cause” (emphasis added).
28. This Court was not asked to review State of New York court decisions. The acts, without jurisdiction, of State employees were described to demonstrate such actions resulted in the conspiracy against my rights.
Title 42 U.S.C. §1985 (2) applies to obstructing justice; intimidating a party, or witness if “two or more persons in any State … conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State”.
29. In Zahrey v. City of New York, (No. 98 Civ. 4546(LAP), 1999), on a motion to dismiss, the District Court dismissed the claims against defendant Coffey on the ground of qualified immunity.
Without determining whether a prosecutor’s fabrication of evidence violated a constitutional right, this Court ruled that Coffey was entitled to qualified immunity because “the law was not `clearly established’ in 1996 that a prosecutor’s fabrication of evidence violated a person’s constitutional rights.”
30. On appeal to the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, (Zahrey v. Coffey, No. 99-9119), this Court’s dismissal was reversed and remanded: “We hold that there is a constitutional right not to be deprived of liberty as a result of the fabrication of evidence by a government officer acting in an investigatory capacity, at least where the officer foresees that he himself will use the evidence with a resulting deprivation of liberty. … [W]e conclude that the allegations of the complaint suffice to indicate that a qualified immunity defense may not be sustained without further development of the facts.”
31. In Gloria Perez, et. al v. Jesus Ortiz, et. al, 849 F. 2d 793 (2nd Cir. 1988), the court, “held that the district court erred in dismissing the claims sua sponte without giving plaintiffs notice and an opportunity to be heard, and abused its discretion in dismissing the official capacity suits against appellees without giving appellants an opportunity to amend their complaints to conform to the requirements for such a suit.”
ROOKER-FELDMAN DOCTRINE IS INAPPLICABLE
32. There are not State proceedings dealing with the issues raised in Plaintiff’s complaint, or with these Defendants; the relief sought (injunctive relief against the state and money damages against individuals) has not been sought in State courts. This District Court has not been asked to change any State decisions.
Plaintiff’s complaint does not concern actions properly “judicial in nature” since Plaintiff asserts lack of Eleventh Amendment Immunity and the fact that acts by individuals beyond the legal limits of their official positions occurred, thereby harming Plaintiff by deprivation of substantive and material guaranteed rights under U.S. laws.
33. The Supreme Court case of Exxon Mobil Corn. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. (544 U.S. 280 (2005)) clearly shows that claim preclusion is a separate doctrine entirely. In Exxon the requisite elements that must be met for the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to apply are defined as:
(a) First: The case must be brought in District Court by a party that has already lost in state court.
(b) Second: The injury claimed must be as a result of the judgment itself. There is no “judgment” in my case. The complaint in District Court concerns on-going abuse of civil rights under color of state law without jurisdiction, or state authority, by state employees and other lawyers causing damages to Plaintiff;
(c) Third: A final judgment on the state court proceeding must have already been rendered before the federal action is brought. This does not apply here.
(d) Fourth: The federal case must invite review and rejection of the state law claim; if the claims are not identical, the Federal claim must be inextricably intertwined with the state law claim, so as to implicate common facts pertaining to the same transaction or occurrence. (District of Columbia Court of Anneals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462,483 n. 16 (1983)).
This does not apply to my case. Since official corruption causing deprivation of civil rights was not part of any State proceeding, there was no previous injury from judgment since there was no final State court judgment, therefore Rooker-Feldman does not apply.
STANDING
34. I asserts widespread and systemic corruption by State employees acting in violation of their oaths of office and without jurisdiction. I believe that such abuses of official positions should be immediately stopped by injunctive relief and by appointing a Federal Monitor.
35. Three tests determine if a would-be plaintiff has standing: the litigant must show: (a) that he has suffered personally some actual or threatened injury; (b) that the injury must be fairly traceable to the alleged illegal conduct of the defendant, and (c) that the injury must likely be redressed by a favorable decision.
(Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, 454 U.S. 464, 472 (1982)). Causation and redressability are required (Simon v. Eastern Ky. Welfare Rights Org., 426 U.S. 26, 38, 41-43 (1976)). The Supreme Court has referred to the “injury-in fact” standard as the “irreducible minimum” required by the Constitution.
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 8, 9 & 12
36. My complaint presented substantive facts without “bald assertions”. Such facts, must be taken as true (Opinion and Order, p.30). The revelations of organized and systemic corruption substantiates the statements that might have been otherwise labeled implausible.
The now-known lack of jurisdiction confirms the planned, improper and damaging actions by the defendants against me. Discovery will further substantiate the preliminary facts asserted. I made statements of fact and attempted to provide enough details (pursuant to Rules 8, 9, and 12) to demonstrate that the claims were not speculative and should not be summarily dismissed sua sponte without discovery.
37. I have state and federal constitutional rights of, inter alai, due process, which has been undisputedly denied me, and which begs this courts intervention.
38. Finally, and also new to this Honorable Court, are the words of the Honorable Joseph W. Bellacosa, former Judge of the New York State Court of Appeals and Chief Administrative Judge of the New York State Court System (Attached hereto as EXHIBIT “F”) .
Judge Bellacosa asks, “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” (Who will watch the watchdogs?”) Briefly, Judge Bellacosa speaks directly to the need of this Court to take immediate and substantive action regarding the federal violations of law by New York State actors, and as herein complained of by plaintiff.
39. WHEREFORE, based on the facts, new information, fraud upon this court and the decisions cited above, plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: grant the requested motion, REOPEN the instant 08cv2391 case, direct the Clerk of the Court to return the case to active status, and appoint a federal monitor to review the herein allegations and any and all such asserted allegations by those similarly situated.
