2014
10.02

In 1987, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court enacted the Rules of Professional Conduct into law describing the rules as “a minimal ethical standard” for the practice of law.
disciplinbrd

Ethics seeks to resolve questions dealing with human morality – concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice and crime.

Ethics involves systematizing, defending and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct, and methods to address disputes.

Ethical Standards are principles which when followed, promote values such as trust, good behavior, fairness, and/or kindness.

There are four general factors which are involved in ethics.
1) Law, 2) Policies, 3) Individual Application. 4) Consequences

1) Law – A society is bound by laws. These laws define the difference between right and wrong, and what is considered acceptable behavior. People must abide by the laws.

2) Policies – Within society, or within smaller groups, a set of clearly stated, highly ethical policies takes the guesswork out of decisions made which represent the group. When properly trained, members actions and reactions become second nature. Ensuring those policies are ethically sound removes the possibility for improper actions or decisions.

3) Individual Ethics – Individuals determine their personal integrity and moral values based on heritage and upbringing, education, and positive reinforcement of ethical actions.

4) Consequences – The consequences for ignoring or breaking an ethical standard exist within each factor. Violate the law and you will be prosecuted. Violating a policy and the infraction affects the group – the action affects the respect accorded the group and can negatively impact the morale of other members. Noncompliance with ethical standards at the individual level damages integrity and reputation.

An Ethics Policy MUST provide a process to resolve conflicts which permits those experiences to benefit the individual through information, the group through policy adjustment and training, and society which can enact laws to prevent future conflict.

Where ethical conflict resolution does not develop and promote ethical behavior, the individual, the group and the society are prevented from the experience, knowledge and reinforcement of an ethical standard.

Ethics develop personal integrity and moral values. Groups benefit from the personal ethics of members which further promotes the reputation and integrity of the group. Society systematizes, promotes and defends the laws developed from the moral and ethical standards of the people.

A societies concept of good and evil, right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice and crime is derived from the values of it’s people.

Ethical behavior is good, right, virtuous and just. Unethical behavior is evil, wrong, a vice and a crime.

A society uses laws to promote, protect and encourage the ethical behaviors and beliefs within the society while discouraging, prosecuting and correcting the unethical ones.

FOUNDED ON PRINCIPLES

The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights and The Constitution of the United States include the basic concepts upon which the United States was established. The documents include the general principles and ethics for our society which have been and are used to understand, interpret and develop the laws.

The US Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land – the moral and ethical standard under which our society agrees to exist.

Federal Law cannot exist where it violates the US Constitution.

State Constitutions exist within the framework established in the US Constitution.

State Law cannot exist where it violates the State Constitution or the US Constitution.

If any law is unconstitutional, it is not a law. EXCEPT… that only works in principle. Until a law is not a law, it is still pretty much a law. Lawmakers review proposed laws during their construction for constitutionality, and sometimes a situation is not realized. The Not-A-Law gets enacted, signed by the Executive, and that Not-A-Law then begins to affect the society.

The unconstitutional Not-A-Law is not consistent with the moral and ethical standards of society and can cause ‘damage’ to individuals or groups until the issue is addressed.

On Petition, the courts review the issue of constitutionality and decide if
a) The law is the law.
b) The Not-A-Law is a nullity.

** The Courts have dismissed the Constitutional Challenge of Rule 1.6. The basis for dismissal is unsubstantiated. The doctrine for dismissal does not apply to pre-emptive constitutional challenges. Facts are ignored. Everything dismissed on paper without any hearings.

PRESENTMENT OF UNETHICAL RULES BY THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ENACTED BY STATE SUPREME COURTS INTO UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW

The American Bar Association developed the Rules of Professional Conduct and presented them as an ethical standard for lawyers. “The Rules” are actually not based or supported by ethical or moral principles. “The Rules” are based on continuing in the way things have always been done – using the same flawed logic for supporting statements. One pervasive concept throughout the ABA ethics program is the constant cross reference to Rule 1.6 CONFIDENTIALITY of INFORMATION.

Rule 1.6 is a deception. At face value, Rule 1.6 requires the lawyer take responsibility and accountability by reporting all acts of misconduct to disciplinary authorities. That moral high ground erodes quickly upon application of the cross references which mandate silence. Excusing silence where the information would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary… or affect the reputation of the legal profession… or affect their law offices… or affect their client. The resultant Rule 1.6 is empty and left completely ineffective to address reporting the misconduct which on its face could suggest esteem-worthy. In the void left behind, Rule 1.6 is an aggressively enforced mandate of confidentiality which conceals corruption and injustice within the judiciary and the legal profession. [Shaking Head] Well, Rule 1.6 is not titled REPORTING MISCONDUCT – because it’s not about that. Rule 1.6 is titled CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION – and it is all about silence, and maintaining confidentiality without the interference of ethics, morals or conscience.

A Group has presented their group policy to the state to elevate into law.

WHY? [No Answer]

As a group policy, constitutionality is not generally problematic. Group Policies must still follow the LAW. Group policies typically refine or specify “a higher ethical standard” which benefits the group through higher esteem, reputation and integrity.

The ABA knows that the “Model Rules” violate the US Constitution. In February 1983, the ABA House of Delegates had met, debated and decided to further remove provisions in the Confidentiality clause. Already constitutionally questionable, the removal further affected the rights of the victims of fraud.

The ABA removed two provisions from Rule 1.6 Confidentiality which permitted a lawyer to speak where silence would conceal or permit “substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another”;
and
where the lawyer was seeking “to rectify the consequences of a client’s criminal or fraudulent act in the furtherance of which the lawyer’s services have been used.”

The decision by the ABA is clearly on the wrong side of the law, AND contrary to the moral and ethical standards of society.

WHY DID THE ABA PRESENT THEIR RULES TO THE STATE SUPREME COURTS TO ELEVATE INTO LAW KNOWING THAT THEIR CONFIDENTIALITY CLAUSE WAS UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

Participating in a crime, voluntarily or not, lawyers are mandated to conceal information which denies, prevents and obstructs justice. The revised Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information affect the victim’s rights which are believed o be secured by the First Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Tenth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Further, the mandated silence causes the lawyer to directly participate in the commission and furtherance of a crime, and to conceal that personal participation and involvement from all law enforcement authorities.

imagesSeriously, the “minimum ethical standard’ joke should have been the punchline. The ABA Model Rules is a code of unethical conduct, enacted into unconstitutional law, MANDATING a lawyer sacrifice personal reputation, ethics, integrity and morality.

The ‘minimal ethical standard’ descriptor seems greatly over-exaggerated where the rules require unethical, immoral, and illegal behaviors.

A Group policy which violates ethics, morality, justice and the Law destroys the ethical integrity of the group.

THE CONTRADICTION IS OBVIOUS. ABA ETHICS ARE JUXTAPOSED

The ABA mandated unethical and immoral participation in criminal actions by attorneys which permit the commission and furtherance of a fraud and the conspiracy to conceal the crime from law enforcement and prosecution. The ABA’s Rules of Professional Conduct is void of ethical considerations.

And…
But…
The American Bar Association has actually done it. The ABA has made unethical behavior a requirement within their Rules of Professional Conduct – their ‘minimum ethical standard”.

The unconstitutional law has been enacted by every state supreme court. It would take 25 years to find the constitutional problem. Rule 1.6 Confidentiality effectively concealed judicial corruption, injustice. The courts ignored the Rule of Law and the US Constitution without being held accountable.

The nation would quickly begin to notice that something is wrong with the US Constitution.

A President would snap that “The Constitution is just a god-damned piece of paper.”

The stage was set. The fraud of the National Foreclosure Crisis began in states where the commission of fraud by lawyers within the court was kept CONFIDENTIAL. No one has been prosecuted.

NATIONAL FORECLOSURE CRISIS – FORECLOSURE BY FRAUD

The ABA lack of ethics was exploited to foreclose upon the homes of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of Americans while constitutional rights and the Rule of Law was ignored by the court. Every level of law enforcement was prevented from action … by a confidentiality clause.

… by an unconstitutional confidentiality clause.

KIDS FOR CASH – Luzerne County Pennsylvania

Two judges exploit the mandate of confidentiality while receiving kickbacks for placing over 4000 children in prisons. Lawyers and judges remained silent. Complaints to the PA Supreme court were unheeded. Human Trafficking of Children in Pennsylvania. AMERICAN CHILDREN were unprotected by the US Constitution, the PA Constitution and the Rule of Law. The lawyers and EVERY level of law enforcement was prevented from action … by a confidentiality clause.

… by an unconstitutional confidentiality clause.

Until a judge contacted federal authorities violating Rule 1.6 Confidentiality. Judge Ann Lokuta was promptly removed from the bench for adversely affecting the integrity of the judiciary. Ciavarella and Coonahan had been permitted to affect the integrity of the court under an unconstitutional veil of confidentiality.

Civil, Criminal and Family Courts – ALL AFFECTED

An act of fraud, judicial misconduct or injustice is all that is required to cause the complete loss of constitutionally protected rights for litigants in the American courts.

There is no one to enforce the US Constitution where every state and federal judiciary has lost judicial independence, jurisdiction and immunity all caused by a mandate of confidentiality. Americans are unprotected by the US Constitution, the PA Constitution and the Rule of Law when every lawyer and EVERY level of law enforcement is prevented from action … by a confidentiality clause.

… by an unconstitutional confidentiality clause.

TREASON – A deliberate act of sedition by the American Bar Association which undermined the judiciary at state and federal levels and prevented the government from it’s proper function…. executed in every state from 1984 to 2009.

DID NOT ONE OF THE 50 STATE SUPREME COURTS REVIEW THE RULES BEFORE THEY ENACTED LAW?

[COUNTERPOINT]
BUT, when a lawyer knows something is unconstitutional, they will fight for their client. They will report and expose the corruption within the judiciary.

That is a beautiful and respectable ideal which completely ignores reality.

Before the issue of corruption is heard in any court, the constitutional advocate/civil rights lawyer will be suspended from the practice of law, or disbarred, for adversely affecting the integrity of the judiciary and the reputation of lawyers.

The lawyer’s personal reputation will be attacked. The lawyer’s careers will be maligned. They will become disenfranchised from the community of lawyers. Those actions against the lawyer, though criminal, are considered acceptable and appropriate when exposing the truth would violate Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information – any publicity would adversely affect the integrity of the judiciary and the reputation of lawyers.

Additional events extend the same state Rule 1.6 Confidentiality Rule to include all state and federal courts… and every level of state and federal law enforcement. There seems to have been great effort has gone into assuring that an KNOWN TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL state law which inexplicably trumps the Rule of Law, the state Constitution and the US Constitution affects every court jurisdiction and all state and federal law enforcement.

Where the state Supreme Courts may have recognized their error, The Rule 1.6 Confidentiality clause prevents even the supreme court from addressing their own misdeed.

At every level of the courts, and law enforcement, there exists an ABA affiliated bar association and the opportunity to undermine and interfere with the course of justice. Efforts which prevent access to the courts, including forgery and issuing unsigned per curiam orders, are unexplained, omit facts, create fictions and fail to cite the applicable law. Rule 1.6 Confidentiality extends to conceal any effort action which prevent the judiciary from being adversely affected.

The Judiciary in whom the people placed their trust has become undone by the American Bar Association. The ABA has undermined the authority of the judiciary by affecting judicial independence which is an essential element for jurisdiction. The authority of the courts has been leveraged throughout the government undermining the Constitution, affecting and ignoring the overreach of the Executive, while observing the failure of the Legislative branch which is determined to accomplish nothing.

The United States Constitution needs to be rebooted.

Removing Unconstitutional Rule 1.6 is the first step it the recovery from the corruption and injustice of the last 25 years.

Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information is unconstitutional, immoral, unethical, improper, prevents, defies, conceals, undermines, usurps, destroys, overwhelms. Rule 1.6 KILLS.

Justice is coming.

Every. Person. Matters.

No Comment.

Add Your Comment

%d bloggers like this: