Luzerne County DA Going Down with Ciavarella

May 30, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center> [attachmentid=2537] </center>
Isn’t it funny that, in every instance, it has taken Lawyers and Legal Groups from OUTSIDE OF LUZERNE COUNTY to blow the whistle on “the standard operating procedures” of The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas? A PHILADELPHIA based Juvenile Law Group filed the suit to over turn some 500+ juvenile cases before President Judge Mark Ciavarella because the Children didn’t have lawyers. A PHILADELPHIA based law firm is now seeking to have a $3.4 million dollar court judgment overturned because Judge Michael Conahan issued the judgment and Conahan has “business relationships” with the owner of the firm he awarded the judgment to.

Where was the Luzerne County DA and the Luzerne County Public Defender’s Office while the constitutional rights of 500+ CHILDREN were being violated?

President Judge Mark Ciavarella has allegedly admitted that he ERRED by not reciting the LEGALLY REQUIRED questioning of juvenile defendants asking them ON THE RECORD if they knew that they had a right to legal counsel. Well,

It appears to us that An Attorney from The Luzerne County District Attorney’s Office had to have been present every time Ciavarella violated the constitutional rights of a juvenile defendant. Furthermore,

Every thing that Judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella are now accused of doing, they did openly in full view of The Luzerne County District Attorney’s Office. David Lupas did not question what was going on in Juvenile Court when he was DA and, NEITHER HAS JACKIE MUSTO-CARROLL!

David Lupas was head of The Luzerne County DA’s Office during most of the events leading up to the current scandals surrounding Conahan and Ciavarella. And, not only did Lupas NOT do anything to stop what was happening in Juvenile Court, David Lupas is now the new Judge of Juvenile Court, he was appointed to the position BY CIAVARELLA.

No matter how anyone looks at The Endless Scandals coming out of Luzerne County, The Luzerne County District Attorney’s Office is NOT going to avoid GOING DOWN with Judges Conahan and Ciavarella.

Reportedly, a radio program in Luzerne County is urging residents of Luzerne County to file Judicial Misconduct Complaints with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Judicial Misconduct Board against Conahan and Civarella. ACCORDING TO RUMOR, the head of the PA Judicial Misconduct Board is an associate of Michael Conahan and, gossip has it that Michael Conahan used his “connections” with the PA Judicial Misconduct Board to bring about judicial misconduct proceedings against Judge Ann Lokuta.

Money Trail LINKS Conahan Ciavarella to Juvenile Center

May 29, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center> [attachmentid=2529] </center>
Those little fucking retards in Luzerne County finally decided to check into the financial relationships of Former President Judge Michael Conahan and Current President Judge Mark Ciavarella. QUESS WHAT?

Documents link county judges to project tied to juvie center owner. Two Luzerne County judges who played key roles in closing the county’s juvenile detention center in 2002 have financial interests in a Mountain Top real estate project linked to Robert J. Powell, an investor who has reaped millions by leasing a private juvenile center that he co-owns to the county. Citizens Voice

The Retards in Luzerne County DESERVE Conahan and Ciavarella, a fucking population stupid enough to ALLOW Bryan Kocis to run a gay bareback porn production studio out of his fucking basement deserves to have their CHILDREN used and abused by Conahan’s and Ciavarella’s Juvenile Court.

Not only was Luzerne County stupid enough to allow Bryan Kocis to openly operate Cobra Video out of his fucking Basement, Former President Judge Michael Conahan changed Bryan Kocis’ 2002 Guilty Plea FOUR YEARS after the fact in 2006. Conahan and Kocis’ attorney Al Flora, Jr simply claimed that Kocis’ original plea was “in error”. AND, The Luzerne County DA was a party to Conahan “correcting” Kocis’ guilty plea JUST AS The Luzerne County DA was a party to what Ciavarella was doing in Juvenile Court.

The Michael Conahan Mark Ciavarella Money Trail

Not only are Judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella linked financially to the owners of the Private Juvenile Center, Mark Ciavarella is linked financially to Michael Conahan via no interest loanS.

It has long been “implied” that Michael Conahan ran the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas with an iron fist and that Mark Ciavarella was Conahan’s handpicked successor. Now, we see that Michael Conahan gave Mark Ciavarella no interest loanS that Ciavarella now refuses to discuss.

In his 2007 statement, Ciavarella also listed zero-interest loans that he owes to Conahan and Beverage Marketing, a Schuylkill County company of which Conahan is president, according to Conahan’s financial statements for 2002 through 2007. The amounts of the loans were not listed.