DECLARATION UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY
The undersigned declares under penalty of perjury that he is the plaintiff in the above action, that he has read the above and that the information contained therein is true and correct, 28 U.S.C. § 1746; 18 U.S.C § 1621.
Dated: New York, New York
September 11, 2010
Respectfully submitted,
KEVIN MCKEOWN
Kevin McKeown, Pro Se
P.O. Box 616, New York, New York 10156
(212) 591-1022 tel - kmck22333@aol.com
TO: ANDREW M. CUOMO
Attorney General of the State of New York
Attn: Anthony J. Tomari, Assistant Attorney General
120 Broadway, 24th Floor,New York, New York 10271
Joseph F. McQuade, Esq.,Michael D. McQuade, Esq.,McQuade & McQuade
390 Fifth Avenue – Room 711,New York, New York 10018
Comments to the Above:
Shira’s conscience said…
Shira, Shira, Shira. What say you?
What say you, Shira, to federal prosecutors?
Can’t hear you. Please speak up.
Wait. Just not yet.
First, think of your judicial oath.
Yeah, yeah. That’s it.
Then speak up.
And speak loudly Judge Shira Scheindlin.
September 16, 2010 12:54 PM
Anonymous said…
good comment. my thoughts exactly.
September 16, 2010 12:59 PM
Anonymous said…
you see, there’s always a silver lining. sherry can now go drinking with the former chief counsel drunk- cahill, forget his first name right now, think it was shotglass. yeah, SHOTGLASS CAHILL.
September 16, 2010 1:21 PM
Anonymous said…
Sherry’s not alone. The rumor is that about 8 lawyers are leaving the DDC. Friedberg’s been acting especially paranoid lately. Maybe he should start drinking and take over where Sherry left off. Dont’ forget that Alan’s a corrupt chump like Sherry, actually bigger in some area.
September 16, 2010 1:37 PM
Anonymous said…
Does anyone see how sad all this is? Does anyone see these orders for these people to commit such hainous acts must have come from above and now they are all afraid……..sad……I thought her name was
Seltzer Cahill!One Seltzerra
Two Seltzerra
Three Seltzerra
FLOOR!
September 16, 2010 1:47 PM
Anonymous said…
Are the other litigants who had their cases thrown out going to refile?If there are more cases attacking these individuals and their corrupt actions, it should provide more evidence of a pervasive, systematic and long term pattern of corruption.Maybe then the DOJ will take action.
September 16, 2010 1:55 PM
LE said…
Sherry Cohen, Thomas Cahill, Naomi Goldstein, Alan Friedberg, David Spokany, all need to go directly to Jail!! Hey, do any of you guys know Attorney Allen H. Isaac, Esq. (GOD). I’m sure you do!!!!! How much did he pay you guys to protect him?ALLEN H. ISAAC, Esq. (Docket No: 2005.3074).
Isaac is a SEXUAL PREDATOR, WHO COMMITTED FELONY LEVEL CRIMES, received a mere slap on the wrist by the Appellate Court, First Dept. What a freaking JOKE that was!!!Court transcripts were altered, they withheld crucial evidence, they tampered with evidence.. and denied Esposito an attorney during the disciplinary hearings against Allen Isaac!!!
Naomi Goldstein, Esq. was promoted soon after the disciplinary proceedings against Allen Isaac. I’m sure she was handsomely rewarded for protecting him!!!!
Hey, what a stinking minute…How the HELL did the Appellate Court, First Department RULE on Allen H. Isaac’s fate in the first place when they are TOTALLY CONFLICTED!!!! Didn’t they hear Esposito’s A/V DVD tape?
September 16, 2010 2:17 PM
WOW said…
JUDGE SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN NEEDS TO DO THE RIGHT THING FOR ALL THE RELATED CASES…RE-OPEN THEM IS THE ONLY RIGHT THING TO DO..AND ASAP!!GOOD LUCK TO KEVIN MCKEOWN, ANDERSON, ESPOSITO, STEPHEN LAMONT, ELIOT BERNSTEIN, CAPOGROSSO, MCCORMICK, CARVEL, ETC……….
MAYBE NOW THEY’LL FINALLY DO THE RIGHT THING..JUDGE, THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL….CRIMES, CRIMES, CRIMES….JUSTICE, JUSTICE, JUSTICE!!!!!!JUDGE SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN CAN YOU HEAR US!!!!!!!!
September 16, 2010 2:23 PM
Anonymous said…
Luisa C. Esposito, Plaintiff, pro-se, filed her motion to reopen her FEDERAL COMPLAINT (07- Civ-11612 (SAS),last week. The Court issued an Order directing her defendants to reply by Sept. 17, 2010..DO YOU THINK they’re getting nervous?HOW and WHY did Esposito and the related cases get dismissed?
September 16, 2010 2:36 PM
T Finnan said…
Notice,the attorney for most of the defendants is Andrew Cuomo. Notice that many of the acts are federal and state crimes. Note that Andrew Cuomo has used NY State funds and employees to defend criminal acts. Did Andrew Cuomo obstruct Justice by interceding to defend criminal acts by some defendants?
Andrew Cuomo’s duty is to defend NY State interests and not the criminal acts by State employees.Luke 16:13 “No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”Andrew Cuomo, you cannot serve the People of NY and Mammon’s corrupt NY courts.
September 16, 2010 6:41 PM
Anonymous said…
I don’t get it. Cuomo only serves one master. Himself.
September 16, 2010 7:32 PM
Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Inventor said…
Where are the beefy exhibits Frank E Baby? Anyone got beef with my hero Scheindlin for what she already did for you all by having Anderson sing death lullaby to Cahill, Sherry, AG Cuomo, Spookany, etc. must take it up with me, her soon to be Supreme Court chauffeur.
