Should the people revive Moreland Commission on Public Corruption?


By  Dr. Leon R. Koziol

While criminal prosecutions continue against leaders of New York’s Legislature as a direct consequence of the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption, serious questions linger. For example, what came of all the shocking testimony and petitions lodged by the general public, limited as it was, on Constitution Day, 2013 at Pace University? What about the hundreds of speakers excluded from that hearing who were left outside protesting as a result? Why was the Commission prematurely disbanded, why were so many citizens misled into believing they could be heard and answered, and how much corruption remains rampant here in New York State due to the utterly impotent nature of that Commission?

It certainly cost our taxpayers substantial money to create this “dream team” of prosecutors and experts to root out corruption in state government. And while we certainly commend U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara for his follow-up investigations and prosecutions, a review of the public testimony raises far more concerns than the ones supporting a prosecution of two legislative leaders. That testimony is found on our site at Leon As one of the few who were allowed to participate from the general public, I raised serious issues concerning documented retaliation for my public criticisms on that site and my complaints of judicial misconduct in diverse filings. The retaliation has only escalated dramatically since that hearing.

Testimony of Leon Koziol, J.D., before the New York Moreland Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University on September 17, 2013. Leon’s eye-opening presentation can be viewed at approximately the 2 hours, 31 minutes and 45 seconds mark:

Therefore I am recommending the creation of a citizens Commission on Public Corruption headed by a “dream team” of good government advocates who can complete the work of the governor’s quickly dissolved “ad hoc” entity. Here are a number of observations from the Moreland proceedings which warrants such a public commission:

1)  Ellen Oxman, of Women for Justice in New York Courts, provided compelling testimony of her abuse at the hands of a wealthy opponent with connections to the judges in her divorce and family proceedings. Where did her petition go, where is she today, and what came of the brazen level of injustice she carefully documented before the Moreland Commission?

2)  Carl Lanzisera of Americans for Legal Reform and a co-member gave startling revelations regarding a 20 year history of court corruption including the similar impotent conclusion of the 2009 Senate hearings on judicial reform. The chair of that Senate Committee, John Sampson, was later indicted for official misconduct while in office. Among the recommendations made by this organization was the mandatory psychological testing of judges who take our children from us to bring them on par with other government officials.

3)  Michael Kraveski, a regular citizen, provided a heart wrenching seven year ordeal in Kings County Family Court which has become all too commonplace in America today, one which led to an unarmed father shot to death in the back while fleeing a support warrant at a traffic stop in South Carolina less than two years later. He described himself as a victim of a “money extortion scheme” through impossible obligations, fraudulent tactical petitions and a “Star Chamber” court. He suffered a stroke in the end after losing his job and life savings.

4)  Rich Velotti, an attorney for Act Now New York made an ominous prediction of sorts when he described how Assembly Leader Sheldon Silver, Senate Leader Dean Skelos and former leader Joe Bruno conspired to influence and limit the work of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics, an entity comprised of members selected by them and the governor to investigate misconduct in Albany. All three were prosecuted criminally by federal authorities, none by the state. Attorney Velotti labeled the JCPE “a joke” with a strong recommendation that the Moreland Commission, with its independent investigatory powers, be made permanent.

5)  Marie Tooker, a single mother of three, described a criminal enterprise in our courts which left her homeless with $12   in her bank account.

6)  A Fordham law professor commended the Commission as an example of good government, never imagining that it would be dissolved in six months for doing the very work it was charged to perform. She emphasized the need for permanent “structural” changes to replace the “prophylactic” approach to public corruption which remains in place.

7)  Elena Sassower was so emotional over the lack of judicial accountability over many years that she refused to yield to her allotted time as a speaker, even under threats of removal.