Ciavarella declined to reveal any details about those loans, saying: “It’s a personal matter between me and the judge.” Citizens Voice

The RICOs In Luzerne County’s Future

May 28, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center>IPB Image </center>
THE LAW OF THE COURTs is that Judges cover each other’s asses. There are not too many cases in which Judges turn on other Judges no matter what kind of stupid shit a judge does. The over-riding doctrine in law is that THE SYSTEM must help a tainted judge save face. CASE IN POINT,

I’m sure every lawyer practicing law had run into some OLD FUCK JUDGE who couldn’t stay awake long enough to actually HEAR the legal arguments that the lawyers were presenting to him in Court.

You want to know what happens when an old fuck judge falls asleep in court?

When an old fuck judge falls asleep in court, THE LAWYERs CONTINUING ARGUING THEIR CASES AS OF THE OLD FUCKER WAS AWAKE AND LISTENING. The same logic, I’m sure, held true while Judge Mark Ciavarella was processing 500+ children who didn’t have lawyers in front of the Luzerne County District Attorney and the Luzerne County Public Defender.

All of the Defense Attorneys, all of the Public Defenders and all of the District Attorneys in Luzerne County ALL knew that they would be before Judge Ciavarella over and over again in other cases, THEY PLAYED ALONG. It took someone from OUTSIDE OF LUZERNE COUNTY to petition the Supreme Court to have Ciavarella’s actions reviewed.

SOME MORE MATH ON THE JUVENILE MESS IN LUZERNE COUNTY

1. I recall reading something about Harlow Cuadra’s First Private Lawyer doing work for The Luzerne County Public Defender’s Office. So, it seems to me that Harlow Cuadra’s first lawyer could have BLOWN THE WHISTLE on what was going on in Luzerne County Juvenile Court.

2. If Demetrius Fannik decided that NOW was the time to use Luzerne County as a stepping stone to fame and fortune a la a book and movie deal on The Bryan Kocis Murder, it seems to me that Fannick could have BLOWN THE WHISTLE on what was going on in Luzerne County Juvenile Court.

3. Lou Sinatra, The Attorney for Judge Ann Lokuta, is based in Philadelphia, just as the Juvenile Law Center is based in Philadelphia. The Philadelphia based Juvenile Law Center filed the petition with the Supreme Court against Judge Ciavarella. And, Judge Ann Lokuta has made no secret of the fact that SHE believes that The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas is either ALREADY UNDER A FEDERAL PROBE or that it should be under a federal probe. Did I mention that “rumor has it” that Judges Michael Conahan and Mark Civarella were behind the move to remove Ann Lokuta from the bench? Michael Conahan RETIRED from the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas the Sunday before Cuadra and Kerekes were arrested. How long can it be before Judge Mark Ciavarella JOINS Conahan in retirement (or as a defendant)?

When The RICOs Start Flying, It’s Gonna Be A Perfect Fucking Storm

A Child Molester / Gay Pornographer turns up Decapitated and Flambeed placing a national spot light on Luzerne County. Then, one scandal after another starts breaking out about how The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas operates. No naturally occurring event is THIS PERFECT.

SOMEBODIES, some human bodies are bringing down The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas. AND,

It all started with Bryan Kocis’ Decapitated Flambeed Corpse

[attachmentid=2528]

Luzerne County Juvenile Scandal Follow the Money

May 27, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center>[attachmentid=2512]</center>
THE ALARM was Bryan Kocis operating Cobra Video out of the basement of a residential house. THIS simply cannot be said too many times …

40+ year old men caught having sex with 15 year old boys aren’t given back their videotaping equipment by The Police and allowed to go back to “the business of producing gay bareback porn in the basements of residential homes”. Especially when it is not legal in Pennsylvania to pay someone money to perform sex acts for the production of adult videos.

Every day lately in Luzerne County, there are new newspaper articles sounding THE ALARM about The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in relation to the extraordinary number of CHILDREN who were sent to “an out of home treatment facility” and “a privately owned detention facility” by President Judge Mark Ciavarella.

Cicon is among 17 parents who contacted The Times Leader following news coverage of an April 29 court action filed by the Juvenile Law Center of Philadelphia that seeks to overturn hundreds of cases in which youths were not represented by an attorney.

In an unexpected move, Ciavarella on Friday decided to step down from juvenile court, according to three sources. He did not return phone messages seeking comment regarding the reasons behind his decision. Timesleader

THE ALARM about The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas SHOULD have sounded the minute anybody with a fucking brain noticed that Bryan Kocis was running Cobra Video from the basement of a residential house.

40+ year old men caught having sex with 15 year old boys don’t get to operate gay bareback porn production companies out of the basements of residential houses.

Police and District Attorneys don’t return video taping equipment to 40+ year old men caught having sex with 15 year old boys.