You never know what gun is put to the head of those who do the right thing immediately after and what it may cause them to do after, like gun to granddaughter head can be swaying to some but you can never forget that pristine moment of heroism.
You must worship it forever, despite what the future holds. Now be prepared in that scenario of Scheindlin acting off to fire off complaints against her if she does not follow the law but file them with love and pain, as I do with Catherine Wolfe and others.
To all those waiting for her, stop and do something bold with what is already before you, be proactive stop waiting for Frank or Shira or Cuomo, fire off some criminal complaints against all those Anderson fingered with everybody, the more the merrier.
And to those most unethical ethics officers who have cast an evil upon this land filled with pain and suffering and death, take comfort that I, Eliot and I A-m That I A-m have a special place for you in hell. I personally will be your eternal tour guide, if you think my writing is long wait until you hear my voice eternally damning you, 24.7.Eternally. Ask Cahill if his soul has been sucked from his being, ask him my name and you will see fear.
Sherry K. Cohen, I already have sucked the lifeblood from your soul. Remember me in Scheindlin’s court, the devilish looking angel that your eyes were fixated upon? Your breath sucked dry, as I sat directly in front of your lying and evil soulless body, remember the conversation that only you could hear?
I already hear your prayers, your whiney begging and know they will not be answered as that conversation was had, the jury out. This sentence will be long, slow and eternally painful, you will pray more and more for swift death but the beginning is now, death will not help, it is when the fun with you really begins.
Your Travel Guide to Hell
Bat Out of Hell
Mad Inventor
Eliot Ivan Bernstein
September 16, 2010 7:37 PM
Anonymous said…
Is this guy Bernstein for real????
September 16, 2010 7:51 PM
Anonymous said…
of course Eliot is real, read the last three salutations again, therein lies your answer!
September 16, 2010 8:02 PM
CLICK HERE TO SEE FILED DOCUMENT WITH EXHIBITS
Friday, September 3, 2010
Eliot Bernstein, Iviewit Technologies Notifies Governor Charlie Crist of Florida Corruption at Suggestion of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum
" Friday, September 03, 2010
Hon. Governor Charlie Crist
Office of Governor Charlie Crist
State of Florida
Dear Honorable Governor Charlie Crist,
Per the Attorney General of the Great State of Florida, I write to you for inclusion into the ongoing Nineteenth Statewide Grand Jury, the Eliot Bernstein and Iviewit companies claims of criminal RICO and ANTITRUST activities by certain members of the Florida Supreme Court, the Florida Bar, the Boca Raton P.D., the law firms Proskauer Rose LLP, Foley & Lardner LLP and more.
The extent of these claims of Public Office Corruption reach the highest levels of Florida government and thus are germane to the Grand Jury’s request for information and stated purpose, “The Office of Statewide Prosecution has established a public corruption hotline for anyone who believes they have information concerning a criminal offense involving public corruption or wishes to suggest issues the Statewide Grand Jury should investigate regarding public corruption.
Below is a communication from Attorney General McCollum in response to my request to his offices for inclusion, whereby he urges me to contact and join your offices of these most serious allegations as well.
I am contacting your offices again, as I have contacted them in the past regarding these matters and am asking that your offices take all actions necessary to have these allegations investigated by the Florida Grand Jury your office has convened, as well as, any other criminal actions you may deem appropriate in investigating these matters and notifying the proper authorities of the allegations alleged herein and in the URL links provided herein.
I am happy to provide additional information or testimony relating to the matters to any investigators you deem appropriate or before the Grand Jury.
Many of these matters have crossed state lines through the law firms accused and in New York, a NY Supreme Court Whistleblower Christine Anderson, Esq. has identified a Racketeering type organization within not only the NY Courts and NY Disciplinary Agencies but the NY prosecutorial offices, including the US Attorney, the NY Attorney General Cuomo’s offices and the NY District Attorneys Office.
The allegations rise to senior members of these public offices acting in conspiracy to deprive due process to citizens’ complaints against them and in fact, a “Cleaner”, Naomi Goldstein of the NY Supreme Court was allegedly according to Anderson Whitewashing attorney complaints for these prosecutors. In addition, Anderson claims “favored lawyers and law firms” had their complaints cleaned as well.
The Anderson case now also involves Federal Obstruction of Justice in a federal Lawsuit, with death threats on Federal Witnesses on their way to testify in Federal Court. Extortion of state employees is also evidenced in Anderson, replete with physical assaults on the 60 yr. female Anderson, to either aid and abet or else by Senior New York Supreme Court Officials.
My Trillion Dollar Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit filed alongside and in support of Anderson’s Historic and Heroic Whistleblower claims, was legally “related” to the Anderson Whistleblower lawsuit by Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin.
Many of the defendants in my Fed RICO and ANTITRUST are located here in Florida, in fact all of my claims began in Florida, as that is where my companies and myself were located at the time the criminal activities were first discovered.
Proskauer partners were ordered for Investigation for Conflicts of Interest and Violations of Public office by the New York Supreme Court, in a unanimous consent of five justices of that court but those investigations are now under investigation for their failure to investigate.
The allegations in NY are almost identical to those I filed in Florida just different players from the same firms often having infiltrated and violated public offices to deny due process to my complaints in violation of law and attorney and judicial conduct codes.
All of my complaints in Florida in the courts and to all state agencies are herein officially requested to be re-opened in light of the revelations of new and damning information revealed in Anderson and new evidence against certain defendants in my lawsuit from Florida.
New evidence includes Defendant Proskauer Rose LLP and Partner Thomas Sjoblom’s involvement in the ExSir Robert Allen Stanford Ponzi scheme, Sjoblom found aiding and abetting Stanford Employees in a Miami Airport Hanger teaching them how to lie to SEC and FBI investigators.
