N.J. Federal Judge Tainted by Bias.

[Friedrich]

AP, "Judge Is Taken Off Murder Case for Bias," in "The New York
Times," June 16, 2012, at p. A18.

Peter J. Sampson, "Judge Pulled Off Case: Impartiality on Bergrin Case
Questioned," in "The Record," June 16, 2012, at p. A-1.

Tom Hays, "Rajat Gupta Found Guilty," in "The Record," June 16, 2012,
at p. A-12. (Former Goldman Sachs Director convicted of insider
trading. Very few African-Americans are guilty of stealing $1 BILLION,
but most convicted African-Americans will get more time than Mr.
Gupta: "So Black and So Blue in Prison" and "Richard A. Posner on
Voluntary Actions and Criminal Responsibility" then "New Jersey Rabbi
Charged With Child Molestation.")

"Listen, Mayor Jones," (Editorial) in "The Record," June 16, 2012, at
p. A-13. (Jeffrey Jones facing further consequences for the "creative"
use of Katrina funds. Do these funds amount to $1 BILLION?)

Kibret Marcos, "Garfield Man Gets 60 Years in Sex Assault: Tried to
Abduct Teen Girl in 2009," in "The Record," June 16, 2012, at p. L-3.
("Judges Protect Child Molesters in Bayonne, New Jersey" and "New
Jersey's Child Sex Industry.")

Richard Cowen, "Officer Sues Over Denied Promotion: Cites Retaliation
for Support of Sex Harassment Suit," in "The Record," June 16, 2012,
at p. L-1. (Corruption in New Jersey police departments?)

Judicial power is subject to any number of dangers, not least human
foibles and prejudices -- like racism or other forms of bias or
stupidity. As with Mumia Abu-Jamal, whose trial was rendered absurd
and offensive under the Constitution by a judge's viciously racist
pronouncements, so it seems that the trial of Paul W. Bergrin, Esq. is
tainted by an obvious and very suspicious animus on the part of the
trial judge, William J. Martini.

I say suspicious because hostility may be about covering-up the
complicity of others in Mr. Bergrin's alleged crimes by flushing
Bergrin away for twenty years or more. Getting inconvenient persons
thrown in prison is one way to get rid of or discredit witnesses.
Perhaps legal ethics proceedings may serve the same function. ("New
Jersey's Legal Ethics" and "Is America's Legal Ethics a Lie?" then
"New Jersey's Office of Attorney Ethics.")

Many observers believe that Judge Martini is trying to prevent Mr.
Bergrin from mounting a vigorous defense in an effort to cover for
"other prominent members of the bar in New Jersey." ("Paul W. Bergrin,
Esq. is an Ethical New Jersey Attorney" and "No More Cover-Ups and
Lies, Chief Justice Rabner" then "Deborah T. Poritz and Conduct
Unbecoming to the Judiciary in New Jersey" and "Virginia Long's
Departure.")

Mr. Bergrin operated a brothel to which leading N.J. attorneys and
judges were, allegedly, invited. ("Sexual Favors for New Jersey
Judges" and "New Jersey's Judges Disgrace America.")

Among the alleged beneficiaries of Mr. Bergrin's "hospitality" are
prominent prosecutors, judges, defense counsel and, perhaps, political
figures. The very same persons are now trying to put some distance
between themselves and Mr. Bergrin even as they claim to be appalled
by Bergrin's lack of ethics. ("Law and Ethics in the Soprano State"
and "New Jersey's Politically-Connected Lawyers On the Tit.")

I have never been charged with or convicted of a crime, despite years
of efforts to "frame" me for "something, anything." ("Does Senator
Menendez have mafia friends?" and "Is Menendez For Sale?")

Federal District Court Judge William J. Martini presided over the
trial of Mr. Bergrin -- who is also alleged to have conspired in the
murder of a witness -- Judge Martini presided in an obviously hostile
and biased manner.

I am not a friend of Mr. Bergrin nor do I wish him well, but farcical
legal proceedings are wrong when anyone is subjected to them. Mr.
Bergrin should get a new trial or have these charges dismissed.

Mr. Bergrin is correct to claim that his Constitutional rights have
been violated by a judge tipping the scales of justice for the
government. Your rights are Mr. Bergrin's rights. To violate his
rights with impunity is potentially to violate YOUR rights or anyone's
rights. This will remain true whatever you think of Mr. Bergrin.
("Manifesto for the Unfinished American Revolution.")

The government -- no matter what you may be taught in law schools --
has every advantage is resources over almost any litigant in most
court proceedings. Constitutional rights are meant to provide some
balance among the parties in litigation, especially in criminal
proceedings, where life and/or liberty may be at stake. ("Freedom for
Mumia Abu-Jamal" and "Justice for Mumia Abu-Jamal.")

"Behind-the-back" targeting of individuals -- not only persons like
Bergrin, but even worshipers in a Mosque! -- by any state is
inquisitorial and profoundly offensive to our system of liberties.
This is even more true when violations of privacy and other rights
involves commission of secret CRIMES by prosecutors and cops against
victims who are members of the public. Government illegality is more
frightening than any individual's transgressions.

New Jersey's unofficial system of "connected" judges protecting
insiders -- like Stuart Rabner protecting Ms. Poritz, perhaps -- and
other fellow judges from liability for deliberate violations of the
rights of persons or covering up lies, often lies told under oath, is
(sadly) in keeping with the putrid reality of the Garden State's legal
system. ("Corrupt Law Firms, Senator Bob, and New Jersey Ethics.")

Mr. Martini is a FEDERAL judge. These transgressions cannot be
permitted to go unpunished or ignored. Incidentally, Mr. Rabner was a
colleague and friend of Mr. Bergrin's at the U.S. Attorney's office
who may have benefitted from Mr. Bergrin's "hospitality" in the city.
("An Open Letter to My Torturers in New Jersey, Terry Tuchin and Diana
Lisa Riccioli.")

Do you speak to me of "ethics," Stuart? ("New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal
System" and "New Jersey's Unethical Judiciary.")

"The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that
Judge Martini 'usurped the jury's role' by excluding some testimony
from the trial in a 'ruling that cannot be reconciled with a sound
exercise of discretion.' ..."

Was Ms. Poritz "sexually involved" with Diana Lisa Riccioli -- or
others procured by Ms. Riccioli -- who was "friendly" with MANY New
Jersey judges? If so, why did Ms. Poritz not recuse herself in my
matters knowing that Ms. Riccioli was involved in a sexual
relationship with Marilyn Straus and hostile towards me? Did Ms.
Poritz authorize Terry Tuchin's "interrogational hypnosis" against me?
If so, for what reasons were these assaults against me permitted?
("Jennifer Velez is a Dyke Magnet!" and "Trenton's Nasty Lesbian Love-
Fest!")