8)  Katherine Wilson, a victim of divorce court, began her testimony with a request that certain Commission members cease their texting during the general public segment of the hearing. She also asked that one or more members who had left for the lobby during that segment return to their seats so that she could have the benefit of a full Commission. Needless to say, she elicited a resounding applause for her bold introductions after emphasizing her experience with “guns in her face” while living in Ireland. It left her without any fear of this Commission. When asked to conclude her remarks, she defended her few minutes of space with the one hour spent by the Commission chair lauding the credentials of members which were already found in the table brochures. She cited shocking examples of domestic violence victims who preferred to return to their abusive home environments than face the “battering” they sustained in New York’s matrimonial courts. You simply have to listen to her full presentation as I cannot do it justice here.

9)  Marguerita Walter gave yet another heart wrenching ordeal at the hands of a corrupt divorce system with a “de facto termination of (her) parental rights,” some $150,000 spent on “supervised visits” and the ultimate permanent alienation of her children. She described 12 years of cruel and retaliatory acts for her exercise of fundamental rights after giving birth to children abandoned at an early age by their father. She was a Cuban refugee as a child herself fleeing from a corrupt communist regime headed by dictator Fidel Castro only to find far worse oppression here.

10)  Not to be out done, Mr. Gallison, a reporter for secondary news sources, Truth-out and Black Star News, provided the Commission and its audience with a shocking rendition of corruption involving the selection of Jonathan Lippman to the highest judicial post of Chief Justice at New York’s Court of Appeals. He gave testimony before the 2009 Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, provided complaints before the state Judicial Conduct Commission and furnished reports in response to Preet Bharara’s request for input following the disbanding of the Moreland Commission, all of which went un-answered.

What happened to these speakers and their presentations? Where are they today? More to the point, what can we, the people, do to get the answers? What can we do to obtain follow-up on all the corruption which could have been heard from all those good citizens left out in the audience or in the streets? Why is all this being swept under the carpet? If we do nothing, we guarantee more of the same or worse corruption in years to come, not a very good legacy for all the children and future generations harmed by the same corruption. It’s a trillion dollar “cottage industry” as one speaker plainly put it, and it shows no sign of correction.

Consequently I am asking our followers and advocates of good government everywhere to join my petition for a People’s (Moreland) Commission on Public Corruption. Kindly spread the word, make it viral as you are so good at doing, send me your credentials, suggestions and support, and let’s give this government something it never expected. We can conduct a preliminary conference call when enough interest is offered, followed by a meeting at Pace University, State Plaza in Albany or any other location for hearings. We can apply FOIA and subpoena powers where possible, and issue our own final report for media consumption and government deliberation. And, unlike the costly Commission, we can do the necessary follow-up ourselves in public, political and electoral processes. An organized protest is long overdue on this crucial subject.

I can be reached at (315) 796-4000 or You can also mail your input to my attention at P.O. Box 8302; Utica, New York 13505. Finally it must be emphasized that there are many court ordeals sampled from the general public segment of the Moreland hearings which warrant a book or documentary publication. As a publishing consultant, I can offer professional assistance to anyone interested in this powerful means of influencing justice and reform. You will find the details in my October 7, 2015 post here at Leon

Best regards,

Leon R. Koziol,  J.D.

Civil Rights Advocate



Everyone knows that discrimination against male parents in our nation’s family courts remains widespread. It is a curiously accepted perversion of equal rights verified by Census Bureau statistics and other reports showing that 85% of all support payers are men and 90% of contested custody cases favor women. Even judges, politicians and legal experts concede the undeniable despite its harmful effects upon veterans, innocent children and overcrowded courts and prisons. So why has nothing been done to rectify the clear injustices well into our 21st Century?

The first answer is the obvious one: unequal classifications of “custodial” and “non-custodial” parents facilitate money transfers which can then be exploited to divert finite resources to lawyers, state coffers and third party bank accounts. This must occur so that the “experts” can direct America on how its children should be raised despite their own lack of example or acceptable standards. Fit parents who simply choose to live apart must compete for court awards while demonstrating their parenting skills at a very dear price to families and children. In short, discrimination is profitable, no different than slavery or underpaid women.

The second answer is political: the principles embodied within our Constitution can be twisted to suit the politics of a given day. So, for example, African-Americans were not considered citizens in the 1850s, hence they had no standing to bring a civil rights case challenging slavery, see Dred Scott v Sandford, 60 US 393 (1857). After the Civil War, they were citizens but made to live separate from the “more equal” ones, Plessey v Ferguson, 163 US 165 (1896). Women were not citizens under the 15th Amendment even after the Civil War. Hence, they were incompetent to vote in the 1872 national elections, United States v Susan B. Anthony, 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (1873).

More than 150 years later, it seems that little has changed with respect to the same principles when applied to fathers seeking to obtain more time with their offspring and equal authority in childrearing. This point was made evident in a trilogy of cases brought by parental advocate, Dr. Leon R. Koziol, entitled Parent v New York; Koziol v Lippman; and Koziol v Peters. As stated at, this is the last in a three part series we call the Civil Rights Trilogy, designed to stimulate your participation and support behind a growing movement to reform our nation’s divorce and family courts.

Today we focus on the last case. Like the earlier two, it was analyzed in a Memorandum of Law filed last week by Dr. Koziol in the case of Koziol v King. The latest one comes as a result of the recent unanimous Supreme Court ruling which criticized lower federal courts for abusing an abstention doctrine to dismiss meritorious civil rights cases such as the Civil Rights Trilogy. A relevant excerpt is attached. The Koziol v Peters case could well be compared to the experience of Susan B. Anthony when she litigated her rights in the same federal court in northern New York. Indeed, she faced everything from standing and jurisdiction issues to the deprivation of her jury rights before being convicted for the federal offense of voting in a congressional election.

In Koziol’s case, his children, law license and livelihood were seized also without a jury in retaliation for his exercise of citizen rights. Invidious targeting of his activity was remarkably similar. And, in an ironic twist, his first license suspension for conscientious opposition to unjust support orders came in the same city of Rochester, New York where Ms. Anthony was arrested. It occurred in a court room dedicated to her achievements. Put simply, there is little to distinguish Koziol’s modern ordeal from the one faced by Ms. Anthony. While being prosecuted, she continued to defy oppression with bold outspokenness and a refusal to pay her fine upon conviction. Today, we find a man seeking to overcome long held prejudices regarding a father’s place in the childrearing hierarchy. Like the 19th Century judges dismissing sound human rights principles, Judge Thomas McAvoy dismissed the ones put before him two centuries later, to wit:

1) Does a father truly have an equal right to raise his offspring?

2) Can the state abuse licensing authority to censor free speech and reform?

3) Is it not a federal court’s duty to safeguard federal rights when the state      violates them?

Like the case of United States v Susan B. Anthony, the federal court here in upstate New York refuses to consider long overdue precedent when the timing and circumstances are so ripe. Instead it misrepresents the law and facts while exercising the expedient option of abstaining from jurisdiction and constitutional duty. Worse yet, it has exploited such rare opportunities to defame and suppress the messengers of reform. With such a profound backdrop, we ask you to assist in our cause. Without resources, we cannot continue this fight. Please share our message. We offer speaking engagements, donation options and a Court Program to assist self-represented parents and those facing the high cost of divorce, custody and support litigation.



In follow-up to our August 4, 2014 post, today we bring you Part Two of our trilogy concerning a prior test case brought by parental rights advocate, Dr. Leon R. Koziol in Parent v New York. As explained, the United States Supreme Court recently handed down a ruling which showed that the test case was properly litigated, both in the lower federal court (yesterday’s post) and on appeal before the Second Circuit federal appeals court in New York City.

On June 15, 2012, a large gathering of parents and civil rights advocates rallied at Foley Square outside a federal appeals court in lower Manhattan in support of Parent v New York. This was a case designed to secure constitutional rights and fair treatment for parents routinely abused in New York’s domestic relations courts. Meanwhile, inside the court house, a decision was being made without public argument. We have included video clips of that rally here.