As you know, Proskauer has been sued in a Global Class Action for the entire damages of Stanford, approximately 7 Billion US Dollars. Another thread to Florida is another Defendant in my Fed RICO, now infamous Ponzi schemer, Marc S. Dreier, Esq., who has been sentenced to 20 years for his Ponzi scheme.
Greenberg Traurig law firm, who represents the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court in my Fed RICO, acting in conflict as Greenberg Traurig was also former Patent Counsel for my companies and myself, where Greenberg has recently been alleged running a large Ponzi scheme in Florida, more information below. A link too many of the Florida specific crimes can be found at
http://iviewit.tv/supreme%20court/index.htm
and
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/oneofthesedays/index.htm
Complaints filed in Florida with the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court are requested to be re-opened by your offices with oversight by your offices to mitigate any further conflicts of interest and violations of Public Offices and law.
Complaints filed with the Florida Bar and Florida Supreme Court against, Florida Bar employees, Florida Supreme Court Public Officials, Proskauer Partners Christopher Clarke Wheeler, Esq. who was convicted of Felony DUI with Injury in Florida and Matthew Triggs who violated Florida Bar Rules in handling Complaints in multiple conflicts and violation of public office of the Florida Bar, are also being requested herein to have formal investigations into the matters reheard entirely based on a plethora of new information and evidence against the defendants in those matters and again instituted with oversight of your offices.
Similarly, we are requesting that your offices investigate the Florida Civil Court Case Civil Case No. 502001CA004671XXCDAB with new evidence showing a complete fraud on the court was orchestrated by Proskauer and Judge Jorge Labarga of the Florida Supreme Court, prior to your appointment of Labarga to the Florida Supreme Court.
I also note that members of your inner staff are formerly with Defendant Foley & Lardner, who acted as Solicitor General to the Florida Supreme Court while my complaints were being reviewed by that Court.
I also note that Justice Jorge Labarga and several of the Florida Supreme Court Justice and Court Officials are Defendants in my Trillion Dollar Fed RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit. I also note that several members or former members of the Florida Bar are Defendants in my Trillion Dollar Fed RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit.
Therefore, I request further that your offices in handling these matters proceed with extreme caution in ferreting out ALL Conflicts of Interest prior to involvement by any party, to preclude further possible charges against members of your office or any other party your offices join into these matters.
I have attached a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form for all parties, including yourself, to sign and return to my office at 2753 NW 34th St. Boca Raton, FL 33434, prior to ANY Actions you take in even considering the matter.
As a mass of Conflicts of Interest have been discovered in these matters already and the Whistleblower further identifying a criminal conspiracy within state agencies, this Conflict form is essential to ensuring fair and impartial due process of law by non conflicted parties. Any conflicts identified may be considered based on full disclosure and agreement by ALL parties involved or new non conflicted parties must be retained prior to disclosure of even the most basic information.
As these matters in New York and Florida are against some of the highest ranking officials in the states, I know that in New York Anderson and now other related cases and witnesses who testified to the New York Senate Judiciary Committee are seeking various forms of witness protection, I similarly would like to know what options for this type of protection are available to those who come forward in Florida.
As a car bombing victim of the RICO Criminal Enterprise, described in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit I feel that certain protections should already have been availed, in fact, I petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for such once already and this Motion is located at the URL
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/2004_10_07_Supreme_Court_Florida_Motion_Final_Cert_Signed.pdf
as well as, repeated requests since it was determined by Florida Fire Investigator Rick Lee that accelerants’ were the cause of the explosion that blew up three cars next to it, in Boynton Beach Florida. Despite repeated notice to Florida Law Enforcement, as you can see from the previous link they too were involved in the second act that protection from the court was requested for and therefore have never investigated these matters through public office corruption after public office corruption after public office corruption as defined herein and in the attached URL’s.
Please make all exhibits and links fully incorporated by reference herein into this letter for formal docketing in the Florida Grand Jury Request of Eliot Bernstein and the Iviewit Companies, each URL may have several URL’s, also hereby incorporated entirely by reference herein and for further use by the Grand Jury.
As Whistleblower Anderson in a sworn statement has claimed that she witnessed document destruction of investigatory files first hand (Anderson’s Statement to the New York Judiciary Committee attached below), please print each and every url in entirety for inclusion into this document and due to the fact that these matters pertain to US Patent Rights of an inventor, please retain these files and information for a period of no less than 20 yrs.
There are over a thousand documents at the URL http://www.iviewit.tv/ on the homepage under the Evidence Section on the homepage for your review and for docketing with the complaints and for review by investigators or Grand Jurors.
Despite whether the Florida Grand Jury investigates these most serious allegations of corruption at the highest levels of Florida Government, let this letter also serve as a formal request that your offices begin all necessary notices and/or investigations and notify all investigatory bodies necessary to investigate all those persons named in my Federal RICO and ANTITRUST lawsuit from Florida and notify them of the new evidence and requests for an entire review of all prior actions by any Florida Agency listed herein or in the URL’s embedded herein.
Please formally notify the following offices of this submission, including but not limited to, the Florida Inspector General (copied herein), the Florida US Attorney, the necessary Florida District Attorneys and the Florida Attorney General of the allegations and information contained herein, please have all parties sign prior to acceptance of ANY materials a Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form, again prior to ANY actions or decisions being rendered or transfer of any confidential information.
