Corruption within Nassau County Legal Aid Society and the N.Y.S. Unified Court System

I have written articles about judicial corruption within N.Y.S. Unified Court System( https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/corruption-within-nys-unified-court-system-federal-judiciary-brown)?and how the U.S. Supreme Court repealed the 13th Amendment through the judiciary when only congress has the power to enforce slavery through appropriate legislation (https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/people-state-new-york-et-al-vs-thurman-brown-docket-20-cv-0020-brown). In this article, we will delve a little deeper into the conspiracy to re-prosecute void criminal processes, or fatally flawed original proceedings, that have been terminated pursuant to N.Y.C.P.L. § 160.50 (https://www.dhirubhai.net/posts/thurman-brown-7a621b88_the-people-of-the-state-of-new-york-v-thurman-activity-6717068275995463680-YOjW). When a termination in favor of the accuse is issued by a court with competent jurisdiction to act, by operation of law,?N.Y.C.P.L. § 160.50(1) states “Upon the termination of a criminal action or proceeding against a person in favor of such person, as defined in subdivision three of this section, unless the district attorney upon motion with not less than five days’ notice to such person or his or her attorney demonstrates to the satisfaction of the court that the interests of justice require otherwise, or the court on its own motion with not less than five days’ notice to such person or his or her attorney determines that the interests of justice require otherwise and states the reasons for such determination on the record, the record of such action or proceeding shall be sealed and the clerk of the court wherein such criminal action or proceeding was terminated shall immediately notify the commissioner of the division of criminal justice services and the heads of all appropriate police departments and other law enforcement agencies that the action has been terminated in favor of the accused, and unless the court has directed otherwise, that the record of such action or proceeding shall be sealed”. These procedures cannot be reversed or surpressed.

All of these procedures occurred in my case...except, client notification and release. In collusion with the Unified Court System, assigned defense attorney’s at the time, Meryl J. Berkowitz ( Current Acting Justice, Supreme Court, Integrated Domestic Violence Court, Nassau County) and Nancy Garber (Current Deputy Bureau Chief of Legal Aid), of counsel for the Nassau County Legal Aid Society, both embraced this backchannel process from the beginning, as counsel for the accuse. Section 160.60, outline the effect of termination of criminal actions in favor of the accused. “Upon the termination of a criminal action or proceeding against a person in favor of such person, as defined in subdivision two of section 160.50 of this chapter, the arrest and prosecution shall be deemed a nullity and the accused shall be restored, in contemplation of law, to the status he occupied before the arrest and prosecution. The arrest or prosecution shall not operate as a disqualification of any person so accused to pursue or engage in any lawful activity, occupation, profession, or calling. Except where specifically required or permitted by statute or upon specific authorization of a superior court, no such person shall be required to divulge information pertaining to the arrest or prosecution.”

My attorneys never had me restored, “in contemplation of law, to the status he occupied before the arrest and prosecution”. The Nassau County Legal Aid Society instead became state actors by allowing the court to re-prosecute me on a void criminal process that lacked subject-matter and personal jurisdiction. The corruption within the judiciary is symbiotic and relies on a wall of silence to thrive. I was then assigned Martin I. Silberg, Richard Wolstein, Claudia Schultz, to continue the void criminal process, or in other words, they were hired to get me to plea bargain but never thought that would invoke the right to represent myself and demand a trial by jury.

I am unaware that I have been exonerated by statute, I am reacting to their hostility towards me as a Blackman, in that, Martin I. Silberg, consented to place me in a line-up where victim had created composite of assailant as clean shaven, bulging eyes, and a receding hair line. I had a full goatee and all my hair at the time of robbery. I remember being chained to a desk, several detectives were present and Martin Silberg, my attorney, said to me, “If you don’t cooperate it is only going to cause you pain”. At first I just glared at them all, and I told Mr. Silberg, “I am the offspring of slaves…YOU DON’T KNOW NOTHING ABOUT PAIN”! So I started to violently raise the tin desk up that I was chained to, and bang it to the floor like a mad man…Until they agreed to produce the Court Order for line up. Of course, I was identified in less than a second. The attorney consented to creating identification evidence when the prosecution and court, in a legitimate proceedings, would have to justify placing a bearded defendant in a line-up where complainant described assailant as a clean shaven balding man. Your attorney can deliberately undermine your case if you let him/her. You get what you pay for. The state paid these attorneys to act on the state behalf.?