, ,

2. Kick a man down Judge O’Neil, but make sure you do it twice!
As an English Psychology Graduate, Postgraduate and Criminology Postgraduate, the past 10 years for me have included various criminal literature searches and my own interested exploration of a variety of cases, both based in the US and the UK. There are obvious differences between the British judicial system, and the US. Now, I am not one to say that the UK system is perfect, indeed it has its own faults, but I don’t feel that as a UK citizen, I have ever been made aware of a Judge who is as clearly corrupt as that of Lawrence O’Neil. Judge O’Neil appears to be a self-righteous, over powered and a possibly narcissistic individual, who can be found to take the law into his own hands. What I find disturbing is that the US government appears to be allowing a string of inadequate legal and societal decisions to be made by a man who should not have the power to make such crucial decision with regards to human rights.

Yesterday, I started to look into the case of Judge O’Neil and it appears that the more I delve into the case relating to the defendant, the more I am finding with regards to OBVIOUS elements of corruption. After the initial denial of the motion set by the defendant in regards to the invalidity of the search warrant and return of seized property, I am to understand that the case was returned to the official clerk for re-assignment. Did Judge O’Neil realise people were aware he had made an unfair ruling? Was he starting to realise he had made a mistake and that he was unable to rule against the motion? Sadly, it would appear NOT. Approximately 30 days after the start of the re-assignment, Judge O’Neil was appointed a Federal District Judge in Frenso. Although at the time of the first ruling in 2006, Judge O’Neil was not authorised to deny the motion with regards to return of property seized under the unlawful search warrant, in 2009, he was now a Federal District Judge, with the power to rule on the validity of the initial warrant with regard to the property seizure. However, if we were to consider the ethics of the case of the defendant, due to the illegal search warrant, and unqualified ruling of the initial motion to return property, it is obvious that Judge O’Neil would not be allowed to have an association of the case under potential does 1-20. Right? Yes, of course I am right; this doesn’t take an educated graduate to work this out!
But alas, I am WRONG! It would appear that this was not how the case was to proceed as Judge O’Neil suddenly appeared to be re-assigned to case of the defendant. Funny that?

Following on from yesterday, I have discovered that the unqualified decision to deny motion on the return of property was not only made unlawfully once, but TWICE!?! By the SAME Judge… Judge Lawrence O’Neil.

In 2009, the defendant’s attorney Anthony P. Capozzi submitted the second motion to return property on the basis that the original search warrant was overbroad and that it violated those rights under the Fourth Amendment of the defendant, and as such, that all evidence seized should be suppressed. And, guess what? Once again Judge O’Neil ruled against the claim that the warrant was overbroad (see line 21).

As an educated individual, one would have expected him to realise his own misgivings upon his decision to deny the motion and allow the warrant to be overruled, especially as he was now acting as a Federal District Judge. As to why he FAILED, for a SECOND time, to rule in line with LAW set by the US government is confusing. My experience as a graduate has taught me that although there are levels of discretion granted as a Judge, it doesn’t automatically give you the right to decide to go against that set by the state?
As Judge O’Neil took a second decision to deny the motion, it highlights that at the time, he once again believed he had power over the law, in particular the Fourth Amendment. It would appear to me, that although Judge O’Neil is clearly aware of the Fourth Amendment, he doesn’t not appear to care; a little blarsé in fact, as if it can be whittled away and hidden under a rug in the court house. As a member of the US’s federal government, should he be so haphazard with his rulings?

I think what surprises me the most is that it is evident that Judge O’Neil is ruling against the rights set by the government in regards to the Fourth Amendment, and yet other judicial members of authority appear to have ‘let’ him get away with it? What sort of judicial system is it that the US appears to have incorporated into a society? I would guess a corrupt one! What was he trying to gain? Does he have a personal dislike to the defendant, and if so, what happened to the elements of impartiality as expected of all members of judicial authority, such as he?