COURANT: More Outrageous DCF State Lawyerly Crimes and Nonsense

[Mort Zuckerman]

To: robert....@yale.edu, emcsw...@nasw.org,
zerh...@od.nih.gov, Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org,
fit...@gmail.com, patrick.f...@usdoj.gov,
model...@sbcglobal.net, jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com,
Jgerb...@cdc.gov, michae...@po.state.ct.us,
con...@po.state.ct.us, executiv...@nytimes.com, managing-
edi...@nytimes.com, news...@nytimes.com, the-...@nytimes.com,
biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com, me...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, FalN...@aol.com,
brans...@comcast.net, vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us,
freet...@charter.net, scott....@po.state.ct.us,
govern...@po.state.ct.us, attorney...@po.state.ct.us,
randall...@usdoj.gov
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, hor...@courant.com,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org

Subject: COURANT: More Outrageous DCF State Lawyerly Crimes and
Nonsense

Date: Nov 2, 2008 12:55 PM

[ARTICLE BELOW]


Oh, please.

What a bunch of baloney.

Do we victims of this kind of false DCF documentation get to present
evidence of
how much harm is done by these whorey, lying insane "lawyers?"
http://www.actionlyme.org/BLUMENTHALS_MAIL_STOLEN_BY_JESSICA_GAUVIN.htm

Do I get to show that Jessica Gauvin defrauded the courts with her OTC
of my children,
which was over a complaint to the Statewide Bar Counsel against DCF's
Sarah
Gibson, who was replaced by Regula-Duggan as the principal ho of DCF
New Haven?

Because she did:
http://www.actionlyme.org/LEEBENS_DEFRAUDING_THE_COURT.htm

That 3 inch databinder was the evidence for my complaints to the
Statewide Bar Counsel
(Gerald Dwyer, New Haven) and the CHRO against DCF's criminally insane
behavior.


Gauvin stole the Attorney General's Lyme RICO mail right off of his
desk.


It isn't MY fault James Phillips is incompetent and gave me brain
damage:
http://www.actionlyme.org/PENISBITERDOCS.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/PHILLIPS_JE_PERVERT.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/BUNNEY_YALE_BRAIN_DAMAGE.htm

He's the one charging the insurance company and myself for this
malpractice.
I am not a doctor, just a real scientist.


It would just be easier if the sex-obsessed James Phillips would admit
what he did.
http://www.actionlyme.org/andersonpenisbiter.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/PENISBITERDOCS.htm

For everyone in the world who has Lyme.
Including children:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Schoen.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/DIANE_EHRLICHIOSIS.htm


Yale's Congenital Lyme Autopsy:
http://www.actionlyme.org/Congenital_Brain_Infection_of_Newborn_Resulting_in_Death.htm

I did DCF's job for them.
I did the FDA's job for them.
I did the USDOJ's job for them.


Why can't Phillips act like a man even just for the sake of his own
redemption, if he does not care about the hundreds of thousands
of people who have to continue to suffer worldwide as a result
of his malpractice and perjury?



Kathleen M. Dickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
http://www.relapsingfever.org
======================================

courant.com/news/local/columnists/hc-
govwatch1102.artnov02,0,4714311.column
Courant.com
GOVERNMENT WATCH
Reprimand Recommended For State Agency Lawyer

Jon Lender

Government Watch

November 2, 2008
Click here to find out more!

The state's disciplinary counsel is recommending a reprimand for
Maureen Duggan,
a state agency lawyer who posed as an anonymous parking lot attendant
when she wrote
a letter in 2004 that led to the firing of then-state ethics chief
Alan S. Plofsky.

Duggan is willing to accept the disciplinary measure.

The proposed discipline will be presented at a hearing Thursday to a
three-member
"reviewing committee" drawn from the 21-member Statewide Grievance
Committee.

"An order of reprimand, combined with some attendance at continuing
courses
of legal education in ethics, would be both an appropriate and a
proportional disciplinary
response," wrote Mark A. Dubois, chief disciplinary counsel for the
state Judicial
Branch of government, in a pre-hearing legal brief.

In a separate memo, Duggan's attorney, Hope Seeley, said her client
"has
signed an admission of misconduct and an affidavit admitting that her
conduct ...
could be found ... to constitute a violation of ... Rules of
Professional Conduct."
She added Duggan "has agreed to accept a reprimand for this misconduct
and
to take 9 hours of ... courses in professional responsibility or
ethics over [a]
three-year period."