Please take this communication as both a request to join the 19th Florida Grand Jury and Request for Formal Investigations of all of the following Florida Defendants in my Fed RICO and ANTITRUST by the Florida Governor and Florida Attorney General’s offices, please docket a separate complaint for each Florida organization and individual listed below;
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP, and, all of its Partners,
Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and
individual capacities,
CHRISTOPHER C. WHEELER, in his professional
and individual capacities,
MATTHEW M. TRIGGS in his official and individual
capacity for The Florida Bar and his professional and
individual capacities as a partner of Proskauer,
ALBERT T. GORTZ, in his professional
and individual capacities,
CHRISTOPHER PRUZASKI, in his professional
and individual capacities,
MARA LERNER ROBBINS, in her professional
and individual capacities,AMENDED
DONALD “ROCKY” THOMPSON, in his COMPLAINT
professional and individual capacities,
GAYLE COLEMAN, in her professional
and individual capacities,
DAVID GEORGE, in his professional
and individual capacities,
GEORGE A. PINCUS, in his professional
and individual capacities,
GREGG REED, in his professional
and individual capacities,
LEON GOLD, in his professional
and individual capacities,
MARCY HAHN-SAPERSTEIN, in her professional
and individual capacities,
KEVIN J. HEALY, in his professional
and individual capacities,
STUART KAPP, in his professional
and individual capacities,
RONALD F. STORETTE, in his professional
and individual capacities,
CHRIS WOLF, in his professional
and individual capacities,
JILL ZAMMAS, in her professional
and individual capacities,
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP, and, all of its Partners,
Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and
individual capacities,
MICHAEL C. GREBE, in his professional
and individual capacities,
WILLIAM J. DICK, in his professional
and individual capacities,
STATE OF FLORIDA,
OFFICE OF THE STATE COURTS ADMINISTRATOR FLORIDA,
HON. JORGE LABARGA in his official and individual capacities,
THE FLORIDA BAR,
JOHN ANTHONY BOGGS in his official and individual capacities,
KELLY OVERSTREET JOHNSON in her official
and individual capacities,
LORRAINE CHRISTINE HOFFMAN in her
official and individual capacities,
ERIC TURNER in his official and individual
capacities,
KENNETH MARVIN in his official and individual
capacities,
JOY A. BARTMON in her official and individual
capacities,
JERALD BEER in his official and individual
capacities,BROAD & CASSEL, and, all of its Partners,
Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and
individual capacities,
JAMES J. WHEELER, in his professional
and individual capacities,
FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
HON. CHARLES T. WELLS, in his official and
individual capacities,
HON. HARRY LEE ANSTEAD, in his official and
individual capacities
HON. R. FRED LEWIS, in his official and
individual capacities,
HON. PEGGY A. QUINCE, in his official and
individual capacities,
HON. KENNETH B. BELL, in his official and
individual capacities,
THOMAS HALL, in his official and individual
capacities,
DEBORAH YARBOROUGH in her official and
individual capacities,
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION – FLORIDA,
CITY OF BOCA RATON, FLA.
BOCA RATON Police Department
ROBERT FLECHAUS in his official and
individual capacities,
ANDREW SCOTT in his official and individual
capacities,
CROSSBOW VENTURES, INC.,
ALPINE VENTURE CAPITAL PARTNERS LP,
STEPHEN J. WARNER, in his professional
and individual capacities,
RENE P. EICHENBERGER, in his professional
and individual capacities,
H. HICKMAN “HANK” POWELL, in his
professional and individual capacities,
MAURICE BUCHSBAUM, in his professional
and individual capacities,
ERIC CHEN, in his professional
and individual capacities,
AVI HERSH, in his professional
and individual capacities,
MATTHEW SHAW, in his professional
and individual capacities,
BRUCE W. SHEWMAKER, in his professional
and individual capacities,
RAVI M. UGALE, in his professional
and individual capacities,
DIGITAL INTERACTIVE STREAMS, INC.,
ROYAL O’BRIEN, in his professional
and individual capacities,
HUIZENGA HOLDINGS INCORPORATED,
WAYNE HUIZENGA, in his professional
and individual capacities,
WAYNE HUIZENGA, JR., in his professional
and individual capacities,
HOUSTON & SHAHADY, P.A., and any successors, and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,
BART A. HOUSTON, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,
FURR & COHEN, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,
BRADLEY S. SCHRAIBERG, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,
MOSKOWITZ, MANDELL, SALIM & SIMOWITZ, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,
WILLIAM G. SALIM, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,
SACHS SAX & KLEIN, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,
BEN ZUCKERMAN, ESQ. in his professional and individual capacities,
SPENCER M. SAX, in his professional and individual capacities,
SCHIFFRIN & BARROWAY LLP, and any successors, and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,
RICHARD SCHIFFRIN, in his professional and individual capacities,
ANDREW BARROWAY, in his professional and individual capacities,
KRISHNA NARINE, in his professional and individual capacities,
CHRISTOPHER & WEISBERG, P.A., and, all of its Partners, Associates and Of Counsel, in their professional and individual capacities,
ALAN M. WEISBERG, in his professional and individual capacities,
ALBERTO GONZALES in his official and individual capacities, "
******
Above Letter From Eliot Bernstein Iviewit Technologies Founder and Main Inventor to Florida's Governor Charlie Crist ... AGAIN... What will Governor Charlie Crist of Florida do with this Knowing of Blatant and Widespread Corruption This Time ??
I will Let You Know.
In My Opinion, if Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and if Governor Charlie Crist IGNORES this information, Well Time for a RICO Lawsuit, a Whistleblower Lawsuit AGAINST the STATE of FLORIDA for aiding and abetting Massive Shareholder Fraud, Major Crime and Corruption, Government Corruption and for Hiding Secrets that will Cost Taxpayers - Investors - Shareholders BILLIONS of Dollars.
More on the Massive Corruption in Florida
www.FloridaGrandJury.com
Posted Here by
Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
got a Tip on Corruption in Florida,
or on Bill McCollum Florida Attorney General,
Or On Governor Charlie Crist ??
eMail me
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Andrew Cuomo Appoints Retired Court of Appeals Chief Justice Judith Kaye to run the Gov. Paterson Probes.
