Iviewit Letter to New York Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman, Senator John L. Sampson Regarding US Federal Whistleblower Lawsuit (07cv09599)

by Eliot Bernstein...
w

Re: Whistleblower Allegations of Criminal Activity at the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department Exposed in US Federal Court Requiring The Judiciary Committee’s Immediate Action; Response of Roy Reardon to the Request of Chairman, John L. Sampson Regarding Disciplinary Complaints Filed a the First Department, including but not limited to;
w
w
A.
February 09, 2009 New Complaints ~ February 09, 2009 Iviewit Complaint Against Reardon and Friedberg @ http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090209%20FINAL%20Iviewit%20Response%20to%20First%20Department%20Re%20Conflict%20Foley%20Proskauer%20attorneys%20SIGNED.doc.pdf

w

Introduction

I write to you as a follow up to the Committee request to Alan W. Friedberg ( Friedberg ), Chief Counsel of the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division First Department ( First Dept ) Departmental Disciplinary Committee ( DDC ) to provide the Committee with status and information regarding Concealed Disciplinary Complaints requested from Friedberg at the September 24, 2009 Judiciary Committee hearing. Friedberg has responded to me, instead of the Committee, which causes further problems defined herein.
w

At the beginning of my testimony at the September Committee hearing on Court Corruption in New York, Senator Sampson asked Friedberg to provide the Committee with information regarding what happened to complaints filed against Friedberg himself and Roy L. Reardon ( Reardon ), Chairman of the DDC.
w

Complaints filed by me almost 8 months earlier, that I informed Senator Sampson in my opening statement had been CONCEALED for months inapposite the First Department’s own procedural rules and in violation of law....
w

Senator Sampson, I was stunned to get a direct reply from Reardon on October 07, 2009 attached herein as Exhibit 1, skirting your request for information and without even a courtesy carbon copy of the letter to the Judiciary Committee, a letter regarding what happened to the CONCEALED complaints against Reardon and Friedberg.
g

This letter again has Reardon handling his own complaint and attempting to dismiss the complaint against himself and other DDC members, a violation of Attorney Conduct Codes, the Rules Regulating the DDC and Law, in a multiplicity of ways, including the obvious conflict created by one reviewing ones own complaint and acting upon it.
r

As you may remember from my testimony at the September 24, 2009 Judiciary Committee hearing and my prepared statement for the Judiciary Committee, the DDC is a defendant in my Twelve Trillion Dollar Lawsuitmarked legally related to the Whistleblower case of Christine C. Anderson ( Anderson ) v the State of New York ( 07cv09599 ) and the DDC as a defendant in that lawsuit has representative counsel, the New York Attorney General ( NYAG ).
r

The DDC as a named defendant in my lawsuit, which the filed complaints directly relate to, makes it inappropriate, highly unethical and illegal for the DDC to be directly contacting me or handling the complaints versus having the matters handled through their retained counsel, Monica Connell ( Connell ) of the NYAG.
r

As it is inappropriate for me, acting as Pro Se legal counsel, to be contacting parties directly who have counsel, I worked with DDC counsel the NYAG to have the complaints transferred to NON-CONFLICTED investigators.
r

Connell directed me to file the complaints with the DDC stating the complaints would be moved once filed and that no First Dept or DDC members would even review the materials due to their OBVIOUS CONFLICTS but that procedurally the complaints initially had to be filed at the DDC.
r

Yet, defying ethics and their counsel’s arrangements with me, the DDC interceded and attempted to dismiss the complaints against other defendants in the lawsuit and now even themselves in what defies logic, ethics and law.
w

[ Iviewit Amended Complaint - RICO http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20080509%20FINAL%20AMENDED%20COMPLAINT%20AND%20RICO%20SIGNED%20COPY%20MED.pdf

CONCEALMENT OF OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS AND OTHER PUBLIC OFFICE VIOLATIONS - In Roy Reardon’s letter, he attempts to exculpate himself from the complaint against himself that he has CONCEALED since I filed it in February 2009, himself claiming the COMPLAINTS were not deemed complaints against him and Friedberg.
q

Further, Roy Reardon attempts to deny he was even aware of the FORMAL COMPLAINT, although referencing the FORMAL COMPLAINT filed against him in February in his own letter?
e

Reardon’s letter attempts to dismiss the complaints he CONCEALED against himself and others since my February 09, 2009 FORMAL COMPLAINT, saying that he did not feel that it was a FORMAL COMPLAINT against Friedberg and himself.
r

This action on his FORMAL COMPLAINT defies a mass of Rules Regulating the DDC, the Attorney Conduct Code, including but not limited to, DR (Disciplinary Rule) 1-102A 4 and 5, NY Penal Laws (see below) and Law.
r

The attempt is to make it look like he has not CONCEALED the complaints, merely did not see my FORMAL COMPLAINT for what it was, as CONCEALMENT of Public Documents is further a crime as later defined herein. See [ February 09, 2009 Iviewit Complaint Against Reardon and Friedberg.
r

@ http://iviewit.tv/CompanyDocs/United%20States%20District%20Court%20Southern%20District%20NY/20090209%20FINAL%20Iviewit%20Response%20to%20First%20Department%20Re%20Conflict%20Foley%20Proskauer%20attorneys%20SIGNED.doc.pdf ]

Source of Post and Lots More information.
http://iviewit.tv/wordpress/?p=209
Click Above and Learn a Whole Lot More
r
r
www.DeniedPatent.com
r
r