EVERY SINGLE FUCKING FACET of Bryan Kocis’ idiot fucking existence in Luzerne County SHOULD have sounded THE ALARM about The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas to every level of the Criminal Justice System in The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

When Bryan Kocis turned up decapitated and flambeed in January 2007, Only The Bitchless Blog Sounded the Alarm about Bryan Kocis and The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas. Now, Today,

Every newspaper in Luzerne County reads like The Bitchless Blog did back in January 2007.

What took authorities in Pennsylvania so long to recognize the obvious about The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas?

What took everyone in Luzerne County so long to see what should have been obvious to them back when Former President Judge Michael Conahan unilaterally decided to stop sending juveniles to a state approved juvenile detention facility and to instead send those juveniles to a Privately Owned Detention Facility (a privately owned detention facility allegedly owned by a deep pocketed “politically connected” Luzerne County Resident).

Follow The Money from The Luzerne County Juvenile Court Scandal

Reading the Newspapers out of Luzerne County is like watching someone with BRAIN DAMAGE trying to do math. It should be obvious to everyone in Luzerne County and to everyone observing Luzerne County where The Luzerne County Juvenile Court Scandal is going to lead EVENTUALLY.

1. Former President Judge Michael Conahan unilaterally decided to send Juveniles to a Privately Owned Detention Facility instead of the cheaper state approved detention facility which now sits empty and unused.

2. Current President Judge Mark Ciavarella is then charged with processing so many CHILDREN so fast for the Privately Owned Detention Facility that he did not even ask the CHILDREN if they knew they had a right to legal counsel, as required by law.

3. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania notices that The Privately Owned Detention Facility is raking up so much money as a result of all of the CHILDREN being detained by The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas Juvenile Court that the State Decides that It Will Not Longer Pay 60% of The Cost for Luzerne County Detaining Juveniles in the Privately Owed Detention Facility.

4. Once The State decides that it won’t foot the bill for all of the Children being DETAINED by President Judge Mark Ciavarella, Luzerne County then decides that it wants to get out of its contract with The Privately Owned Juvenile Detention Facility.

Anbody with a fucking brain should be able to DO THE MATH on The Luzerne County Juvenile Court Scandal.

Anybody with a fucking Brain SHOULD have seen that SOMETHING WASN’T RIGHT about The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas when Bryan Kocis wasn’t required to register as a Sex Offender and when Kocis used The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas to threaten Sean Lockhart.

Anybody with a fucking brain SHOULD BE ASKING how The Luzerne County District Attorney and The Luzerne County Public Defender’s Office could have allowed President Judge Mark Ciavarella to process so many CHILDREN through Juvenile Court without Ciavarella asking the Children on the record if they knew they had a right to legal counsel, as Ciavarella was required to do by law.

Judge Mark Ciavarella assigns Juvenile Mess to David Lupas

May 25, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center>IPB Image </center>
Ye Ole President Judge Mark Ciavarella of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas has stepped down from Juvenile Court and assigned Judge and Former DA David Lupas to Juvenile Court.

WILKES-BARRE – Embattled Luzerne County President Judge Mark Ciavarella has decided to step down from handling juvenile matters and has assigned Judge David Lupas to preside over the court, according to three sources.

The decision, reportedly made on Friday, comes in the midst of a controversy over Ciavarella’s handling of the juvenile court, which he has presided over for 12 years.
Times Leader

Former President Judge Michael Conahan, the Judge for Bryan Kocis’ TWO cases, unilaterally decided to stop sending Juvenile detainees to a state approved detention facility and to instead send the juveniles to a PRIVATELY OWNED detention facilty. Judge Mark Ciavarella was detaining so many juveniles and sending so many juveniles to OUT OF HOME treatment programs that the Commonwealth of Pennsyvlania advised Luzerne County that it would no longer pay sixty percent of the cost of detaining juveniles and treatment programs for juveniles in Luzerne County. Starting in June, Luzerne County will have to come up with the money to pay for housing juveniles in the Private Detention Facilty while the state approved and cheaper detention facilty is EMPTY AND UNUSED. As you would imagine,

Now that Luzerne County is going to have to foot the bill for all of the juveniles being detained, Luzerne County is now trying to get out of the contract it signed with the Privately owned Juvenile Detention Facilty.

One would guess that Judge Mark Ciavarella resigned from Juvenile Court rather that face the possibility that The Juvenile Law Center and the PA Attorney General would petition The Supreme Court to have Ciavarella REMOVED from Juvenile Court. Now, get this

David Lupas was the Luzerne County DA WHILE juveniles in Luzerne County were being denied their right to legal counsel. So, how clean can Lupas’ hands be, given that Lupas knew or should have known what was going on with juveniles and Judge Mark Ciavarella? According to a report in the Citzens Voice, most defense attorneys in Luzerne County knew what was going on in Juvenile Court and refused to take Juvenile Court Cases because they KNEW. The Luzerne County Public Defender’s Office ALSO had to KNOW.