Judith L. Kaye would definitely qualify in my book as IN NO way a good pick for this "probe" .. oh unless you want to cover up Zillions in Alleged Crimes - Fraud - or Really Anything.. as with Proskauer Rose connections, Favors Owed, Steven Krane and all the Favors and Influence that Brings ... there seems to be No One that Can Hold Criminals Accountable for Crimes on their Watch...
Here is the Article..
"" ALBANY - Attorney General Andrew Cuomo handed off the politically red-hot probes of Gov. Paterson on Thursday - clearly hoping not to get burned any more.
Just days after a Marist College poll revealed a sizable drop in his approval ratings, particularly among blacks, Cuomo "removed" himself from the potentially explosive inquests.
He appointed retired Court of Appeals Chief Justice Judith Kaye to run the probes.
"This is a legal determination as to what is the best way to conduct an investigation," said Cuomo, who is all but certain to run for governor.
Cuomo said he made the decision to appoint Kaye out of "an abundance of caution" to avoid any possible conflicts, though he acknowledged the political prism through which the case is likely to be viewed.
"I understand the ferocity of politics of New York and I understand that it is incredibly important to all of us that the public have a 100% confidence that this investigation is being handled properly," Cuomo said.
Cuomo's office is investigating whether Paterson and the state police interfered in a domestic violence complaint mom of two Sherr-una Booker brought against top Paterson aide David Johnson.
His office has also launched a probe into whether the governor got free World Series tickets from the Yankees - and then lied about it to the state's Public Integrity Commission.
Tuesday's Marist poll found the public was becoming increasingly uncomfortable with Cuomo's role in the investigation. His once sky-high approval rating had dropped 13 points in just a week, including a 22-point drop among nonwhite voters, to 45%, the Marist poll showed.
"Politicians are supposed to follow public opinion, he did and the result was a wise decision," said Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf."
Kaye's appointment means the case is likely to drag on for several more weeks - and hang over Paterson as he tries to negotiate a budget with lawmakers.
Kaye will oversee Cuomo's staff of lawyers and investigators, who've interviewed dozens of witnesses and pored over pages of documents in both cases.
Nearly all of the crucial witnesses have been deposed in the probe of whether Paterson, his aides or the state police broke any laws by intervening in the domestic abuse case.
The Daily News reported yesterday that Cuomo's investigators have found little evidence to support a witness tampering case against Paterson.
Cuomo did not deny the story, but said: "Discussing any outcome would be premature."
This week, a handful of witnesses are being called back for a second interview. Johnson, another top Paterson aide, Clemmie Harris, and the governor are to be interviewed as soon as next week.
Kaye will essentially play the role Cuomo would have played, overseeing any presentation to a grand jury, signing off on subpoenas and, in the end, making the call as to whether to prosecute.
Cuomo will be barred from participating in any of these matters.
Kaye, who has no experience as a prosecutor, vowed the "public will have a full, fair and independent accounting of the facts."
Paterson's lawyer Theodore Wells Jr. promised to cooperate with Kaye.""
Source of Post...
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010/03/11/2010-03-11_down_in_polls_andy_bails_on_probe_gives_hotpotato_gov_mess_over_to_former_chief_.html#ixzz0hwGdgE2T
So Cuomo wants to Be Gov. - Cuomo's Dad Appointed Kaye to her Judge Job... and now Judith Kaye is Investigating the Current NY Governor.. Hmmm.. nobody sees this as a Conflict.. and Andrew Cuomo has the nerve to say.. "Cuomo said he made the decision to appoint Kaye out of "an abundance of caution" to avoid any possible conflicts, though he acknowledged the political prism through which the case is likely to be viewed." What is Going on in New York?
Who is Theodore Wells Jr. - what Connections does he have to Proskauer, or History with any of the Attorney Fraternity we talk about on this site... ???
More on Proskauer Rose Affiliations, Conflicts of Interest and Alleged Crimes..
and How Proskauer Rose is Involved in a Trillion Dollar Patent Theft that now has plenty to do with the Corruption in the New York Court System and the Cover Up Power of Judith S. Kaye..
www.ProskauerSucks.com - www.DeniedPatent.com - www.Iviewit.TV
Got a Inside Tip on any of this.. Email Me At
Crystal@CrystalCox.com
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger
A Veteran Judge, Never a Prosecutor, Is Seen as Well Suited to Investigate the Governor - Judith S. Kaye - David A. Paterson - New York Courts
Cuomo Hands Paterson Case to an Ex-Judge
(March 12, 2010)
Times Topic: Judith S. Kaye
That, say people who know the state’s retired chief judge, Judith S. Kaye, may be a strong enough résumé point to make up for a lack of prosecutorial experience as she takes over the politically volatile investigation of Gov. David A. Paterson and his administration. In a long legal career, she never worked as a prosecutor.
But her appointment could add to the investigation’s credibility, said George Bundy Smith, who served with Judge Kaye as a judge on the state’s Court of Appeals until he retired in 2006. “She will be objective, and that is the main thing you look for in an investigation like this,” Judge Smith said.
In a statement on Thursday, Judge Kaye thanked Mr. Cuomo for entrusting her “with these serious and important matters.”
“I promise,” Judge Kaye added, “that the public will have a full, fair and independent accounting of the facts.”
Former prosecutors said that though Judge Kaye lacked a track record of making prosecution decisions herself, her career on the state’s highest court and, before that, as a litigator in civil cases, provided her with many of the skills needed to navigate not only the management but also the political sensitivities of the investigation.
“Regardless of what decision she reaches, her decision will be respected because of who she is and what she brings to the table,” said Alan Vinegrad, a former United States attorney in Brooklyn.
