IMPEACH #JUDGE WILLIAM J. O'NEIL WHO DOES NOT HAVE A VALID "OATH OF OFFICE"...
IMPEACH #JUDGE WILLIAM J. O'NEIL WHO DOES NOT HAVE A VALID "OATH OF OFFICE"...
Judge - Impeach William J. O'Neil, Arizona State Supreme Court Presiding Disciplinary Judge (PDJ).
Sign this Petition to Impeach William J. O'Neil (PDJ) by restoring public safety to the State of Arizona, Licensed Arizona Attorneys and their families!
Why Impeach O'Neil: O'Neil (PDJ) is prosecuting (disciplining) Arizona Attorneys without a valid "Oath of Office.
O'Neil (PDJ) shows Favoritism towards some attorneys, Disparate Treatment towards other attorneys and will prosecute cases not within his jurisdictional statutory authority.
EXAMPLES (HOW) JUDGE O’NEIL HAS SHOWED “FAVORITISM”
O’Neil's FAVORITISM TOWARDS AN ATTORNEY who killed a Woman while Driving Drunk – allowed to Practice Law from Prison
According to Sonoran News, “Christopher Perry - he's no longer a lawyer but just plays one in the judicial system. Perry, an attorney that assisted in #Judge O'Neil's mother in law's short sale that resulted on #O'Neil getting the property, was allowed to practice law while in prison for killing a person while Perry was drunk.
After the retroactive disbarment order, Perry is practicing law at Shapiro, Van Ess, Sherman & Marth, LLP, as O'Neil and the Arizona State Bar turn a blind eye. He continues to be listed as an active attorney. The website contains up to date information about their activities.” See Source and scroll down to Christopher Perry at - http://www.sonorannews.com/archives/2014/140827/news-clear-bench.html
O’NEIL STAYED CRIMINAL CHARGES OF JUDGE GARY DONAHOE ($350 MILLION CRIMINAL COURT TOWER)
Former Judge Gary Donahoe was everywhere he isn't supposed to be!
Gary Donahoe, who had criminal charges against him stayed by Judge O'Neil, then trial judge on his case, magically appeared on a probate case, finding the attorney for one of the parties in contempt of court. That attorney represented a party, Bill Lund, who used to be business partners with Conley Wolfswinkel but had a falling out. Donahoe was the same judge that picked up cases not assigned to him and ruled in Wolfswinkel's favor as well as stopped the investigation into Novak and others involved in the $350 million criminal court tower.
O’NEIL’S SEXUAL EXPLOITATION FAVORS
O’Neil’s Sexual Exploitation Favoritism, towards Attorneys that he did “NOT” disbar.
O’Neil’s favored Attorneys, even admitted within Court Records: channeling the dead to communicate in exchange for Sex, admission of Sex with Clients, Oral Sex with Clients, among other actual Sex Exploitation towards vulnerable legal clients and court clerks….
Charna Johnson is an attorney who was found to have had sex with a client, as well as channeling the dead to communicate to clients. The bar also reported, "Johnson represented her client in a divorce proceeding and drafted a will, leaving all the assets for herself." Despite the fact that "Five aggravating factors were found: prior disciplinary offenses, dishonest or selfish motive, submission of false evidence, refusal to acknowledge the wrongful nature of conduct and substantial experience in the practice of law," Johnson was merely suspended for one year. See Source:http://www.azbar.org/newsevents/newsreleases/2010/10/suspensionrecommendedforattorneywhowasallegedtohavechanneledthedead
JUDGE TED ABRAMS FELLOW JUDGE TO O’NEIL
O'Neil treated his fellow judge Ted Abrams. O’Neil merely suspended him for two years and barred him from being a judge. Here is Abrams’ extensive history of sexual harassment, as reported by The Arizona Republic:
During a 14-month period, the judge sent the unidentified public defender at least 28 voicemails and 85 text messages, many of which were sexually suggestive (at least one was, he admitted, “obscene,” and described a sex act he wanted to perform on her), repeatedly pressured her for sex, made slurping noises and at one point fondled her buttock. In response, the public defender said she wasn’t interested, repeatedly told him that it would be inappropriate for them to have a relationship because he was a judge, she worked in his courtroom and he was married. She called him “crazy and disgusting.”
Abrams, 47, also had a sexual relationship with another attorney, a private defense lawyer who appeared in his court, and he sent sexually explicit e-mails to a third attorney, an assistant city prosecutor who appeared in his court.
The state bar brief said the judge "victimized a young lawyer for his own personal gratification and when she did not enjoy, welcome or otherwise relent to his constant requests for sexual contact, he berated and humiliated her from the bench during a jury trial." The victim also said Abrams told her that it would not be good for her career if she rejected his advances. After the short suspension, it appears that he is about to be reinstated to the Arizona bar.
Attorney Matthew Schultz admitted he had a sexual relationship with a client, and was just suspended for one year.
Government attorney Robert Standage… actually did send sexual images and videos to an existing client. He was already on probation for a previous incident, but Judge O’Neil merely suspended him for two years. His attorney — no surprise — was Scott Rhodes. See Court Case NO.: PDJ 2015-9007 – SBA File #14-0367 Filed 06-29-2015.
Read Court Document http://www.azcourts.gov/Portals/101/Standage%20Web.pdf
Credit Above Sources Rachel Alexander http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2016/07/05/how-state-bars-are-taking-down-conservative-attorneys-n2187819
FRED ACKEL JUDGE PUNISHED BY ARIZONA SUPREME CT
Fred Ackel, another judge, was punished by the Arizona Supreme Court for his sexual misbehavior with a mere censure. Not even suspension, probation, etc.
