I have been indefinitely suspended from the practice of law for the “crime” of refusing to disclose my client’s confidences in a patently illegal proceeding. My apparent real crime has been to defend a gay black Republican in the last months of his life before he succumbed to brain cancer. For this and my many other unpopular causes, I will never be forgiven.
This attack on my person and my profession came at a time when I was litigating a multitude of police misconduct cases that despotic actors within our government desperately wanted silenced. This included a case with affirmative photographic evidence that Metropolitan Police Department vice officers stole some thirty thousand dollars in negotiable money orders from my client’s home never to be found again, and another where a District of Columbia taxi driver was arrested for solicitation of prostitution, yet the preserved security camera recordings plainly show him waiving off the advances of the undercover officer and driving away, and another where I reported the ongoing unlawful conduct of bankruptcy court officials to the Department of Justice. The present actions of the United States District Court are in immediate and direct retaliation for my reporting of specific judicial abuses, and my formal demands that the courts confine themselves to the authority permitted by law.
My suspension in and of itself is of course, illegal. Regardless of the false and defamatory publication to the contrary, I have never been convicted of any serious crime. I was charged with criminal contempt by a court which no longer had jurisdiction to act. There was no trial, no jury. I received less due process than I would defending a parking ticket.
Without a jury trial, there can be no “serious crime”. As the Supreme Court recognizes, the Constitution demands exactly this.
“This course of events demonstrates the unwisdom of vesting the judiciary with completely untrammeled power to punish contempt, and makes clear the need for effective safeguards against that power’s abuse. Prosecutions for contempt play a significant role in the proper functioning of our judicial system; but despite the important values which the contempt power protects, courts and legislatures have gradually eroded the power of judges to try contempts of their own authority. In modern times, procedures in criminal contempt cases have come to mirror those used in ordinary criminal cases. Our experience teaches that convictions for criminal contempt, not infrequently resulting in extremely serious penalties, see United States v. Barnett, 376 U. S. 681, 376 U. S. 751 (Goldberg, J., dissenting), are indistinguishable from those obtained under ordinary criminal laws. If the right to jury trial is a fundamental matter in other criminal cases, which we think it is, it must also be extended to criminal contempt cases.”
Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194, 207-208 (1968).
Not only have the District of Columbia courts refused to respect the constitutional limitations on their own authority, court officials now outright publicly defame me with a claim that I committed a “serious crime”, despite their specific knowledge of the summary proceeding solely imposing a fine upon me. This circumstance was all too convenient to deprive me of my law license without a hearing and in turn, my ability to defend the rights of those most vunerable.
The hyper-politicized federal judiciary stands today as an abject failure of our constitutional form of government and remains the greatest threat to our collective civil liberties. I regret that I have failed in my decades-long endeavors to curtail these abuses. However, I value my integrity more than my own personal well being, and have never bowed to undue pressure to willfully abandon my clients and their claims. Such matters are now beyond my control.