Sunday, September 08, 2013

Message from Columbia University Law School Dean


-----Original Message-----
From: David Schizer <dschiz@law.columbia.edu>
To: Gary Freedman <garfreed@aim.com>
Cc: jschiller <
jschiller@bsfllp.com>; newyork <newyork@fbi.gov>
Sent: Sat, Sep 7, 2013 8:55 pm
Subject: Re: judicial conduct

Dear Mr. Freedman,

I am not an expert on the rules you reference and am not in a position to advise you on this matter.

Best,

DS

__________________________
David M. Schizer
Dean and the Lucy G. Moses Professor of Law and
the Harvey R. Miller Professor of Law and Economics
Columbia Law School
212-854-2675


From:        Gary Freedman <garfreed@aim.com>
To:        dschiz@law.columbia.edu,
Cc:        jschiller@bsfllp.com, newyork@fbi.gov
Date:        09/07/2013 03:34 PM
Subject:        judicial conduct


Dean Shizer:

I pose a question of academic legal interest.  It is well known that a judge must avoid even the appearance of impropriety.  Just what constitutes propriety in a case where a federal judge receives a message such as the following?

Incidentally, Judge Roberts is a 1978 graduate of the Columbia University Law School.

Gary Freedman
Washington, DC
___________________________________


The Honorable Richard W. Roberts
Chief Judge
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Washington, DC

Judge Roberts:

The following message will serve as my misprision of felony certification for September 2013.  I certify under penalty of perjury for making false statements that there is persuasive evidence that I am committing a felony against the Government of the United States.  I certify that there is evidence that I am engaged in a long-term scheme to defraud the US Government of up to about $500,000 in public monies.

I commit myself to cooperating with the US Department of Justice in investigating this matter.

GARY FREEDMAN
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC  20008\
202 362 7064
________________________________


Darrell Valdez, Esq.

Assistant U.S. Attorney
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. Valdez:

This email message (and its hyperlinks) will serve as my felony fraud certification for September 2013.  It appears that I am continuing to commit a felony against the government of the United States by defrauding the U.S. Social Security Administration of up to about $500,000 in public monies in violation of
42 USC 1011.  There is substantial evidence that I do not now nor have I ever suffered from an illness that would disqualify me from employment.

http://dailstrug.blogspot.com/2013/08/i-love-fact-that-simply-saying-i-am_17.html

I respect the determination of the Government of the District of Columbia, however, that as of October 1991 I suffered from
a psychiatric disorder (consistent with schizophrenia) that rendered me a direct threat in the workplace, disqualifying me from the protections of The Americans With Disabilities Act -- an illness that, according to DC Government criteria, continues to the present.

The actual felony fraud certification, offered under penalty of prosecution for making false statements (under
42 USC 408), can be found at the following link:

https://www.change.org/petitions/to-the-director-of-the-federal-bureau-of-investigation-please-institute-a-criminal-investigation

I am available to assist the U.S. Department of Justice and The George Washington University Medical Center Medical Faculty Associates in any investigation of this matter.

Gary Freedman
Washington, DC

1 comment:

Gary Freedman said...

Canon 2. A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All of the Judge's Activities.

A. In all activities, a judge shall exhibit respect for the rule of law, comply with the law,* avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety, and act in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and the impartiality of the judiciary.

Commentary. - Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on the judge's conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly.

The prohibition against behaving with impropriety or the appearance of impropriety applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the proscription is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, and other specific provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and competence is impaired.

See also Commentary to Section 2C.