National Forum On Judicial Accountability

This message appeals to the interest of Americans in good government. It relates to the devastation heaped on a lawyer for her apparently minor role in pursuing criminal racketeering charges against one or more judges in Maricopa County, Arizona. Her loss of dignity, stability, and personal support is substantially detailed by an online op-ed titled “Maricopa County, AZ Seat to Unprecedented Judicial Corruption”.


Most adults probably have at least some interest in good government. Of course many could care less about the plight of a lawyer, even one with seemingly good intentions, or the prospect of judicial corruption. Ironically, the relative ease with which America’s judiciary can devastate private lawyers, prosecutors, and judges for challenging judicial integrity, reflects a threat to good government in America.


No level or quality of education, experience, responsibility, success, or accolades guarantees a lawyer or judge will not be abruptly excluded from his or her profession; deemed unfit for challenging the integrity of one or more judges. All humans are fallible, but it seems the rigors of becoming and certainly excelling as a lawyer or judge should expose whatever unfitness there is for the task. Yet the arguable best and brightest of America’s legal and judicial systems may be portrayed as taking leave of their senses should any of them harshly assess a judge.


It should be baffling that someone fit to impact life, liberty, and property as lawyers and judges do, may be inclined but considered unfit to critique the profession of which he or she is part. The paradox should have at least civic minded Americans wondering who sets and what are the criteria for levying credible charges against judges as an ethics or criminal matter.


Unfortunately major media relies on American government more than it should for sifting between credible and unreliable judicial critics. But responsible monitoring of America’s judiciary need not take endless combing of alternative media outlets. If enough Americans helped (in a small or big way) ensure legal process is not abused to discredit judicial critics, American government could not easily dictate which of them are or are not legitimate. It is largely if not primarily the proverbial blind eye towards professional discipline and other prosecutions of judicial watchdogs and whistleblowers giving carte blanche to judicial misconduct.


In 2007, Transparency International (TI), a global anti-corruption coalition, published an extensive, international report on judicial system corruption. Its preface states what the report confirms:

. . .

For whatever reason and whether petty or gross, corruption in the judiciary ensures that corruption remains beyond the law in every other field of government and economic activity in which it may have taken root. Indeed, without an independent judiciary, graft effectively becomes the new ‘rule of law’.

. . .

So judicial watchdogs and whistleblowers (i.e. people attempting to expose judicial misconduct or corruption) help preserve good government, including but not limited to fair and impartial court proceedings.


Some non-lawyers detect judicial misdeeds as proficiently as some lawyers and judges. Hence reasonable minds may not agree on the essentialness of formal legal training in formulating valid charges of judicial misconduct or corruption. In any event, if such charges are to proceed, some form of prosecutor (administrative and/or criminal) must advance them on behalf of appropriate government bodies.


Undoubtedly at times the suspension or disbarment of a prosecutor corresponds with good government. But the absence of buffers between prosecutors and the judicial systems (with their agencies for lawyer discipline) from which prosecuted judges hail, leaves prosecutors unduly vulnerable to retaliatory professional discipline. A grassroots judicial reform organization, National Judicial Conduct and Disability Law Project, Inc. (NJCDLP), addressed this chilling reality years before TI.


In 2005, NJCDLP proposed federal judicial whistleblower protection dubbed "The Weinstock Act" (TWA). A sister organization known as POPULAR (Power Over Poverty Under Laws of America Restored) later adopted TWA and made it part of a white paper titled “Protecting Judicial Whistleblowers in the War on Poverty”. Another NJCDLP offshoot, National Forum On Judicial Accountability (NFOJA), joined POPULAR's quest for federal judicial whistleblower protection and nationalized regulation of lawyer speech rights. NFOJA also promotes model legislation that would empower randomly selected, trained private citizen to oversee state judicial disciplinary processes.


To learn more about NJCDLP and all its projects, please visit


Thank you NFOJA member M. Lanson for sharing this message about beautiful people.  Hopefully it helps all of us understand that working to protect private sector lawyers, prosecutors, and judges who choose to be part of combating abuses of America's legal system, in addition to pursuing other worthwile legal/judicial system reforms, is NOT an expression of preference for legal professionals over non-lawyers. 



Views: 581

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Patrice, notice my message references the "prospect of judicial corruption".  Acknowledging such a prospect or the reality that judicial corruption exists is quite different from stating or suggesting a certain judge, group of judges, most judges, many judges, or all judges are corrupt.   


Considering my background, does it not make sense that I could help you anticipate how judges and Establishment lawyers are likely to respond to your legal / judicial reform advocacy?  Did you seek my input before pursuing the initiatives in Rhode Island you describe?  I could have probably helped you avoid some if not all of the negative outcomes you encountered in Rhode Island with the same knowledge, time, and effort it would take for me to explain why they happened.


The legal / judicial reform groups I help administer are not tantamount to pet projects.  They reflect very carefully researched, studied, and substantially tested tactics and strategies with proven success.  That you and others prefer to do something else should not make me a bad guy.