On June 18, 2012, the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a summary order affirming lower court dismissal of the Parent case on grounds of Younger abstention. However, the recent unanimous Supreme Court ruling in Sprint Communications v Jacobs now verifies the erroneous nature of that order. Because Koziol’s constitutional challenges were wrongly declined, no decision on their merits has ever properly occurred. Hence the new case, Koziol v King, was filed last week with its added First Amendment claims, including disciplinary and Family Court retaliation for Koziol’s testimony at the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption.

A relevant excerpt from Dr. Koziol’s memorandum of law in support of a preliminary injunction in the new case is attached. As stated, we are dedicating this trilogy to all parents abused in our nation’s divorce and family courts. We would like to especially thank all those volunteers who rallied behind our cause two years ago. It turns out, you folks were correct as well in this movement to restore integrity and justice in our states’ third branch of government. Kindly share this post with others. We continue to rely on donations, additionally offering a Court Program to assist self-represented parents or those anxious to reduce costly litigation.



Last week, we published the filing of a civil rights lawsuit by parental advocate, Dr. Leon R. Koziol, on our website, Leon As noted, it challenged First Amendment censorship and parenting deprivations inflicted by certain state judges, enforcement agents and disciplinary authorities, including retaliation for Koziol’s testimony before the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University on September 17, 2013 (Constitution day).

The new case raises similar claims made in a test case filed on February 26, 2009. It was dismissed in a 45 page decision by a federal judge three years ago. Commenced with the goal of converting the case into to a class action, the claims were ultimately left un-answered due to an abstention rule applied whenever state proceedings are pending. However, in a recent unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court, lower federal courts were admonished for their abuses of Younger abstention beyond its narrow scope. Meritorious civil rights cases were being wrongly dismissed all across America in recent decades.

In addition, such dismissals were being abused to engage in further encroachments upon constitutional rights. In Koziol’s case, the 2011 dismissal was exploited by state agents to escalate their retributions for his valid criticisms and reform efforts concerning abusive and lucrative bench and bar practices in divorce and Family Court. In short, Mr. Koziol’s longstanding position against application of Younger abstention was proven correct. However, in order to rehabilitate the reputation damage caused by this dismissal, an excerpt from Koziol’s recently filed memorandum of law is attached.

Many parents suffered a similar fate, and we had hoped to intervene for their benefit and assistance. Unfortunately resources were lacking, donations insufficient, and retributions so severe that we were forced to question our every move. The current action explains it all. Beginning with this post, we will be publishing a trilogy from the same memorandum to convince our followers how we were right all along. We are dedicating this trilogy to all parents abused by a system which is getting increasingly out of control.



What started out as an idiotic suggestion in a back-room meeting at the Governor’s office turned into a decision hailed by constituent pet owners as the most brilliant to date from the Cuomo administration. Reeling from a corruption investigation investigating his own corruption commission, Governor Cuomo today announced a decision to revive the Moreland Commission which he disbanded only months ago halfway into its assignment. Predictably, no person of stature cared to take part due to fears of state retribution and no court willing to provide justice.

Citing monarchial immunity from New York’s pre-Revolution Constitution, Cuomo is alleged to have issued edicts to the effect that his taxpayer financed corruption commission should be focused upon everyone but himself. When that position backfired, one staffer suggested that two felines be appointed to co-chair the new commission. Outraged over this idea, Cuomo is said to have responded, “How am I gonna control things my way with a couple of (expletive) cats heading up this (expletive) commission which got me into all this trouble in the first place?”

However, when the staffer explained the logic behind it, a desperate Governor began to listen intently, smiling and nodding in stock fashion until his enthusiastic support was given. If there is one thing the public knew about cats, they cannot be controlled by anyone. Quietly strutting around homes all across America, these family favorites do essentially nothing while getting free meals at their beckon meow. As the astute staffer put it, “these kitties got it better than welfare recipients, and their independence is beyond question. This Bharara character has no chance if the idea catches on Andy.”

And so it went at a news conference held at Cuomo’s summer retreat in the CATskill Mountains. It was a startling scene which had one Times reporter choking on his hour glass. Two attractive felines were placed on a table next to the podium as the Governor announced his new co-cats. Their resumes were indeed impressive, offered by a concerned couple tired of hearing about government corruption. No criminal background, no ties to any politician, and a wit to make anyone laugh. Introduced from right to left were Dr. Cocoa Katz and District Attorney Charmin Whiskers. The Governor explained his decision before opening the floor to the media through a cat interpreter. An AP correspondent was the first to stand up.

“Governor, not for nothing, but a pair of cats to head up the new Moreland Commission? Have you finally lost your marbles?”

“Look John, you guys are always hounding me about ethics and independence. Now you got nothing on me with these cats. Why don’t you direct your questions to them?”

“Okay, then, kitties, tell us more about this Commission. Will both major political parties be represented among its members?”

After a moment of intense silence, Dr. Katz began to meow the responses to all questions while an interpreter translated everything to an unprecedented gathering of dignitaries. In contrast, Attorney Whiskers simply looked over this audience with only passing interest.

“Of course both parties, the felines AND the canines, will be represented on this new Commission. We also intend to have participants from major third parties such as the Feathered Friends Party and the Fins and Crawling Things Party. In fact, Attorney Whiskers and I have already suggested a Siberian Husky and Golden Retriever to join us as co-chairs, but we cannot interfere with the other party’s decision-making authority.”

A CBS news team was quick to seize upon this leak of information to craft a flaw in the new Commission for an eager national viewing audience. “So what you’re saying then is that there’s already some in-fighting going on with the other political party?”

“Not at all. Like our party, they follow the democratic process. Right now they’re in the midst of an election involving two dogs named Peanut and Quasimodo. Apparently they won some kind of ugly dog contest out in California, and we’re told that beauty must be followed by the beast if the politicians are going to take us seriously. It’ll put more teeth into our final report if you get my drift. When they decide, you’ll be the first to know.”

“What will the Commission be investigating?” asked a reporter from the New York Post.

“The usual things: stray cats, abused dogs, animal shelters and more federal funding for sanitary parks. As long as the other party is still voting, we’re looking to commission a study on why our canine counter-parts can’t use litter boxes like we do.”

“What does any of this have to do with corruption at the state Capitol?” asked a USA Today journalist.

“For decades now, the public has watched elected leaders taking dumps all over our halls of government. They come up with all kinds of ways to control our behavior while making a mockery of their own. Soon there’ll be nothing left of our Constitution. The people are tired of cleaning up their mess with our hard earned taxes. So we’ve got to clean up this mess once and for all. We’re the cats to do it. If we can figure a way to get a dog to use a litter box, it’ll provide valuable insight for making politicians do the same.”

“You know, this new Moreland Commission is beginning to sound quite productive and trustworthy,” concluded a reluctant observer from another news organization. “Will you remain committed to the end, or can we expect more of the same?”

“I can assure you that we will be purrrr- suing every complaint. Look, the people are fed up to their gills with all this corruption. They’re getting the impression that no one can be trusted to govern their affairs. One of our members is so upset that you guys are calling him the Grumpy Old Cat. That’s why Andy came up with this fantastic idea for us to head up his new Commission. That Grumpy Cat is being considered for our director’s spot, and you gotta admit, he looks a heck of a lot better than the last one.”

“I got a question,” asserted an eager reporter. “What about the other co-chair? He hasn’t mewed about anything here. Doesn’t he have an opinion?”

All eyes were suddenly fixed upon the other cat who until this point had demurred entirely to his partner for the answers. Indifferent to the attention he never sought, Attorney Whiskers finally spoke up…

​“Hey, do I look like I care about any of this? I’m just here for the cat food.”



