Constitutional Law

KingCast tells Jack Middleton and Kelly Ayotte: When I say I want a full disclosure, I mean full disclosure, dammit.

By Christopher King

Plaintiff seeks leave of Court to Supplement his Demand for Full Disclosure relative to McLane, Graf Defense Counsel, Kelly Ayotte and Magistrate Judge McCafferty.

First of all, close friendship and working associations often result in recusal as noted in Arthur Ginsberg v. James DeHart, Landya McCafferty, John Griffith, Margaret Nelson, Diane Nicolosi et al.., 2010-CV-452 filed at the same time as Plaintiff's case. Even Judge Barbadoro recused himself and the case was moved to another District in the interest of fairness.

Note that Judge LaPlante recused himself in Plaintiff's case, ostensibly because he worked at the same firm as Kelly Ayotte.

In light of the fact that Kelly Ayotte and Jack Middleton and Jennifer Parent all continued association together even after Ayotte left McLane, Graf law firm (see NH Bar Foundation Quorum feature), Ex. 1, and in light of the fact that he has contributed approximately $3,000.00 to Friends of Kelly Ayotte (see campaignmoney.com, Ex. 2), and in light of the fact that Jennifer Parent contributed approximately $2,400 to Friends of Kelly Ayotte, Id., Ex. 3, and given that Jack Middleton was Judge McCafferty's boss, Kelly Ayotte's boss and is Jennifer Parent's boss, and given that Attorney Parent and Attorney Ayotte worked at McLane, Graf at the same time, and given that it is also entirely likely that Attorney Middleton wrote letters of recommendation for Judge McCafferty in her ascension to the Bench, Plaintiff hereby reiterates and supplements his Demand for full Disclosure.

This is particularly telling in light of the fact that any reasonable person would assume that McLane, Graf is providing some legal oversight for Kelly Ayotte, given her four-year tenure there and continued support. Therefore her recent 7-month failure to file her U.S. Senate Disclosure Statement could be seen as a byproduct of this nefarious association because each and every one of these attorneys is aware, or should be aware, of these basic obligations, just as they were aware that Plaintiff should have been notified of the web of substantial association between these attorneys, Kelly Ayotte and Her Honor. Plaintiff became aware of this association because journalist David Ridley opined in one of his videos:
"GOP lawyers fight indie reporter demands for Ayotte access"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sB3MMY-sUyc

....that Attorneys Middleton and Parent were "evasive" about their identities so this could show a plan, pattern and practice of deception that colors not only the nondisclosure at hand, but their entire Defense strategy.

They are all politically savvy and intelligent attorneys so it does not compute that somehow they forgot that Ayotte was supposed to file said Disclosure Statement, when she had a 77% increase in 2009, see Center for Responsive Politics feature Ex. 3, nor does it compute that they accidentally forgot to disclosure the relationships that could have mandated a recusal of the sitting Judge.
(Full document tonight).

We use video podcasting at KingCast.net and Justiceforkids.net to protect the First Amendment and highlight corporate and police abuse, such as the Ohio Board of Grievances, American Tower Corporation, Jaffrey Police Department, and the NAACP have all told material lies or unlawfully withheld evidence

Full post as published by Chris King's 1st Amendment Page on December 20, 2010 (boomark / email).