Here's a post of mine from Facebook (and there are others) that hopefully suggests why I shun name-calling and inflammatory rhetoric under the guise of legal / judicial reform advocacy:

NFOJA member Daar Fisher asked: "Is every US court case somehow rigged? Are lawyers making money they should not be if the system wasn't so corrupt? Are judges more like organized crime figures than public servants paid with tax dollars? Are the courts the tool used for international corporations, banks, and organized crime taking over America?" We thank him for asking these questions. They are not terribly different than the central question of "The Matthew Fogg Symposia On The Vitality Of Stare Decisis In America":     Yet beware of answers based on any determination that a person or group is "corrupt" if it's made without the benefit of a fair and impartial trial including opportunities for discovery, cross-examination, and all that due process entails. No matter how compelling any evidence of corruption may be, it should not replace adversarial proceedings as America's truth finding process; particularly when the corruption alleged amounts to a crime. As long as alleged criminals are deemed innocent until proven guilty upon trial, such as they are in America, everything untested by trial but offered as proof of a crime or criminality, is no more than evidence.


Multiple, serious malfunctions and dysfunctions of America's legal / judicial system can be proven through sound social science research, empirical data, and analysis. Some of those malfunctions and dysfunctions are in our anti- legal / judicial corruption mechanisms. So we can reasonably presume there is unchecked legal and judicial corruption in our country. In fact, compelling evidence of it abounds. But "proving" that corruption in specific instances and / or pinpointing its exact scope without trial, is beyond our jurisprudence.


Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns.  Thank you for your consideration.


/s/  Zena Crenshaw-Logal,

NFOJA Co-Administrator


How do we motion to HAVE the trial - when we cannot even get in the door? We would LOVE to give those we complain about - a fair trial. Will you help us initiate one? We cannot even get past access or find any attorney willing to help us do what you write about. Its empty rhetoric. We asked you to come in and help u with a class action or take up the case or to provide assistance - where in there did you miss the request?

And- we looked all over the state - no attorney would file the pleadings; and you know how pro se litigants are treated. And, we would love to give them the same ex parte, no due process, no fair trial, guilty even after proven innocent, pay for expert witnesses who don't have to appear or be cross examined and non-jury trial that WE get. Oh - and, gee, let's lock them up on a bogus 8-day hold for no reason while we are busy manufacturing and post dating motions and judge's order ( no habeus corpus of course) so we can "set the stage" and rig the ruling.

You want US to provide the a jurisprudence, due process, opportunity to present evidence and all the rest, while they have denied same to us. I continue to beseech you to address this double standard you side step in EVERY post. When are you going to admit that what you write above - is what they DO TO US?

Where in any of the corrupt Famliy Court trials were nurturing and protective and very good parents proven unfit according to all the rules of evidence, due process and "jurisprudence" you wish our legal abusers are sure to get from us, before we audit the system and start gathering evidence - to "prove" the corruption, using the FBI's definition of public corruption. Its beyond your jurisprudence do without trial - only you can't be bothered helping us to SETUP the trial!! That you claim to have-as-a-secret as the expert legal scholar of exactly how to conduct, with proven methods and you are holding on to a solution - and refuse to share it or help us implement and then sit on the sidelines and scoff - while we give our best shot anyway?

You have yet to answer about the double standard. Attorneys and judges are biggest violators of due process, civil rights, and constitutional abuse - and we have NO remedy. NONE. I tried to file in Superior Court on my own and asked for jury trial to do exactly what you say - and you would not take the case (too much time, too much expense, too much detailed analysis and jurisprudence involved). No one will DO what you propose above - not even yourself. Again this is very double standard and a duplicitous, and very intellectually dishonest post. Holy cow.

I don't know what planet you are on - however I have met far more people HARMED by the system,than helped by your secretive methods of anticipating how judges will react. If the normal grievance process worked as it should., early on and a zero tolerance for abusive bullying behavior out of attorneys that is both unethical AND unlawful was put effected - we could put things in check and in balance.

What LAWSUIT are you actively engaged in, per your so-above-us experience that will help set case law and precedence, whose example we might follow? Do you have motions to share? pleadings? time? Or just more monday morning quarterbacking? This is such a postured and dishonest post. You never ONCE stepped in to help us despite multiple requests. You insisted we work on your symposium and educate ourselves while children we knew continued to be harmed.

And now, thank goodness, we have the Sandusky conviction. Now THATS scope. Praise the courageous prosecutors who actually came forward, rolled up their sleeves and did the work, instead of drinking beer and pontificating about how they "might" go about solving that Penn State problem. God Bless the white knights of the profession.

After 7 years of involvement both in litigation and supporting other litigants.  I have not seen one just outcome.  I see only the financial rape of litigants and then no justice.  It is a worthless corrupt system where every litigant with or without an attorney gets SCREWED!

It is time to wake up and face reality.  You may possibly get justice only if you have a criminal mind and a lot of money.

If you are an average citizen, you will not get justice and if you try, you will be ruined financially.  You will be enslaved by unethical attorneys and biased judges.

Many litigants involved in the legal process develop a learned helplessness.  Why bother for justice?  It can't happen in this legal system.   

I was speaking with another in jured  friend.  She stated that everyone is worried about the government forming concentration camps, when they are already in place.  Each time you enter a courtroom, you are in a concentration camp.  I believe this to be true of our in justice system.

Amen sister.   Watch the movie "Sara's Key".   Learn history.   Unfortunately the neighbors simply said " what is that smell" .... until they were picked up and became one of the bodies, rotting in a cess pool of feces waiting for the trains of hitler to come show them justice.  

We are WAY past polite educated round tables and taking notes about what should be done. 

Again Patrice, more conclusions based on your experiences, perspective, and opinion and certainly without participation in (or cooperation with) any of the public service programs that I help administer:


/s/  Zena Crenshaw-Logal,

NFOJA Co-Administrator

Rebecca, allow me to emphasize that my office does not have a record of you participating in any public service program that we help administer:


/s/  Zena Crenshaw-Logal,

NFOJA Co-Administrator

Patrice, the only thing I'm side stepping is your invitation for me to publicly refute your account of my representations and related facts and/or events.  Instead I will ask you to refrain from presenting as facts what are, at best, your opinions.  Please also note that your continued public belittling of any apparent legal abuse victim or victims will not be tolerated.


/s/ Zena Crenshaw-Logal,

NFOJA Co-Administrator   


I agree that we are way past public round tables.  Attorneys are finding that they are not protected from the system they created.  Attorneys have ignored how the citizen has not been protected for years. Probably stating that poor bastard.  They are now learning that anyone who enters that concentration camp will be traumatized.  The legal field of which the members are so greedy that they now have shot themselves in the foot.  They have created countless victims and show little remorse.  Revolution may be the only answer to break free of the legal repression of the in justice system we have in the US.  We certainly can't put our hopes upon the attorney professionals to protect us.

Well Rebecca, it's unfortunate to see you reaching such conclusions given that you are a pyschotherapist.  Obviously NFOJA is not premised on such views.


/s/  Zena Crenshaw-Logal,

NFOJA Co-Administrator

Correct.   How can we possibly be "belittling" any legal abuse victim - when WE are among them!  The court's are the ones which say " too bad" and no remedy is forth coming.  We say stand up, fight back, don't be a victim.  I was told I wasn't a "good victim" because good little legal victims roll over and just take it.   Those of us who speak out, and fight back, or file motions or cry foul, and turn in disciplinary complaints, are told we are "dangerous" not legal abuse victims.  So how is that I am belittling MYself alongside all the other victims of a very very very broken ( since we are agreeing not to use the word "corrupt") - lets' say BROKEN pubic infrastructure in the form of our state and local judiciaries  - and quite possibly whole portions of the federal judiciary.  

I am an engineer by trade.  If we had a rusting, strained and fractured bridge or road way or building serving the public that was a severely broken, and rotting and near to crumbling as the Judiciary seems to be - we would CLOSE IT DOWN.  As a danger to the public.  As unsafe.   We don't paint over the rust spots and let double the truck traffic cross the bridge and triple the tolls and do NOTHING to mitigate it!!  

I cannot fathom the absolute pushback  coming from a failing system, that seems to admit its rusting and unserviceable, yet refuses the necessary and strident measures that would build around, detour, close down, and pre-empt FURTHER DISASTER.  

My brain does not wrap around it.   Engineers are licensed and in the public trust.  If they short shrifted materials or allowed deterioration to collapse a public structure and harm people who unknowingly TRUSTED it to cross every day  - those engineers would be FINISHED.  And likely the public officials who signed the contracts and the media would sell papers with the front page news.  

The legal system?  Some kind of taboo shrouds the accountability.   why is that? 

We are asking the question - and challenging the facts.  Show us the audit.  Then the facts will no longer be in dispute - will they? 

I too am a licensed professional and I would not be allowed to practice if I committed the crimes so many attorneys, accountants, judges, clerks and legal witnesses commit.

It is time to  stop painting over the rust and tear it down, rebuild and restructure.  It is time to face reality, the system is broken and has taken so many victims.  Those in charge are not regulating the system and they need to be replaced.

They are actually committing war crimes, treason.  It must be changed.

Certainly we don't imagine that America's legal and/or judicial system will undergo major reform without extensive analysis among lawyers, judges, public policy thought leaders, legislators, litigants, and other civic minded citizens.  No other grassroots organization has been more successful in facilitating related dialogue than NFOJA.  We welcome all those who join the effort with an open mind.


/s/ Zena Crenshaw-Logal,

NFOJA Co-Administrator


© 2018   Created by NFOJA Administration.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service