In one case cited in the Juvenile Law Center petition, a Fairview Township police officer was accused of advising a defendant against hiring an attorney. The practice is widespread in Luzerne County juvenile cases, said an attorney familiar with the system, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“I was told that I didn’t need a lawyer, that the lawyer wouldn’t even be allowed to speak, and that (Jamie) would just get a slap on the wrist,” Bryk said. “I honestly thought, since she’s a juvenile, she didn’t need a lawyer.” Citizens Voice

Severed Head of Bryan Kocis Morphing

May 23, 2008 in Bryan Kocis The Thing by Bryan-Kocis-The-Thing


To Kill The Thing
Uploaded by bitchlessness. – Full seasons and entire episodes online.

EXCLUSIVE!!!

The Bitchless Blog has obtained exclusive access to secret government video showing The Severed Head of Bryan Kocis Morphing To Eight Legged Freak.

This video proves once and for all that Bryan Kocis is The Thing. That the fire that destroyed Kocis’ house was started because the only known way of killing he Thing IS with fire.

The Severed Head of Bryan Kocis Morphed To Eight Legged Freak was last seen heading to Philadelphia on its way apparently to The Offices of the Juvenile Law Center

Change of Venue Stampede Against Luzerne County

May 21, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center> [attachmentid=2501] </center>
The legal system in America IS Adversarial and, every Defense Attorney has an obligation to act in the interest of his client. Given this and the NEVER ENDING SCANDALs circulating around The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas, it would essentially amount to MALPRACTICE for a Defense Attorney with a client before The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas to NOT petition for A Change of Venue.

What do you suppose is going to happen when EVERY CRIMINAL DEFENDANT before The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas is petitioning the PA Supreme Court for a Change of Venue?

Attorneys for accused killer Harlow Cuadra have asked for a change of venue and a trial separate … Citizens Voice

Philadelphia based Juvenile Law Center, The PA Attorney General AND a PA Child Welfare Agency are all petitioning the PA Supreme Court to take immediate jurisdiction over 500 juvenile Cases presided over by President Judge Mark Civarella of The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas.

IF Every Defense Attorney with a criminal case before The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas ALSO files a petition with The PA Supreme Court for a Change of Venue, as they should be required to do in order to avoid a charge of malpractice, Pennsylvania Judicial Officials should be forced to Shut Down The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas.

Ladies and Gentlemen, The Luzerene County Court of Common Pleas

1. The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas has been described by Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Judicial Authorities as Dysfunctional.

2. Since the death of Bryan Kocis in January 2007, there have been never ending scandals erupting about the way The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas operates. Bryan Kocis’ 2002 guilty plea was completely changed in 2004 by Judge Michael Conahan. Kocis was represented by Al Flora, Jr, Flora is the second in command of the Luzerne County Public Defender’s Office and, Flora has not been heard from on 500 juveniles before Judge Ciavarella not having lawyers. The “correction” to Kocis’ guilty plea retro-actively explained the fact that Bryan Kocis never registered as a sex offender as required by his “initial” guilty plea.

3. The latest and biggest scandal surrounding The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas has President Judge Mark Ciavarella “processing” more than 500 children through juvenile court without asking the children if they knew they had a right to legal representation. PA law REQUIRED that Ciavarella ask the juveniles ON THE RECORD if they knew they had a right to lawyers. Neither The Luzerne County DA’s Office nor The Luzerne County Public Defender’ s Office blew the whistle on the fact that more than half of the children before Judge Ciavarella did not have lawyers. It took the PHILADELPHIA BASED Juvenile Law Center to file a lawsuit with Pennsylvania Supreme Court asking the Court to exercise King’s Bench Authority and take immediate jurisdiction over the 500+ juvenile cases before President Judge Mark Ciavarella. Both a PA Child Welfare Agency AND the PA Attorney General have joined with the Philadelphia Juvenile Law Center’s petititon.

Juvenile Court Scandal Will Take Down Luzerne County DA

May 18, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center>[attachmentid=2494] </center>
Every Attorney Admitted to The Bar Is Considered AN OFFICER OF THE COURT. The Attorneys in the Luzerne County Prosecutor’s Office, as Officers of the Court, should not have participated in criminal prosecutions against 500 children when those children did not have legal representation.

The Juvenile Court Scandal in Luzerne County will not only take down President Judge Mark Ciavarella, it will also take down The Luzerne County Prosecutor’s Office headed by Jackie Musto Carroll.

Previously, we mentioned that The Attorney for Bryan Kocis’ Estate, as an Officer of the Court, should have informed the Court that Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes were extradited to Luzerne County and, as a result, that they are probably immune to the service of civil process under Commonwealth of Pennsylvania law.

While the legal process in America is Adversarial, every attorney admitted to the bar is considered an Officer of the Court and every Officer of the Court is required to act in the interest of justice.