A litigant who appeared in front of Ackel to stop a man from harassing her, was — ironically — so disturbed by the judge’s constant sexual remarks and attempt to have a romantic relationship with her, that she started tape recording him. His comments about sex were extraordinarily vulgar. Perhaps most disturbing, he told her in regards to the man harassing her, "If I have to raise some more hell, I'll have him arrested."
The court said in its opinion, "We agree with the Commission that Ackel's conduct toward Randall constituted willful misconduct." The court also noted that he'd had six prior complaints — and one they considered an aggravating factor, where he had called a female attorney during a pretrial conference "darling," and commented on her legs. In fact, the court found a second aggravating factor, "Ackel's regular use of endearing terms toward and physical contact with women." See Source http://law.justia.com/cases/arizona/supreme-court/1987/87-0001-2.html
Sunday, October 30, 2016
“The article the Arizona Bar doesn't want you to see - they got it removed from Forbes after two hours!
…It's gotten so bad that one of the former members of the Bar's Board of Governors wrote an op-ed for Forbes recently exposing it. Well, within a couple hours after the article was posted here on the Forbes site, it was removed… We've learned that the Arizona Bar disciplinary judge William O'Neil "is a member of the Barnett family, which is basically a one family crime syndicate that everyone in Pinal County knows." …Click on Link Below to read, [T]he Article Arizona Bar doesn’t want you to see…
DISPARATE TREATMENT AGAINST COMMUNITY RESIDENT (MARK DIXON)
According Arizona Central to Divorce case stirs ethics allegations about judge.
This is not a story about a dog or a divorce, but that's where it begins.
After Mark Dixon and his ex-wife, Carol Johnson, terminated their marriage in late 2009, they got into a custody dispute over Shiloh, an Australian shepherd.
On Dec. 2 of that year, Dixon was pulled over by three plainclothes Pinal County sheriff's deputies with semiautomatic weapons, according to the incident report and court records.
Dixon alleges he was ordered to surrender the dog or face immediate arrest, so he acquiesced. A civil complaint he filed in federal court against a group of Pinal County deputies and Dixon's ex-wife says he argued that the disagreement with his wife was a civil matter and that deputies "did knowingly and willingly criminally extort property" by threatening arrest if he did not give up the dog. His lawsuit accused Pinal County officials of conspiracy.
In a court motion, Dixon asserted that his ex-wife, who then worked for a credit union, had assisted Pinal County Superior Court Judge William J. "Bill" O'Neil in obtaining a $300,000 loan prior to the canine-custody dispute…
In a court motion filed last month, suspended Phoenix attorney Jane O. Ross asked that O'Neil be removed from Bar disciplinary proceedings against her because of "a pattern of corruption, failure to uphold the due-process rights of disciplinary respondents, failure to acknowledge conflicts of interest, abuses of discretion and power, dereliction of judicial duties and knowingly making false statements."...
The motion to remove O'Neil contains allegations of criminal and unethical behavior. It relies heavily on information gathered by Dixon and includes an affidavit from him sworn under penalty of perjury.
Furthermore, O'Neil (PDJ's) Oath of Office fails to meet the requirements pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 38-231(E);
O’Neil, (PDJ) has not been sworn the same Oath as required by the Arizona State Constitution, in order to be a lawful officer of the Arizona State Supreme Court, position of Presiding Disciplinary Judge
Any officer or employee who fails to take and subscribe to the oath or affirmation provided by this section within the time limits prescribed by this section is not entitled to any compensation until the officer or employee does so take and subscribe to the form of oath or affirmation prescribed by this section,” Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 38-231(B); ...and
Consequently, O’Neil (PDJ) is a public safety threat to the State and any State Licensed Arizona Attorneys who are faced with being disciplined by O'Neil (PDJ).
Sign the Petition to have William J. O'Neil (PDJ) Impeached.
Sign the Petition, to also Demand that Honorable Justices within the Arizona State Supreme Court review all cases prosecuted by O'Neil (PDJ), in order to uphold their fiduciary duty to protect even Arizona Attorneys, who are inclusive of said public.
Sign the Petition, to Demand that all Honorable Justices within the Arizona State Supreme Court review all O'Neil (PDJ), cases for consideration to rescind - Rulings, Orders and Decisions, issued by O'Neil PDJ, because they are possibly "Null and Void," due to O'Neil (PDJ) not having a valid "Oath of Office," among other issues. Except, Arizona Attorneys convicted of criminal cases not necessary for review by Honorable Justices of the Arizona State Supreme Court.
More importantly, sign the Petition to Demand after the Honorable Justices within the Arizona State Supreme Court have done their careful review of the facts and decipher there is substantial evidence, they send the issue of O'Neil (PDJ) on to the Arizona House of Representatives for a formal Impeachment Trial against O'Neil (PDJ).
If a judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his orders are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason.
We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid; but we cannot avoid them." US Supreme Court Case
https://supreme.justia.com/ cases/federal/us/449/200/case. html
In another, not unrelated context, Chief Justice Marshall's exposition in Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264 (1821), could well have been the explanation of the Rule of Necessity; he wrote that a court:
"must take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the constitution. We cannot pass it by, because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it if it be brought before us.
We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid; but we cannot avoid them." SOURCE: https://supreme.justia.com/ cases/federal/us/449/200/case. html
Conclusion: We thank you in advance for signing this Petition, to stop the "High Jacking of Justice" by William J. O'Neil, Arizona State Supreme Court Presiding Disciplinary Judge, a Judge Gone Wild!
Please also visit the following sites: http://judgegonewild.net/invalid-oaths/oneils-democrat-judge-oath-of-office-is-invalid/