|
|
Post by Venter on Jul 16, 2014 9:17:04 GMT -5
I believe that Judge Kuhn Acted Outside of His Authority by Emailing Legal Assistance to the Adams County Solicitor, John Hartzell.
I believe that he should "do the right thing" and just Retire from the Bench for this Transgression against a Citizen.
Judge Kuhn Knowingly and Willingly Stepped Outside His Robes when he shared his "Judicial Wisdom" with Hartzell, in a case that is before him by Bruce Hollinger, challenging the "Clean & Green" Policies in Adams Co.
Should Punitive Damages be Awarded due to his Collusion with Hartzell?
Should Judge Kuhn Step Down from the Bench?
Should there be a Request for Kuhn to Step Down?
Should Hartzell face Punishment for Accepting the Info, and NOT Reporting Kuhn?
|
|
|
|
Post by Venter on Jul 16, 2014 9:18:34 GMT -5
I believe I can Add Options to THIS Poll.
Are there any additions you would like to see?
|
|
|
|
Post by SpellChecker on Jul 16, 2014 9:35:53 GMT -5
I believe I can Add Options to THIS Poll. Are there any additions you would like to see? I think you forgot that hartzel should step down/ be let go. This isnt the first time he has participated in these shenanigans. |
|
|
|
Post by paulkellett on Jul 16, 2014 11:47:23 GMT -5
This matter should be decided/ investigated by the Judicial Conduct Board. My ( and mine alone) reading of the cannon ( law) governing the behavior of judges suggests that such ex parte communications are forbidden. Similarly, it is the obligation of the other judges, now that it has come to their attention to report the wrong doing. They are under obligation to report both Judge Kuhn and Mr. Hartzell now. I have always wondered how Judge Kuhn ruled in the Links lawsuit triggering the reassessment, but recused himself when I sued? As to Mr. Hartzell, I have proof that he tampered with the expert witness, contrary to our signed agreement not to do so. The judcial code says that anyone can report wrong doing by the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by SpellChecker on Jul 16, 2014 12:33:23 GMT -5
This matter should be decided/ investigated by the Judicial Conduct Board. My ( and mine alone) reading of the cannon ( law) governing the behavior of judges suggests that such ex parte communications are forbidden. Similarly, it is the obligation of the other judges, now that it has come to their attention to report the wrong doing. They are under obligation to report both Judge Kuhn and Mr. Hartzell now. I have always wondered how Judge Kuhn ruled in the Links lawsuit triggering the reassessment, but recused himself when I sued? As to Mr. Hartzell, I have proof that he tampered with the expert witness, contrary to our signed agreement not to do so. The judcial code says that anyone can report wrong doing by the way. If you dont want to say I understand but did you report him when you found out he had communicated outside of his agreement? |
|
|
|
Post by paulkellett on Jul 17, 2014 7:41:00 GMT -5
When I found out, I filed a motion to have him held in contempt, the judge said he would not look at that motion because i did not have standing as an individual. Because Hartzell had sent a letter to Freedom Township, urging them to drop the lawsuit and let me proceed as an individual, alone, and Freedom said, what the heck, he can do it as an individual, why should we worry about it, according to the judge, I did not have standing and could not contest the crappy treatment. I know it is hard to comprehend so let me go point by point.
1. Freedom Township (Paul Kellett) and Adams County agreed to hire an independent expert paid for by both parties and he was supposed to do an independent evaluation of the reassessment. This expert was originally contacted by the County, but he and the County promised that he had not started and could easily be a neutral expert.
2. Mr. Hartzell told (without my knowledge) that no agreement had been reached between Freedom Township and Adams County, he told the expert that he was only working for the county and that the report should be as an expert for the county only.
3. Although some words were under discussion, Mr. Hartzell assured me that we did in fact have an agreement and complained when some of my supporters (unknown to me) contacted the expert. Mr. Hartzell claimed that this was a "clear violation" of our agreement.
4. Mr. Hartzell demanded that the expert finish and release his report to the press 3 days before the election. He told the expert that the report was to be only for the County up until 8 P.M. the day before he demanded the report for 9A.M. (the email says that an agreement has been reached and that he can copy Freedom Township)
5. The report was an executive summary and contained the findings that would be expected of a witness paid well by only the county.
6. When I asked the expert did produce his actual calculations, which showed that the COD was much worse than even I thought and the reassessment was completely flawed.