An Officer of the Court cannot proceed with any civil litigation against two extradited parties the Court has no jurisdiction over because of void / improper service of process. ALSO,

The Attorneys in The Luzerne County Prosecutor’s Office, as Officers of the Court, should have demanded proper legal representation for 500 children in criminal proceedings before President Judge Mark Ciavarella.

<center>Shit + Fan + Be Hit</center>
The Philadelhpia Based Juvenile Law Center is arguing that President Judge Mark Ciavarella processed so many children through Juvenile Court SO FAST, The Judge didn’t even recite THE REQUIRED SPEECH of asking the Children if they knew they had a right to legal counsel.

The Attorneys in Luzerne County Prosecutor’s Office who obtained convictions against 500 children in Juvenile Court in Luzerne County HAD TO KNOW that Judge Mark Ciavarella was REQUIRED to ask those 500 children if they knew they had a right to legal counsel.

Leval Miller-Wilson, an attorney for the Philadelphia-based Juvenile Law Center, and the two juveniles defendants whose cases served as the basis for the petition, accused Ciavarella of limiting sentencing hearings to about 90 seconds.

They said the judge acted with such ferocity, he skipped past an on-the-record colloquy required whenever a young defendant waives his or her right to an attorney.

“The interests of justice are not served by punishing the wrong person, adult or juvenile, and shortcuts in procedures that increase this possibility can only erode public confidence in law enforcement and the juvenile justice system,” Koons and Knorr said in the brief.
Citizensvoice

PA Attorney General Joins Petition Against Luzerne County Court

May 17, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center>[attachmentid=2493]</center>
In the brief, Calvin R. Koons, the senior deputy to state Attorney General Tom Corbett, and John G. Knorr, the chief of the appellate litigation section, outlined their support for a petition filed last month by an advocacy group that is seeking emergency relief from the court for hundreds of Luzerne County juveniles it claimed were run through the system without legal representation. Citizens Voice.

As previously reported, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has statutes providing for something called King’s Bench Jurisdiction. The King’s Bench Power allows the Supreme Courts of Pennsylvania to take immediate jurisiction over cases that are of extraordinary public importance.

The Philadelphia based Juvenile Law Center filed a petition with the Supreme Court asking the court to take immediate jurisdiction over more than 500 criminal cases involving juveniles before President Judge Mark Ciavarella. A Pennsylvania Child Welfare Agency had previously joined in the Petition. As shown above, The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’ Attorney General has also joined in the petition AGAINST Judge Mark Ciavarella.

Former President Judge Michael Conahan and Juveniles in Luzerne County

Judge Michael Conahan was President Judge of Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas before Judge Mark Ciavarella became the court’s president Judge. According to political blogs out of Luzerne County, Mark Ciavarella was in fact Conahan’s hand picked successor as President Judge. So, you have to wonder how RADICALLY DIFFERENT the practices of Mark Ciavarella are versus what Michael Conahan was doing before him when Conahan was in charge of Juvenile Court for Luzerne County.

ALSO, there was a previous scandal involving The Luzerne County Court for Juveniles and Michael Conahan with respect to Judge Michael Conahan unilaterally deciding that the State Approved Juvenile Detention Facilty was UNFIT. After ruling that the state approved juvenile detention facility was unfit, Conahan started sending detained juveniles to a facility operated by Parties alleged to be associates/friends of Conahan. It was recently reported out of Luzerne County that Conahan’s brother-in-law has collected more than $1 million dollars in fees as a psychologists for Luzerne County’s Juvenile Court System.

The Current Scandal involving Judge Mark Ciavarella and Luzerne County Juvenile Court has to eventually lead right back to Judge Michael Conahan and his actions when he presided over Juvenile Court for Luzerne County.

Judge Michael Conahan announed that he would retire from The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas ON THE SUNDAY before Harlow Cuadra and Joseph Kerekes were arrested. Conahan was also The Judge who presided over Bryan Kocis’ 2002 guilty plea and the 2006 “correction” to that guilty plea. Attorney Al Flora, Jr, second in command of the Luzerne County Public Defender’s Office, was Bryan Kocis’ lawyer in 2002 and 2006.

Cargo deal makes for familiar bedfellows
Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas Judge Michael Conahan, a player in the juvenile detention center issue, has surfaced in the case with Paragon Park.

Conahan, president judge at the time that Gladstone and PCA initiated the case against Knosp’s park, assigned himself to hear a motion on the issue and directed all future filings in the case to be directed to him.

Conahan had acknowledged meeting with Zappala to discuss the detention center proposal.

Difference of opinion

Urban had charged that Conahan overstepped his bounds by meeting with Zappala before Zappala’s company’s proposal was considered by the commissioners. Conahan said he would refuse to send juveniles to an existing county juvenile detention facility even though the state agreed to renew its license.

