Monday, August 22, 2016

Making a documentary on family courtlimits its audience and its impact on wrongdoing therein
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2016 10:53 AM
Subject: Documentary on Family Court: broadening its scope to the judiciary and focusing its criticism on the dynamics of wrongdoing

Dear Mr. Bergamini and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries,


Thank you for your email.


I am interested in your documentary project and would liketo work with you to make it as effective as it can be.


A. Making a documentary on family courtlimits its audience and its impact on wrongdoing therein


1. If you title your documentary so thatit indicates that it concerns family court or limit its contents to that court,you implicitly tell people with cases, or harm sustained, in probate, bankruptcy,juvenile, or civil or criminal courts that your documentary does not concernthem and that they need not waste their money or time viewing it.


2. Worse yet, even if your documentarywere effective in bringing some change in family court, it would beshort-lived, for such change would be limited to replacing current wrongdoingfamily court judges with people, most likely family court lawyers, of the sameilk who already know how the game of power is played:


a. Those who recommend, endorse, appoint, nominate, andconfirm candidates to the family court bench expect in return a favor fromsuccessful candidates. Connivance between politicians and judges is at the rootof the problem, not only in family court, but also in the rest of thejudiciary. Politicians hold judges unaccountable, lest the judges hold theirlegislative agenda unconstitutional(*>jur23fn17a), or retaliate against politicians’cronies through the myriad shenanigans at judges’ disposal:


1) files important to their cases get lost;


2) files are forward or backward dated in the dockets totheir detriment;


3) motion after motion is decided against them; etc.


3. Politicians cannot get out of theirheads judges’ explicit or implicit warning cry: “If you take me down, I’ll bring you with me!


4. Hence, if you do not want to gothrough the frustrating experience of seeing current bad family judges replacedby new bad ones, you must broaden the appeal of your documentary so that you:


a. inform the largest number of people possible, the nationalpublic, of the nature, extent, and gravity of wrongdoing that affected them intheir past cases or can affect them when in future they have a case. Thatinformation about wrongdoing must...


b. outrage people so intensely as to stir them up to forcepoliticians, lest they be voted out of, or not into, office, to hold nationallytelevised hearings on the judiciary, not merely judges, so that the findings soaggravate public outrage that politicians have no choice but to reform thejudiciary substantially(jur:158§§6-8).


B. An effective documentary focuses on‘the dynamics of wrongdoing’, rather than its manifestations in one court


5. Knowledge is Power. It is of theessence to understand the underlying relations of power between all thedifferent players in a judicial system, e.g., politicians, judges, businessmen,parties, federal funds, socialworkers, guardians ad litem, etc., that allow judges to abuse the judicialpower entrusted to them. This understanding can be gained by applying to themdynamic analysis of harmonious and conflicting interests(*>Lsch:14§§2-3; dcc:8¶11; dcc:17¶1).


6. However, the task of learning can besimplified by beginning with an understanding of the relations among judgeswithin a judiciary, which are dominated by two principles:


a. “Live andlet live” –I let you benefit from your wrongdoing and you let me benefit frommine–; and


b. the doublewhammy of denunciation:  If you are ajudge and you denounce me, although I am your colleague, your peer, yourfriend, one your fellow judges!, you can:


1) consequentialself-incrimination: set off an investigation that can uncover your ownwrongdoing either as:


(a) aprincipal wrongdoer, or as


(b) anaccessory to the principal, whether


(1) accessoryafter the fact, because you looked away from my last wrongdoing, therebycovering it up; and

(2) accessorybefore the fact, because your looking away gave me the implicit assurance thatyou would look away if I committed yet another wrongdoing, thereby facilitatingmy commission of more wrongs;


2) pariahstatus as a traitor: be ostracized as a traitor to the class of judges andthose who put you on the bench. As a result,


(a) you will be shunnedsocially.


(b) You will also bedestroyed professionally:


(1) Your judicial decisionswill be reversed on appeal one after the other, whereby you will appear to beutterly ignorant of the law and incompetent to apply it.


(2) After your term on thebench ends or you are removed from it, who is going to hire you as a lawyer? Neithera law firm nor a client, for you will be marked as the target of retaliation byevery sitting judge. You committed the ultimate betrayal: Not sticking by yourfellow judge no matter what he or she did!


7. Your failure to understand how thepower game is played led to your professional suicide.


C. Learning about the dynamics ofwrongdoing so that the documentary appeals to the national audience in and outof court


8. Tothat end, I draw your attention to sections concerning ‘the dynamics ofwrongdoing’ in my  study  of judges  and  their judiciary,  which  is titled  and  downloadable as  follows:


* Exposing Judges’  Unaccountability 
and  Consequent  Riskless Wrongdoing

Pioneering  the news  and  publishing field  of 
judicial  unaccountability  reporting



a. thedynamics of wrongdoing: jur:86§4


b. the impactof wrongdoing on a judicial system: jur:50§b


c. the natureof judicial wrongdoing: jur:133§4


D. The treatment of a documentary onjudicial wrongdoing: BlackRobed Predators


9. To implement the strategy ofinforming the national public of, and outraging it at, judges’ wrongdoing thatdeprives you of your property, your liberty, and all the rights and duties thatdetermine your life, the members of the media are indispensable.


10. In fact, an ever-growing number ofjournalists is needed to launch a Watergate-like generalized,competition-driven, and first-ever media investigation of the Federal Judiciaryand its judges.


11. They are the models of their statecounterparts(ol:319), including family courts,which apply family law, a law issued only by the states. It follows that adocumentary dealing with family courts in New York would be of no interest toCalifornians or Floridians and vice versa. It would be a daunting task to tryto convince the national public that the family courts in the 50 states aresimilarly pervaded by wrongdoing. Do you know enough about each of them toaffirm that they are?


12. This explains why the firstdocumentary on judges’ wrongdoing should concentrate on two unique nationalstories(>ol2:440) of wrongdoing that can outrage the nationalpublic. It can introduce the issue of unaccountable judges and their risklesswrongdoing into the national debate.


13. The national public will beoutraged by the findings of journalists’ investigation: Federal judges’ wrongdoingis so routine, widespread, and coordinated as to constitute the FederalJudiciary’s institutionalized modus operandi(jur:49§4).


14. Such findings will be broadcast bythe national TV and radio networks and the national newspapers. That outragewill in turn force politicians to officially investigate judges, including byholding nationally televised hearings on judicial wrongdoing, akin to thoseheld by the 9/11 Commission and the Senate Watergate Committee.


15. Your documentary can be what setsoff that journalistic investigation. Eventually, professional and citizenjournalists will be experienced and emboldened enough to investigate statejudiciaries, including state family courts.


16. This is the strategy born ofstrategic thinking(*>Lsch:14§3; ol:52§C; ol:8§E) laid out in my treatment for the documentary Black Robed Predators:when judges are the wrongdoers(ol:85;313).


E. Joining forces to make the first-everdocumentary on judges’ wrongdoing and set in motion a shift to a new We the People-government paradigm: the People’s Sunrise


17. What are your means for making andmarketing a documentary?


18. Do you know or can get in touchwith Acclaimed Documentarist Werner Herzog in order to join forces with him?


Watch the PBS Newshour episode for Thursday, August 19,


19. There will be enough glory to goaround: 50% of something is so much better than 100% of nothing, particularlyif you are trying to take on the mighty, life-tenured judges of the FederalJudiciary.


20. We are not looking for martyrs orpeople sent to prison or driven into bankruptcy. We want to end up with Oscarand Pulitzer Prize winners. Do you want to be as successful and acclaimed andmake as much money as Michael Moore did with Fahrenheit 9/11 and win an Oscar asdid Laura Poitras(ol:35) for Citizen Four on EdwardSnowden(ol:17; cf. 21-23, 88)?


21. We want to provoke the emergenceof leaders of the huge(ol:3111) untapped voting bloc of thepeople dissatisfied with the judicial and legal systems, who are part of thedominant segment of the electorate: The Dissatisfied With The Establishment.That is our audience. If we capture its attention, it will make us successful.


22. To do so, we need to join forces;otherwise, we will continue to make as much progress in exposing judges’wrongdoing, never mind reforming a judiciary, as we have up to now: none at all.


23. Therefore, let’s work together onwhat is likely to be effective in achieving our common goal:


a. To expose judges’ wrongdoing and reform the judiciariesso that through the establishment of citizen boards of judicial accountability(jur:160§8)We the People assert our status as the only source of sovereignpower and the masters of all our public servants, including judicial publicservants, whom we hold accountable for the performance of the duty for which wehired them, namely, to administer Equal Justice Under Law, and liable tocompensate the victims of their wrongdoing. If we are successful, we all willbe nationally recognized by a grateful Peopleas their Champions of Justice who lead them to the People’s Sunrise(jur:164§9; ol:29).


I look forward to hearing fromyou.


Dare trigger history!(jur:7§5)…andyou may enter it.




Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq.

Judicial Discipline Reform

2167 Bruckner Blvd.

Bronx, NY 10472



NOTE: Given the evidence at *>ggl:1 et seq.of interference with Dr. Cordero’s emails, when emailing him, please place theabove bloc of his email addresses in the To: line of your email to enhance thechances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.