7. Freedom drops out of the lawsuit on Hartzell's suggestion.
8. Judge tells me that I have no right to complain as who the hell do you think you are?
9. Hartzell's actions were only punishable by the judge, as he has no obligation to act ethically to me.
10. I was totally disillusioned by the justice system.
As an interesting side note, the judge in my case (Howsare) borrowed chambers from a local judge who happened to be in those same chambers when Howsare came to town. Any one wish to guess which Judge was chatting up Howsare?
|
|
davew
Poster Child
Posts: 308
|
Post by davew on Jul 17, 2014 10:32:50 GMT -5
I would love to see if we could get this shopped around a little bit and picked up in media a little larger than adams co media, or maybe pushed up to the state AG by a few individuals filing complaints. Maybe it's a little bit premature for that kind of stuff, but it doesn't appear that the folks involved have any interest in fixing even the very clear problems you've pointed out on your page, let alone the whole system.
|
|
moose
Post Master
Posts: 184
|
Post by moose on Jul 17, 2014 17:44:06 GMT -5
I will refrain from voting. I wish no ill will on Judge Kuhn whom I assume is a good person (and usually Honorable man). He shouldn't have communicated with the defense counsel, simple as that. He should know better. I doubt there will ever be any mention of this outside the 51st Judicial District. Judge Kuhn willingly stepped down a couple years back to allow Judge George to take over the President Judge spot to allow for a seamless transition upon Judge Kuhn's retirement. Judge George owes him one, so to speak, even though he is obligated to report on another Judge's alleged transgressions. Don't expect that to happen in this case.
This is the second time Hartzell has been caught communicating (against the law) and interfering with justice. There are also a myriad of allegations that I've levied against the county that have yet to be ruled upon. Hartzell is supposed to be the gatekeeper in there and keep them in compliance with the law. When they refuse to follow his lawful advice, his is obligated to take steps to try to bring them into compliance. It is my opinion that as an Officer of the Court, Hartzell has little regard for the law and chooses to adapt the law to fit his needs and or desires.
|
|
moose
Post Master
Posts: 184
|
Post by moose on Jul 17, 2014 17:47:18 GMT -5
I would love to see if we could get this shopped around a little bit and picked up in media a little larger than adams co media, or maybe pushed up to the state AG by a few individuals filing complaints. As evidenced by the Gettysburg Times coverage, that ain't gonna happen. They even forgot to report on the alleged ex parte communications. I've tried other media...they seems to be all in cahoots with one another. The media ain't what it used to be; no investigative reporting or nothing anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by Venter on Jul 17, 2014 17:48:55 GMT -5
Why is it that the Attorneys/Solicitors/Counselors in this town RUN THE FUCKIN' TOWN???If we wanted Hartzell, Davis, and recently, Phillips to Make the Laws and Important Decisions that affect us, then we would have Elected THEM instead of the Commissioners/Supervisors/Councilpersons! I think they are WAY to Involved in the Process. I actually think Harry Eastman Balances it extremely well, by Assisting with Legal Issues, and allowing the Borough Council to stumble a bit, before he Suggests or Offers COUNSEL.
If those Attorneys, previously mentioned, feel as if they'd like to have a hand in Writing Ordinances or Enacting Laws - then maybe they should consider RUNNING FOR OFFICE, and let US Decide if we want THEIR Guidance and "WISDOM".
Otherwise, shut the fuck up! 
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex Oreilly on Jul 18, 2014 1:22:11 GMT -5
What about bringing it to District Attorney Shawn Wagners attention?
|
|
|
|
Post by lifesaver on Jul 18, 2014 7:36:59 GMT -5
I will not be voting either, for many of the same reasons as moose. I also think it's better to focus on the suit itself, where all of these things will come out eventually anyhow. The case has been accepted. Score one for us, and thank you moose for your perseverance!
|
|
moose
Post Master
Posts: 184
|
Post by moose on Jul 18, 2014 11:45:19 GMT -5
What about bringing it to District Attorney Shawn Wagners attention? Tried that with the Chief Assessor when she failed to apply Act 235 to farmstead lands in Forest-Reserve and Ag-Reserve for the years 2005-2010. Shawn Wagner said no Pa law exists for nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance in office. The closest statute is Official Oppression 18 Pa.C.S.A. ยง530 1, however he will not pursue it because quote, "alleged actions in this case would not constitute the crime of official oppression because there is no evidence that her actions were knowing and/or intentional." However, if you or I violated a law, and did so either unknowingly or not intentionally (like running a stop light), we'd be held responsible for our actions. To me, it seems the good ole boy network is alive and well in Adams County. Mr. Wagner doesn't want to rock the boat, he works with them / for them. My opinion, of course.... |
|
davew
Poster Child
Posts: 308
|
Post by davew on Jul 18, 2014 12:22:23 GMT -5
You hit the nail on the head with the last part, in my opinion. Anyone running around outside of the system comes by for incidental temporary contact, but anyone in the system is probably thinking about whether or not they want to go to work and face people they're lighting up.
|
|
|
|
Post by Venter on Jul 20, 2014 11:53:29 GMT -5
Protecting each others asses is one thing - Forming a Daisy-Chain is quite another.
|
|