Conahan had said he decided to stop sending juveniles to the county facility beginning in January 2003 because it was “antiquated” and lacked adequate medical and educational facilities.

When PA Child Care sued former county Controller Steve Flood and the state Auditor General’s Office to prevent them from making public the audit critical of the detention center lease, Conahan sealed the lawsuit at PA Child Care’s request.

A higher court said Conahan was wrong to seal the lawsuit.

The ruling stemmed from the Times Leader’s appeal of Conahan’s sealing order. Conahan sealed the suit at the request of PA Child Care without notice to the other parties. The judge refused the newspaper’s plea to intervene in the lawsuit.

Now, Conahan is in a position to hear a case that could affect Gladstone Partners’ land deal with PCA Corp.

He was scheduled to hear arguments for the dismissal of Knosp’s appeal last Monday. But Conahan was sick, and Lycoming County Judge Clinton Smith heard the arguments on Wednesday. He dismissed the appeal, saying it was filed after statutory limits expired.

Knosp’s attorney, James Scallion, said he plans to use another avenue of appeal in county court. Skyscraperpage.com Highbeam.com

Harlow Cuadra and the King’s Bench Bombshell

May 16, 2008 in Freak Show Trial by Freak-Show-Trial

<center> [attachmentid=2488] </center>
Not two minutes ago, we openly wondered when there would be a move to Shutdown The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas and, low and behold, the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia is already asking The Pennsylvania Supreme Court to invoke its King’s Bench Jurisdiction and take immediate jurisdiction over criminal juvenile cases in Luzerne County.

Maybe it’s just me but, If The Supreme Court invokes its King’s Bench Jurisdiction and takes immediate jurisdiction over criminal JUVENILE cases in Luzerne County, why should it stop at juvenile cases when the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas has been described by State Judicial Officals as DYSFUNCTIONAL?

THE FUCKING SHIT HAS OFFICIALLY HIT THE FAN

When the Philadelphia based Juvenile Law Center filed a petition with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to have 500 criminal juvenile cases in Luzerne County OVERTURNED, President Judge Mark Ciavarella immediately argued that the law center had no jurisdiction to contest his actions.

When a Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Child Welfare Agency joined in with the Juvenile Law Center’s petition, Judge Mark Ciavarella argued that The State was doing so purely because of Money, not because any child’s constitutional rights were violated.

Luzerne County DA Jackie Musto-Carroll is asking that the petition to the Supreme Court be denied because it is NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH, not because 500 children didn’t go through the Luzerene County Court of Common Pleas in criminal proceedings without lawyers.

SHIT + FAN + BE HIT

Well, it turns out that specific law in The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, King’s Bench Jurisdiction”, does give Supreme Courts in PA the power to take immediate jurisdiction of “special cases”.

What could be more SPECIAL than criminal cases and criminal death penalty cases before a Court System that a State Judicial Official described as DYSFUNCTIONAL?

What could be more SPECIAL than a death penalty murder case in which the defendant was assigned The Victim’s Lawyers?

What could be more SPECIAL than a death penalty murder trail for the murder of Bryan Kocis given Bryan Kocis’ Oh So Special History with The Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas AND, given the fact that Bryan Kocis’ Estate somehow managed to serve civil process on two extradited guys who appear to be immune to the service of civil process?

SHIT + FAN + BE HIT

More than half the juveniles who appeared in county court in 2005 and 2006 did not have an attorney, the Juvenile Law Center said in its petition. Almost 60 percent of the delinquency dispositions for those defendants resulted in an out-of-home placement.

The group requested the state Supreme Court invoke it’s “King’s Bench Power,” take immediate jurisdiction over the matter and vacate the sentences imposed by Ciavarella in hundreds of Luzerne County cases since 2005. The Citizens Voice

King’s Bench Jurisdiction

Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts

Press Release
Contact: Tom Darr
(717) 795-2026
August 3, 1995

HARRISBURG – Calling the phrase “King’s Bench” a misnomer, the state Court Administrator’s chief counsel told a legislation committee today that the state Supreme Court’s extraordinary authority to hear cases is an important safety valve which has been rarely used.

While there may be disagreement with the exercise of jurisdiction in a particular case, Chief Counsel Zygmont A. Pines said it is hard to argue against the theoretical and practical necessity of such authority in our rapidly changing and tumultuous world where expeditious justice remains a cherished ideal.

After a review of cases involving extraordinary jurisdiction dating back to 1803, Pines said:

the truly essential purpose of extraordinary jurisdiction has been to protect the citizens of this Commonwealth from damage and injustice that would likely follow if Supreme Court intervention were not expeditiously exercised.