Judge Kaye, 71, was first appointed to the court in 1983 by the current attorney general’s father, Gov. Mario M. Cuomo.
She became chief judge in 1993 and was widely praised when she retired as the longest-serving chief judge in 2008.
Mr. Paterson said at the time that she would “go down in history as one of the greatest chief judges this state has ever had.”
Benito Romano, a former United States attorney in Manhattan, said that Judge Kaye’s reputation as a careful judge might be exactly what was needed to calm political anxieties. “It should provide people who are concerned about the decision being driven by politics with great reassurance,” Mr. Romano said.
On the court, Judge Kaye was considered liberal on some issues, including gay marriage and the death penalty. But she often sided with the prosecution in criminal cases and sometimes said that her rulings defied simplistic labels.
With a domestic-violence case as one of the aspects of the inquiry, some lawyers noted her history of interest in that issue. In her role as the chief officer of the sprawling state court system, she made it plain that she had a special commitment to working on the problems of domestic-violence victims.
She created special domestic-violence courts to provide victims with social and other services, saying that the complex cases required an integrated approach that went beyond the letter of the law.
Before she was named to the bench, Judge Kaye was a prominent civil litigator and the first female partner at Olwine, Connelly, Chase, O’Donnell & Weyher, which was one of the city’s blue-chip law firms.
Since she retired from the court, she has been at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
While there, she headed an investigation into the State University at Binghamton’s athletic scandals that was critical of officials for compromising standards when the school moved into major college athletics. ""
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/nyregion/12judge.html
Are You Kidding me, Judith Kaye Investigating anyone for anything is Riddled with Conflicts of Interest, Cronism, Favoritism, Political Ties, Political Favors and will certainly not be unbiased in any way what so ever in my opinion.
As I have been following the Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent case and It seems to me that when Judith Kaye was Judge, the Criminal did as they pleased and that she allegedly covered up for Trillions of Dollars in Crimes that Proskauer Rose Law Firm was accused of, as in the Alleged Trillion Dollar Iviewit Technologies Stolen Patent.
Remember .. yes Judith Kaye is now a Widow, However, her then Husband was Stephen Kaye a Proskauer Rose Partner - and her whipping boy was Steven Krane.. big wig in New York Ethics and well THEY run New York along with the Connections at Proskauer Rose - which are connected to the Really Big Money and Political Ties and WELL - Judith S. Kaye will Certainly NOT Add ANY credibility to an investigation on ANYONE..
Who is George Bundy Smith... I mean Really.. he thinks Judith S. Kaye adds "Credibility" ARE YOU KIDDING... ???????????
I just see No Way that Judith Kaye adds ANY Credibility to this Investigation.. in My Opinion Judith Kaye .. Ex-Judges adds the Element of ... ok Whew not someone has my Back and I won't get into trouble.. Judge Judy will Hide my Ass and ALL will be Well...
didn't Judith S. Kaye Create that Athletic Scandal... or was some part of creating some smoke screen or diversion so the bad guy could get away.. hmmm.. I cannot keep up with the Alleged Corruption out of New York.. and where there is Alleged Corruption I cannot help but notice a Proskauer Rose Cronie Connection..
"greatest chief judge" "calm political anxieties"???? What a Crock !!!
other links for more information on Judith Kaye, Proskauer Rose and Iviewit Technologies..
http://nylaw.typepad.com/new_york_civil_law/2007/03/chief_judge_jud.html
www.Iviewit.TV
www.DeniedPatent.com
www.ProskauerSucks.com
posted here by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger...
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Where there is Billions Lost by Investors and Trillion Dollar Patent Thefts, there is Proskauer Rose LLP and the US Second Circuit Court.
to Investigate Proskauer Rose LLP.
Information from March 2009 included in Eliot Bernstein's Complaint to the SEC On Proskauer Rose... Time Warner, Warner Bros., Intel Corp, SGI, Lockheed Martin and More...
Was anyone listening to Eliot I. Bernstein? Or was the Madoff Liquidation of Assets just simply another layer to an already corruption Multi-Billion Dollar investment scheme...
From Eliot Bernstein's Blog on his SEC Complaint listing Warner Bros., AOL, Time Warner, Ernst Young, Intel, SGI, Lockheed Martin and explaining a whole lot more about the names and players of the Trillion Dollar Stolen Iviewit Patent, and the Involvement and Cover Ups for and by Proskauer Rose LLP - Meg Law Firm.
" " March 02, 2009 “EMERGENCY MOTION TO INVESTIGATE PROSKAUER ROSE DEFENDANTS INVOLVEMENT IN THE ALLEN STANFORD FINANCIAL, THE BERNARD MADOFF AND THE MARC DRIER FRAUD SCANDALS.
REMOVE PROSKAUER FROM SELF REPRESENTATION IN THESE MATTERS UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE FBI REMOVES THEM FROM THE ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS INTO THE STANFORD FINANCIAL FRAUD”
http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090302%20FINAL%20Emergency%20Motion%20Re%20Proskauer%20Stanford%20Madoff%20Dreier%20Scandals4017.pdf
I filed Motions at the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals and US District Court, already exhibited herein, with similar claims of regulatory failures of the prior Presidential administration. Failures allegedly directly related to the Madoff case and I have reported this to Federal Authorities.
The Motions also discuss Conflicts centering on the Madoff saga where Proskauer publicly identified their firm as having the most clients in the Madoff Ponzi and now it is revealed in the press that many Madoff clients are the subject of ongoing SEC investigations.
