Part 10: The Death of Justice and Perversion of the Rule of Law

Last week, we identified a few of many instances of the trampling of the Rule of Law by the Town of Clarkstown in its numerous legal actions against us, including—irony of ironies!—its recent legal “victory” that will cost Town taxpayers many hundreds of thousands of dollars. This week, we briefly examine the judge’s Decision and Order which—even giving him the benefit of every conceivable doubt—is as indefensible as the financial quagmire into which Town Supervisor Gromack, Town Attorney Amy Mele, and the Town Board have now voluntarily placed taxpayers:

* In granting the Town’s motion to remediate our property on the alleged grounds that it “presents a direct hazard to the environment, neighboring property, and to site occupants, as well as to the public at large,” the judge (more fully identified below) simply didn’t address—inadvertently overlooked? blatantly ignored?—numerous official, uncontroverted, exculpatory, Town and Town consulting company-generated exhibits that we submitted that explicitly identify our fill as non-hazardous. These included:

* Two documents signed by Town DEC Director Kalarickal.

* Multiple references within a draft Project Manual prepared by the Town’s consulting engineering company (LMS, now HDR).

* Multiple references within its “final” Project Manual, signed and sealed by LMS founding partner Patrick Lawler.

* Multiple additional references within revisions to its “final” Project Manual, signed and sealed by LMS founding partner Patrick Lawler, which included, among other official statements, “In the opinion of the Engineer, the fill is non-hazardous.”

* Confirmation of all of the above through a letter by high-level LMS officials, which confirms a conference call among LMS officials, Kalarickal, and then-Town Attorney Costa, who unanimously agreed that our fill was non-hazardous. 

* How much more official can it be that our fill is not hazardous?

* How is it possible that the judge could ignore every one of these submitted exhibits? 

* On what basis could the Town ask the court to declare our fill hazardous? 

* On what grounds could the judge comply with such a facially false claim? 

* Here’s what the judge had to say as a “reason”—rationalization? invented excuse? deceptively dishonestly?—in refusing to address any of these uncontroverted documents: 
     “…failure of the Court to specifically mention any particular issue in this Decision & Order does not mean that it has not been considered by the Court in light of the appropriate legal authority.” (Decision & Order, p. 4) 

* What do you think the odds are that the judge and Town officials  met in advance—furtively discussed? conspired?—to arrive at such artfully vague phrasing that allowed him to entirely circumvent this most central issue—and in the process pervert the Rule of Law?

* Let us interpret it for you: Thomas E. Walsh the Second is an attorney who, to the best of our knowledge, has long worked in the Town of Clarkstown and was recently appointed to the lowest state-wide judicial position as an acting surrogate judge. 

* What are the odds that he has further judicial aspirations after having been a village judge for years? 

* What are the odds that in order to be appointed to even this lowly judgeship he was required to develop a full appreciation of politics, patronage, and governance in the Town of Clarkstown? 

* What are the odds that he didn’t implicitly—even explicitly?—know that recognition of these official, uncontroverted, Town-generated documents would necessarily defeat the Town’s motion? 

* What are the odds that he had no choice but to “inadvertently overlook” or “blatantly ignore” our submissions which he alleged were “largely comprised of a series of documents which are not admissible for a variety of (unspecified) reasons”—when even the Town never contested their validity? 

* And there you have The Death of Justice.

* But that’s hardly all. The Right Honorable Judge also chose to not address—inadvertently overlook? blatantly ignore?—the Town’s knowingly deliberate attempt to subvert federal bankruptcy law, which resulted from our having received complete protection for ourselves and our property against the Town, of which the Town has long had actual and constructive knowledge. Had his surrogate judgeship acknowledged this absolute and inviolable protection, he would have to have dismiss the Town case—and place sanctions upon the Town and Deputy Attorney Schofield, which we sought. But surely, we couldn’t have that! 

* What do you think the odds are that His Highness and Town officials met in advance—furtively discussed? conspired?—to arrive at such an artful course of inaction?

* What do you think the odds are that any ordinary citizen without political connections would be able to obtain justice under such circumstances?

Thus, after pursuing us through four violation notices, three legal resolutions, a criminal action, and a civil action dating to 1999, after engaging in numerous well-documented illegal and malevolent actions, while ignoring a unanimous jury verdict, an Article 78 Supreme Court decision, Town code, State law, and case law, Town officials have finally “gotten us.” And what have they “gotten?”

* They got a local judge to “overlook” myriad official documents that formally and officially declared our fill non-hazardous.

* They got the judge to declare that, “as a matter of law,” our fill “presents a direct hazard to the environment…and the public.” 

* They got the judge to “ignore” that fact that the Town was knowingly legally bound to refrain from pursuing this matter by virtue of federal bankruptcy law.

* They got the judge to allow the Most Righteous Town Supervisor and his Right Merrie Band of Rubber-Stamping Council Members—guided by The Infinite Wisdom of His Most Ethical Million-Dollar Legal Department—to expend hundreds of thousands of dollars of hard-earned taxpayers’ money for the benefit of…whom?…and what?…and why? 

Good for taxpayers? Good for “the public at large?” Good for the Rule of Law? Good for other local citizens who Town officials are out to “get?” We think not. What do you think?

(Next week and beyond we’ll document additional malignant, duplicitous, conspiratorial, and outright illegal actions of numerous Town officials, judges, and other “players.” You may also want to review our web site, townofclarkstownvgoldberg.org, which contains full documentation on all factually-based statements.)