Pines noted that a recent analysis showed that in the sixteen year period from 1979 through 1994, an average of less than six extraordinary jurisdiction cases per year proceeded from briefing to decision. Those six cases contrast to between three and four thousand total filings per year in the Supreme Court.

With respect to the Supreme Court’s spare application of its extraordinary jurisdiction authority, Pines quoted the Supreme Court’s prothonotary as saying, “Many (extraordinary jurisdiction) cases are filed, but few are chosen.”

Determining precise factors as to how any court decides to grant petitions for extraordinary jurisdiction is difficult, according to Pines. He noted four general factors from one treatise on the subject: the need for a prompt, final decision; the impact on the administration of justice; the presence of important constitutional issues; and the expeditious disposition of criminal matters.

Pines said state Supreme Court exercises of extraordinary authority have included, among others, civil cases involving elections and labor relations and criminal cases involving grand juries and the media.

Extraordinary jurisdiction is not unique to Pennsylvania, Pines told members of the state House Judiciary Committee meeting in Harrisburg today. He noted that the federal All Writs Act authorizes broad jurisdiction to the United States Supreme Court, and other federal courts, to issue writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their jurisdiction. Also, at least six other state appellate courts have specific King’s Bench jurisdiction by name, while others may have similar jurisdiction in principle.
###

Attachment – Zygmont A. Pines, Esq. testimony
Testimony of Zygmont A. Pines,

Chief Legal Counsel

Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts

August 3, 1995

House of Representatives

House Judiciary Committee

I come to you today to briefly speak on a topic that is as old as and, in fact, pre-dates this venerable Commonwealth : I speak of the so-called “King’s Bench” jurisdiction of our Supreme Court.

My legal career began first as a litigator in private practice, followed by apprx. 17 years with the judiciary, first as Assistant Chief Staff attorney for the Pennsylvania Superior Court and now as Chief Counsel for the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts. In addition, I have written on appellate court matters and have taught at various institutions. Therefore, I am somewhat familiar with the concept of King’s Bench jurisdiction in Pennsylvania.

The term King’s Bench is, of course, a misnomer for we have neither a King nor the three principal English courts of Westminster. Therefore, I will refer to the modern King’s Bench jurisdiction as it should be properly called, that is, “plenary” or “extraordinary” jurisdiction.

The creation of extraordinary jurisdiction in this Commonwealth goes back to the “Act of 1722″ when the newly created Supreme Court of Pennsylvania was given the authority to exercise King’s Bench jurisdiction — a jurisdiction that was exercised historically by the judges of the King’s Bench, Common Pleas and Exchequer at Westminster. Historically, the King’s Bench powers included of necessity the right to supervise and manage the other courts.

The exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction by our Supreme Court has existed since 1722 without substantial disturbance. Today, the importance of that jurisdiction is given flesh by the Constitution of our Commonwealth, specifically, Article V, sections 2 and 10(a), in which the Supreme Court is designated as the highest court of this Commonwealth with the powers of superintendence over all other courts. The Supreme Court’s extraordinary jurisdiction is also recognized by statute and court rule . At the 1968 Constitutional Convention, a respected authority on our Constitution, Delegate Robert Woodside, who served as a Superior Court judge and Attorney General, referred to the King’s Bench powers as an inherent jurisdiction, “powers, which, in effect, are the Commonwealth powers.”

It has been commonly stated in academic journals and cases that the principal historical purpose of extraordinary jurisdiction is to prevent a subordinate judicial tribunal from exceeding or abusing its jurisdiction and to protect the Court’s appellate jurisdiction.

However, as I view the various reported Supreme Court cases since 1803, the truly essential purpose of extraordinary jurisdiction has been to protect the citizens of this Commonwealth from damage and injustice that would likely follow if Supreme Court intervention were not expeditiously exercised. In effect, extraordinary jurisdiction has operated as a necessary — and often only — safety valve to provide expeditious, economical and definitive justice on critical issues of public importance.

While the theory of extraordinary jurisdiction is fluid and broad, the exercise of such authority is rare. Its exercise is purely discretionary with the Court. On many occasions, the Supreme Court has stressed the very limited availability of this jurisdiction. In the Carpentertown Coal and Coke case, the Supreme Court said:

The writ of prohibition is one which, like all other prerogative writs, is to be used only with great caution and forebearance and as an extraordinary remedy in cases of extreme necessity, to secure order and regularity in judicial proceedings if none of the ordinary remedies provided by law is applicable or adequate to afford relief.

In another case, where the Supreme Court was faced with balancing the right of the press to access pre-trial proceedings with a defendant’s right to a fair trial, the Court cautioned:

The presence of an issue of immediate public importance is not alone sufficient to justify extraordinary relief…[W]e will not invoke extraordinary jurisdiction unless the record clearly demonstrates a petitioner’s rights. Even a clear showing that a petitioner is aggrieved does not assure that this Court will exercise its discretion to grant the requested relief…

How rare is this concept that we are discussing? Based on statistics provided by the prothonotary of the Supreme Court, there were approximately 97 extraordinary jurisdiction cases that proceeded from briefing to decision in the Supreme Court from 1979 to 1994. Thus, during that 16 year period, an average of less than 6 cases per year were adjudicated by the Supreme Court pursuant to its extraordinary jurisdiction. This figure of 6 cases per year should be placed in its proper context, namely the Supreme Court’s annual total caseload of approximately 3000 to 4000 filings per year. As the prothonotary told me: “Many [extraordinary jurisdiction] cases are filed, but few are chosen.”

How do these matters come before the Supreme Court? The relevant statute states that the Supreme Court can invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction on its own or in response to a petition by a party in a proceeding pending in any court. The procedural mechanism that brings these cases up to the Court include petitions for writs of mandamus, prohibition, stay or certiorari — they all basically serve the same purpose. These extraordinary jurisdiction petitions are circulated to the entire Supreme Court for its review and vote. It is, of course, difficult to isolate any one factor that may influence the Court’s decision to grant these petitions. However, one respected treatise on appellate practice has identified the following factors as important: (1) the need for a prompt, final decision, (2) the impact on the administration of justice, (3) the presence of important constitutional issues, and (4) the expeditious disposition of criminal matters.

Extraordinary jurisdiction cases are varied. The Supreme Court prothonotary’s categorization of the cases from 1979 to 1994 included the following:

Civil Cases: Election cases: 5
Judicial Election cases: 12

Labor Cases: 6

Government related cases: 11

Other: 18

Criminal Cases: Grand Jury cases: 2

Other: 29

Media related cases: 4

Judicial Administration Cases: Funding cases: 4

Other: 6

To illustrate these categories, the Supreme Court exercised its extraordinary jurisdiction in the following cases or issues:

- a case of first impression holding that quasi judicial immunity insulated Commonwealth officials of the Department of Labor and Industry from criminal liability and prosecution for acts taken without bad faith or corruption
- a case upholding the constitutional power of the General Assembly to confer tort immunity upon political subdivisions
- a case involving the validity of an injunction prohibiting a strike which crippled the Philadelphia school system for three months
- a case involving the power of an investigating grand jury to call witnesses after a defendant has been formally charged with a crime
- the constitutionality of over-crowding conditions for prison inmates in which the Court held that one man/one cell was not constitutionally required
- the constitutionality of procedures to recall the mayor of Philadelphia
- the Commonwealth’s right to demand a jury trial in criminal cases
- the validity of a primary election for judicial office
- the number of candidates who may be nominated for office of county commissioners
- the power of a lower appellate court to review the decision of a county’s Civil Service Commission
and
- the power of a judge to make or change judicial assignments in a criminal matter

And, in a recently publicized case, the Supreme Court granted a petition for extraordinary jurisdiction in a Commonwealth Court matter involving the safekeeping and disposal of infectious wastes and the right of a citizenry to a safe environment under a new statutory scheme. Personally, this is the very type of case that, I think, justifies and demands the intervention of our highest to secure finaljustice for the concerned citizens, who demand a safe environment; for the owner-operators, who face the risk of financial ruin; and for Commonwealth officials, who have the onerous obligation of making sure that highly dangerous wastes are properly handled in conformity with the new regulatory and statutory framework.

Lastly, let me say that the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction is not only grounded in the history of this Commonwealth; it is a power that has been exercised in other jurisdictions, including the federal court system. For example, the federal All Writs Act authorizes the United States Supreme Court (and other federal courts) to issue extraordinary writs necessary or appropriate in aid of its jurisdiction. As with the practice in Pennsylvania, the Court’s power to issue such extraordinary writs is broad. But discretionary principles and a due regard for the Court’s pressing business have made actual use of this federal power very narrow. In addition, my quick research has indicated that the following states also recognize the common law King’s Bench power or a modification for their highest courts: New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, Florida and Virginia. Of course, a similar grant of authority may exist in other states under a different name.

Thus, as we sit here today, it is important to remember that the so-called King’s Bench authority has been part of the fabric of this Commonwealth since 1722. For years, that authority has been there for the citizens of this Commonwealth – for governmental officials, for the press, for criminal defendants, for political candidates, and for those concerned with this Commonwealth’s common weal. While there may be disagreement with the exercise of jurisdiction in a particular case, it is hard to argue against the theoretical and practical necessity of such an authority — of such an important safety valve — in our rapdily changing and tumultuous world where definitive and expeditious justice on matters of public importance remains a cherished ideal.

Thank you. I will be pleased to answer any questions that you may have. courts. state.pa.us