The committee members will have 60 days to accept or reject the
proposed disposition.
Rejection could open the possibility of sending the case to a judge
for consideration
of harsher discipline, such as suspending her law license or
disbarment. Some 60
to 70 lawyers a year receive reprimands in Connecticut, and about a
half-dozen get
disbarred, Dubois said.

Duggan, a $105,000-a-year attorney with a management role at the state
Department
of Children and Families, is charged with "fraud and conduct
prejudicial to
the administration of justice." When she wrote the bogus letter in
2004, she
was working for Plofsky as a State Ethics Commission lawyer.

Now, Duggan's ability to keep her DCF job depends on keeping her law
license;
accepting the reprimand would enable her to preserve that license.

Critics have said she should be disbarred for lying about her identity
when she
wrote the letter. But Dubois said disbarment generally is reserved for
when a lawyer
steals money or "sets out to advance him or herself and causes
harm ... to
his client."

Dubois said a reprimand is a permanent blot on an attorney's
professional record
and reputation. "A reprimand remains on your record forever" and can
haunt
a lawyer many ways, such as "if you apply for a job, if you apply to
be a judge,
[and] if you apply for credentials in another state," he said. A
background
check "would pick up this reprimand, and the full record is
available,"
he said. "This goes onto the judicial department web page as imposed
discipline."

The Courant disclosed May 18 that Duggan had authored the mystery
letter in summer
2004. In the intentionally misspelled missive, Duggan assumed the
guise of an "anonimus"
employee who worked in the parking lot outside the ethics agency's
Hartford
office and claimed to have observed irregularities.

The letter set in motion a series of events: A week later, Duggan and
two co-workers
filed complaints against Plofsky. In the sworn complaint Duggan
submitted, she did
not acknowledge writing the letter, referring to it as "an anonymous
letter."
Based on the complaints, the commission fired Plofsky — finding that
he told a female
subordinate to destroy a tape of a meeting, that he said she might
need to lie to
a grand jury, and that he improperly ran up compensatory time.

Plofsky denied the charges. A state appeals board two years later
found that the
commission lacked reasonable cause to fire him and reinstated him to
state employment,
but not his old job. He retired in May.

Seeley's memo argued that although Duggan used a false identity,
auditors later
said her letter raised valid issues. Seeley said Duggan "felt she had
no viable
alternatives. She feared retaliation by Plofsky; she was a
probationary employee
and ... she was concerned about her ability to support her family if
she were fired,
as her then-husband was not working at the time. Therefore, Ms. Duggan
wrote the
letter as if it had been written by someone who worked in the parking
lot."

Dubois wrote that Duggan, "though perhaps motivated by the best of
intentions,
engaged in conduct which went beyond the scope of permissible
dissembling by a lawyer."

Duggan's ex-husband, lawyer Steven M. Regula, also is set to appear at
Thursday's
hearing to face misconduct charges based on Duggan's testimony that he
mailed
the letter.

Dubois now is recommending those charges be dropped after Regula's
lawyer, Richard
Brown, argued that his client is protected from his ex-wife's
allegations by
"marital privilege."

Duggan's allegations against Regula arose in January, during a
deposition in
a pending lawsuit by Plofsky over his firing. Under questioning,
Duggan testified
that she had authored the letter. But she also said that she couldn't
bring
herself to mail copies of it to ethics commission members and that
Regula took it
upon himself to do so for her.

Duggan claimed that Regula got commission members' addresses from a
website.
But Brown said she had asked Regula to mail envelopes that already
were sealed and
addressed, and all he did was comply. Brown said Regula had no way of
knowing whether
the letter was true or false, and so he committed no misconduct.

"Our Supreme Court has recognized a marital privilege that would
prevent Maureen
Duggan from testifying about what [Regula] knew when he mailed the
letter,"
Dubois wrote after researching Brown's arguments. Dubois quoted a
court decision
that said: "The basis of the immunity given to communications between
husband
and wife is the protection of marital confidences, regarded as so
essential to the
preservation of the marriage relationship as to outweigh the
disadvantages to the
administration of justice that the privilege entails."

•Jon Lender is a reporter on The Courant's investigative desk, with a
focus
on government and politics. Contact him at jle...@courant.com;
860-241-6524; or
c/o The Hartford Courant, 285 Broad St., Hartford, CT 06115.

Copyright © 2008, The Hartford Courant