Wednesday, October 17, 2007

prosecutorial misconduct

Double click image to enlarge.

The above published prediction by all area attorneys, judges, legislators and ex-prosecutors of potential prosecutorial misconduct becomes reality that is set forth in this blog. All case law represented in the legal papers reproduced in this blog are compilations of judicial opinions and/or legal writings from licensed attorneys. The legal story (brief) is at:

The cover-up (without the mention or analysis of one fact from the briefs or printed case) of prosecutorial misconduct and outright prosecutorial felonies by the Vermont Supreme Court is at:

The full story is at:

The unopposed briefs and printed case apparently were not even read by the Vermont Supreme Court as neither the facts nor law cited appear in the unpublished opinion of the court. The court simply ignored all the paperwork in front of them. Government protects government. I suppose extortion, obstruction of justice and acceptance of a bribe by a state prosecutor is a messy issue to handle so the court thought best to just ignore it and cover it up. See brief and opinion. A glance at the "issues presented" portion of the brief in comparison to the opinion reveals that the Vermont Supreme Court addressed Zero of the appellate issues.

Even in light of it's vagueness, the opinion of the Vermont Supreme Court outlines the extortion and obstruction of justice by the state using the threat of criminal charges to leverage an advantage in civil proceedings. The court conveniently leaves out the part about a written threat from the state prior to the plea agreement. The court does mention that the prosecution retaliated after my wife amended a pleading in a civil suit. No problem with the Sate making good on its written threat to make civil litigation the basis for filing criminal charges, thereby, using criminal proceedings to manipulate civil proceedings (also known as Obstruction of Justice and Extortion).

Then there is the prosecutor participating in a plea agreement that specified the dismissal of civil suits against himself and his best friend. Did the prosecutor recuse because the plea involved a personal benefit to himself and his friends. Of course not, he loved the idea of the lawsuit against him being dismissed. By staying on the case, the prosecutor accepted personal benefit for himself and his close friends, also known as, acceptance of a bribe.

Without a fair tribunal for enforcement, constitutional rights are nothing but empty unenforceable words on an old piece of paper. This case presents a problem for the modern judiciary as the facts supporting a finding of constitutional transgressions are on the record, unopposed and the prosecutorial extortion exists on a written court pleading filed on behalf of the state. A cover up without changing the hard facts required zero analysis of the fact and zero analysis of case law, exactly what the court did. Note the Vermont Supreme Court opinion is devoid of any citation of case law, it is a statement of policy that the court does not have to opine on issues it is uncomfortable with even though it is the only appellate state court in Vermont and it is the sole attorney ethics disciplinary authority in Vermont. This is the status of constitutional rights in this country -- there are no constitutional rights as there is no mechanism for enforcement other than a broken judicial system.

This case reveals that prosecutorial acts of moral turpitude and constitutional transgressions are routinely ignored by the Courts and ethics authorities.

The 144 page printed case (appendix) filing in the Vermont Supreme Court is available upon request.

Scott Huminski

s_huminski –at-

Read and please sign the Obama Justice Reform petition at,

No comments: