- In law, there is a principle described as customs, practices,
and usages. In simple terms, it means certain habits that those who rule
us use by way of conducting themselves. BUT, these ingrained ways are generally
not written down, yet are clearly understood as the accepted and established
way of government.
- For example, in the South for a hundred years after the
American Civil War, or as southerners call it The War Between The States, the
customs, practices, and usages, were that whites would not respect the
Equal Protection of the Law guarantees as to blacks. Lynchings were condoned,
and whites would eat their picnic lunch while watching blacks hanging from
a tree. The Ku Klux Klan, although dominated some fifty per cent by FBI
agents and informants, was more or less allowed to run wild and terrorize
blacks. Some Federal judges, such as in Mississippi, were known to chase
blacks out of their courts while hurling racial slurs against them. It
was a customs, practice, and usage, that blacks had separate fountains
to drink water from, in public facilities.
- In Chicago, we spoke to an Afro-American lawyer, formerly
a government official, who told us how the federal courts in Chicago likewise
mistreat black attorneys, even now. He decided not to make any public
statements about the same. Italian-American lawyers told us similar things
from first-hand experience. Namely, that lawyers of color and of certain
ethnic groups, are looked down upon by the Chicago federal judges, some
of whom are persons of color themselves. That is, the judges prefer "pin-stripe"
suit attorneys, WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). No, it is not as
blatant as having black attorneys drinking from a separate fountain. BUT,
their petitions are routinely rejected, so that they cannot hope to make
a living in the Chicago federal courts.
- Some of the accepted ways of the judiciary, state and
-  The buying and selling of judgeships in courts at
all levels. We discussed this in a website item "Buying a Judgeship".
Because of certain circumstances, some of this is even coming out in the
monopoly press. Such as "Ex-Judge gets 27 months in bribery case;
U.S. still probing whether he paid for seat on bench". Chicago Tribune,
- A popular website (<http://www.worldnetdaily.com/>www.worldnetdaily.com,
6/19/03)referred to a story in a major New York publication:
- "In an admission that has New York Supreme Court
[actually a lower court] in an uproar, a retired Brooklyn judge said he
paid $35,000 to a Democratic leader more than three decades ago to get
a seat on the bench, New York Newsday reports. The payment, says Thomas
R. Jones, 89, was 'IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CUSTOMS AND PRACTICES OF THE
DAY', though he added, 'it was not right then, it's not right now' ".(Emphasis
- The article went on to discuss how judges and lawyers
knew that certain lawyers were "bagmen", used as go-betweens
of lawyers and corrupt jurists.
- In our website series on "Coca-Cola, CIA, and the
Courts", we mentioned how a known criminal-type bought the bench for
Chicago Federal District Judge Blanche M. Manning[(312)435-7608]. An elite
federal investigative unit, contacted us.
- Government investigators: "Your story, also in the
court record, that Judge Manning's judgeship was bought, is not correct."
- Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts: "What
is wrong with our court statement and our website story?"
- Government investigators: "You state that her judgeship
was bought for one million dollars by a known power-broker, described as
a mobster. It is not a correct amount. Our inquiry has determined that
the power-broker paid two million dollars."
- Citizen's Committee: "So, is that all you found
wrong with our position on the buying of that Judgeship? That we mentioned
a lower amount?"
- Government investigators: "Yes, you have stated
a wrong amount."
- He did not inform us what, if anything, would be done
against the Judge and her patron/judgeship buyer.
- Since the buying of judgeships is a known custom, practice,
and usage, what are the obvious conclusions? Such as, the criminal-types,
or political power-brokers, that buy the judgeship and install someone
of THEIR choice, then are in a position to profit in some way from the
judge thus put in place. Some call it, pulling on the chain. (In the New
York example, however, the retired Judge claimed it did not effect his
-  The handling of court records. No accountability.
There is a practice moreso in the federal courts in the U.S., of the judges
NOT SIGNING THE COURT RULINGS by them, particularly so in civil cases.
So, were you, as we have for decades, to have examined decisions by U.S.
District Judges and then their supervisors, the reviewing courts, U.S.
Courts of Appeal, it is quite evident the Judges DO NOT SIGN THEIR NAME.
- What is the rationale, off-the-record, and behind-the-scenes?
Namely, that many of the federal court decisions are NOT made by the Judges
who are simply a front. The decisions are made by law clerks, also "minute
clerks" as they are referred to. In plain lingo, we have long since
known that to corrupt the judiciary, you have to lean on their secretaries,
their minute clerks, their law clerks, sometimes just the court bailiffs
or deputy marshals, or their ghost-writing law professors. Further,
in some instances, the decisions are written by former law school
students or present or former law professors, particularly so where the
judges are former law professors.
- We have given as examples of corrupt practices, that
three Chicago Federal Appeals Judges, and one judge on the U.S. Supreme
Court, are all formerly from Rockefeller's University of Chicago Law School.
(7th Circuit Judges Richard A. Posner (312) 435-5806); Frank H. Easterbrook
(312) 435-5808, were law professors, and 7th Circuit Judge Diane P. Wood
(312) 435-5521, was Dean of the Law School. U.S. Supreme Court Justice
Antonin Scalia, was a professor there.)They commit perjury, in violation
of the federal criminal code, in that they have failed to disclose that
they, on the bench, represent the Billion Dollar stock and bond portfolio
of Rockefeller's University of Chicago. This disclosure, which they have
not made, is an annual mandatory judicial financial disclosure, failure
to reveal the same by their signed form, being perjury, under federal law.
- What is the problem with the judges, as is their custom,
practice, and usage, not to sign their name to their rulings? The ghost-written
decisions in important cases, not every case, contain judicial perjuries.
That is, the established undisputed facts in the court record show it is
DAY. To make a corrupt and arbitrary ruling, the judges' rulings say
it is NIGHT, and apply NIGHT case law.
- The litigant "loser" and/or their attorney
is puzzled. Rarely, if ever, do lawyers confront the corrupt judges with
their judicial perjury. Funny thing, since the decisions are often ghost-written,
the judges, supposely in all candor, could say, but never do, "I did
not write that. I know nothing about that decision. You can't hold me responsible
and accountible. Why? Because I also did NOT sign it." It is a corrupt
and rotten way of carrying out the unwritten customs, practices, and usages,
of the Bench and the Bar.
-  The U.S. Constitution, Seventh Amendment provides:
- "In Suits at common law, where the value in
controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall
be preserved, AND NO FACT TRIED BY A JURY SHALL BE OTHERWISE RE-EXAMINED
in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common
law." (Emphasis added.)
- The state and federal courts in this nation have
been set up similar to a church hierarchy, with a lower court (the local
church), a reviewing and appellate court (the regional or local Archbishop
of the Church), and the higher court (The Vatican, the Pontiff, the Pope).
- By the 7th Amendment of the Bill of Rights, the reviewing
and appellate court and the highest courts, are forbidden to re-examine,
that is, to change, re-determine, the facts submitted to a jury and made
into a jury trial court verdict.
- The 7th Amendment in important cases, not every case,
is again and again violated by feudal lords, sitting as Archbishops on
the bench and throne of power as appellate, reviewing, and highest
court judges. They commit judicial perjuries, picking so-called new "facts"
out of the air, and thus justifying a corrupt and arbitrary ruling in dealing
with a jury trial verdict of the lower court. To survive, members of the
Bar dare not complain about these judicial perjuries which constitute a
fraud upon their own Court by the reviewing, appellate, or high court judges,
actually made, as earlier stated, by ghost-writers, and allowed, permitted,
condoned, and acquiesced in by the judges.
-  The U.S. Constitution sets up a system of government
into three departments, Legislature, Judiciary, Executive. It is a violation
of these provisions, for example, for the Legislature to sit as a Court.
In enumerating the powers of Congress, Article I, Section 9, "No Bill
of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
- Bill of Attainder is to have the Legislature and/or the
Executive branch, designate, without a judicial determination, that
a person is an "enemy of the State", a "terrorist",
or a "criminal". During periods of public ferment, such as the
Civil Rights and Anti-Viet Nam War era, the FBI and the American CIA, secretly
designated U.S. citizens as "enemies of the State" and similar
labels in the records of those agencies. And, circulating those secret
rulings, following up on that, secret government operatives, fingered political
activists to have their phones sabotaged, their private residences and
offices broken into and records of membership stolen, and other injuries
done to them as law-abiding citizens, such as fire-bombing their cars,
causing wheels to somehow fall off their car while in motion, and inserting
provocateurs into peace parades. These secret records justified the
FBI/CIA in assassinating Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., to prevent "the
rise of a Black Messiah" and to punish him fatally for having one-year
prior to his political murder having made a speech in New York. Dr. King
said he intended to go to Viet Nam to urge black GIs not to murder yellow-skin
people in someone else's civil war. In other website stories, we mentioned
how William Rehnquist headed a secret Justice Department unit doing such
things. Later, when he became a Justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, he ruled
that there should not be a court remedy for these wrongs, and in so doing,
did not disqualify himself in respect to his own prior actions as to the
- In prior website items, we told how Hillary Rodham Clinton,
while First Lady (which is NOT an official government position), nevertheless
mis-used government power to put persons such as us, on her "enemies
list" to harass and terrorize us. Courts, as we mentioned, refused
to consider our plight and to x-out these Bills of Attainder issued against
us and others, without judicial determinations.
- Furthermore, the Federal Courts have become, more and
more, super-Legislatures, passing "case laws", binding on everyone,
the same as if done by Congress.
- There have been no actual remedies for violation of the
Separation of Powers, the three department system of the government. We
have in the past mentioned about Chicago-area Congressman Henry Hyde who
had two hats. First hat, he was, of course, a Congressman. Secondly, he
was also head of the CIA's "black budget", supervising funds
for dirty tricks including political assassinations. So he sat in the Legislative
and Executive branches at the same time.
- Since Judges are not intended to be representatives of
the people, and are primarily chosen by the Ultra Rich, the U.S. is becoming
more and more a nation ruled by Judges. We have in our website stories
about the year 2000 Presidential election, told how the "Gang of Five",
like a Military Junta, on the U.S. Supreme Court, installed George W. Bush
as the occupant and resident of the White House, in so doing, the high
court gang re-examined and re-determined the facts, even plucking supposed
"facts" out of the sky.
- Thus, more and more we are being ruled by the Judges
without our consent as the governed.
- More coming....Stay tuned.
- Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court reformer and
since 1963, Chairman/Founder, Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts.
Since 1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, Moderator/Producer of "Broadsides",
a public access Cable TV program, cablecast WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS of Chicago
to upwards of 400,000 viewers, each Monday evening, 9 p.m., Channel 21
Cable TV. Portions of some of the shows, via videostreaming, can be seen
anywhere, anytime, through our website.
- Office, 8 a.m. to Midnight, most 7 days, (773) 375-5741
BUT, please, DO NOT BOMBARD THIS LISTED PHONE WITH "JUST ROUTINE"
CALLS, such as asking us our address which is part of every one of our
- For a recorded phone message, updating our work, NOT
an expensive call (773) 731-1100.
- For a heavy packet of our printed stories, send $5.00
[U.S. funds only], plus a stamped, self-addressed BUSINESS size envelope
[ #10 envelope, 4-1/8 x 9- 1/2 ] WITH THREE U.S. FIRST CLASS STAMPS
on it, to Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts, Sherman H. Skolnick,
Chairman, 9800 So. Oglesby Ave., Chicago IL 60617-4870.
- WEBSITE: <http://www.skolnicksreport.com/>http://www.skolnicksreport.com/
[NOTE "s" after name].
- E-MAIL: email@example.com