The Motion at the US Second Circuit is to Compel that court to address the Conflicts of Interest and other matters according to law, laws being ignored while the Court and the Defendants perpetuate never ending Conflicts and Crimes. Note here that the handling of the Madoff Ponzi is by the same courts handling my RICO and ANTITRUST Lawsuit and that the same courts were notified for months of the correlations between the Madoff Ponzi and my Lawsuit and have failed to notify the proper authorities, including the SEC and instead attempted to bury my lawsuit and motions.
The SEC should further note that in the courts handling my Lawsuit, many of the judges and clerks are also Defendants in the Lawsuit and despite the obvious conflicts, they continue to handle the matters, as if no rules or laws apply to them.
These illegal actions by members of the courts should also be cause for the SEC, FBI and others addressed herein to investigate the members of the courts involved for possible collusion and aiding and abetting these schemes through Fraud on the Courts.
Following this Formal Complaint, for the courts failures to address the conflicts and misprision of a felony, the three Second Circuit Judges involved in my appeal will be filed on for Criminal Obstruction and other crimes, as exhibited already in the Motion to Compel.
The SEC should note here that the US Second Circuit has recently attempted to evade the Motion to Compel, by attempting to dismiss the Appeal as baseless, while the related Whistleblower case remains ongoing.
Sneaky as it sounds, by dismissing the case, the court has evaded addressing the criminal charges levied against them and the request for oversight of their criminal actions, as set forth in the Motion to Compel. This brilliant but failed attempt to evade the Motion to Compel, without having to rule on their conflicts or answer the charges against them, despite factual and material conflicts of interests in the court, further evidences their continued criminal obstruction.
All those addressed herein, should therefore immediately begin investigation of the Second Circuit and US District Court for the Southern District of New York court officials involved. Especially concerning their concealment from authorities of these material facts relating to these Schemes, again which may be a Misprision of Felony and whereby had the courts acted within law they could have prevented injury to many victims in these Schemes years earlier, when I initially reported Proskauer’s misdeeds to them.
This information should be cause for the SEC to reanalyze the entire Madoff Scheme in light of this new evidence. All asset sales and other distributions should instantly be halted until these material facts can be reviewed to determine if these funds are also relating to the Iviewit stolen patents. " "
Click here for Source of this Post and the Entire SEC Complaint
Wake Up Mary Schapiro - this is and has been a Financial EMERGENCY for a VERY long time..
Posted Here by Investigative Blogger
Crystal L. Cox
If you have any information on Proskauer Rose's further involvement in the Standford Affair, the Madoff Scheme or any dirty deeds or favors owed that would make it so that Proskauer Rose LLP can seem to hold no accountability for Billions of Dollars of Shareholder Loss... Please Email Investigative Blogger Crystal L. Cox at Crystal@CrytalCox.com
blog
crystal cox
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Judiciary New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Chairman - Public Hearing Senator John L. Sampson in New York September 2009
Prepared Statement of Eliot I. Bernstein of Iviewit to New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Regarding Trillion Dollar Iviewit Federal Lawsuit Naming Proskauer Rose, Foley & Larnder, IBM, Intel, SGI, Lockheed and More »
September 24, 2009 Public Hearing Senator John L. Sampson NY: Standing Committee On The Judiciary New York Senate Judiciary Committee John L. Sampson Chairman – Testimony of Eliot Bernstein, Inventor, Iviewit Technologies re Trillion Dollar Lawsuit Naming Proskauer Rose, Foley & Lardner, Intel, IBM, SGI & Lockheed Martin.
SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Senator John Sampson Chairman
SUBJECT: The Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts and the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct
PURPOSE: This hearing will review the mission, procedures and level of public satisfaction with the Appellate Division First Department Departmental Disciplinary Committee, the grievance committees of the various Judicial Districts as well as the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct
Monday June 8, 2009
NYC
250 Broadway
NY NY
10 A.M.
19th Floor
ORAL TESTIMONY BY INVITATION ONLY
Witness List for Judiciary Hearing 9/24/09
The Judicial & Attorney Disciplinary Process in the State of New York
1. Richard Kuse of New City, NY
2. Victor Kovner of the Fund for Modem Courts
3. Douglas Higbee of Mamaroneck, NY
4. Judith Herskowitz of Miami Beach, FL
5. Peter Gonzalez of Troy, NY
6. Andrea Wilkinson of Rensselaer, NY
7. Maria Gkanios of Mahopac, NY
8. Dominic Lieto of Mahopac, NY
9. Regina Felton Esq of Brooklyn, NY
10. Kathryn Malarkey of Purchase, NY
11. Nora Renzuli, Esq. of Staten Island, NY
12. Stephanie Klein of Long Beach, NY
13. Ike Aruti of Rosedale, NY
14. Terrence Finnan of Keene, NY
15. Gizella Weisshaus, NY
16. Eliot I. Bernstein of Boca Raton, FL
17. Suzanne McCormick & Patrick Handley of NY
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court is the entity that is legally responsible for enforcing the Rules of Professional Conduct governing the conduct of attorneys in New York State. The Appellate Division Departments have created grievance committees that are charged with the investigation of complaints against attorneys.
Within the First Judicial Department the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the Appellate Division investigates complaints against attorneys.
The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct was created by the State Constitution and is charged with investigating complaints against Judges and Justices of the Unified Court System.
According to the 2009 Report of the Commission on Judicial Conduct, there were 1,923 complaints filed in 2008. Yet of these complaints only 262 were investigated and of those, 173 were dismissed.
This hearing will examine the processes and procedures that are followed by the various agencies charged with the responsibility of enforcing the rules and regulations that must be followed by the Judiciary and the Bar in the State of New York. It will also evaluate public satisfaction with the disciplinary process. ""
Full Article, Source of Post and VIDEO Click Below
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=159
posted HERE by
Crystal L. Cox
Investigative Blogger