July 31, 2014– Yesterday, we released the formal complaint in the federal lawsuit filed by parental advocate, Dr. Leon R. Koziol on July 29, 2014. As explained, it challenges First Amendment censorship and state retributions upon Dr. Koziol’s testimony before the New York (Moreland) Commission on Public Corruption. In less than twenty-four hours, numerous inquiries have resulted from across the country. To answer some of them here, an excerpt from the lawsuit is attached which explains which posts on our site have been targeted by the Albany Committee on Professional Standards. Also, yesterday, we released the first page excerpt from the lawsuit memorandum of law which shows how prior cases were properly pursued.

It should be emphasized that the Governor appoints judges to the higher courts engaged in the attorney regulatory process in addition to four of the eleven members on the state Judicial Conduct Commission and all the members of the Moreland Commission on Public Corruption. It should also be emphasized that the lawsuit is based, in part, upon the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Sprint Communications v Jacobs, 134 S. Ct. 584 (December 10, 2013). By unanimous ruling, the Court criticized lower federal courts which had been dismissing lawsuits simply because parallel state cases were pending, i.e. divorce, custody and support.

Known as the Younger abstention doctrine, it was used by a federal appeals court in New York City to dismiss Koziol’s test case in Parent v State and by a lower federal court in Koziol v Peters. Because such abstention does not go to the merits of the dismissed cases, as fate and justice would have it, the earlier cases can now be resurrected in the current lawsuit because of the recent Supreme Court ruling. To put it simply, Leon Koziol was correct all along regarding his position against the exploitation of the now clarified Younger abstention doctrine.

Unfortunately, we have received numerous complaints from similarly injured parents whose federal cases (usually self represented) were dismissed for identical reasons. We would have liked to intervene in those cases as an amicus party (Friend of the Court) to assist such victims. However, resources are needed to do this, and as you can see from the attached excerpt, the state is attacking us relentlessly on all fronts.

For this reason, we need your help. Kindly make your donations to this very worthy cause today. You can also visit our other site to order the valuable court program which has helped so many parents avoid the high cost of divorce and Family Court. Not surprisingly, this program is also being targeted. The institute office can be reached at (315) 380-3420 and Dr. Koziol can be reached directly at (315) 796-4000. This is all more important than you know, if for no other reason than to protect the inalienable rights and children we cherish.

More News Relating To the Moreland Commission:

U.S. Attorney Warns Cuomo on Moreland Commission Case



On July 29, 2014, parental advocate, Dr. Leon R. Koziol, filed a civil rights lawsuit against state judges and ethics investigators for unlawful censorship directed to his website, organizing activity and testimony before the New York (Moreland) Commission on Public Corruption at Pace University on September 17, 2013 (Constitution Day) (excerpt from Memo of Law). Mr. Koziol has appeared on CBS 60 Minutes, front page of the New York Times, CNN and numerous internet news sources in connection with parenting rights, First Amendment issues and Native American land claims.

 After 23 years as a highly successful and unblemished civil rights attorney, Mr. Koziol was subjected to extraordinary retributions when he began focusing his criticisms and reform efforts upon widespread abuses in New York’s domestic relations courts. At the Moreland Commission, he asked for an investigation into retaliatory suspensions of his law license due to contrived ethics charges and a protracted license reinstatement process (His eye-opening presentation can be viewed at approximately the 2 hours, 31 minutes and 45 seconds mark). Ethics lawyers engaged in this process declared in court that they would continue opposing Koziol’s reinstatement so long as his offensive website postings and court filings continued. Weeks later they were fired for falsifying time sheets.

Also in his testimony, Koziol recommended that the state Commission on Judicial Conduct be disbanded due to its ineffectiveness, selectivity and “window-dressing” effects. In March, 2014, the reverse occurred, and on April 8, 2014, the Committee on Professional Standards in Albany issued a confidential report opposing Koziol’s reinstatement to his former civil rights practice. In that report, seven website postings (Post1) (Post2) (Post3) (Post4) (Post5) (Post6) (Post7) were targeted for “fitness” reasons, including the entire Moreland Commission testimony appended to the report. Retributions were also exacted upon his parent-child relationships by Family Court judges including one on his custody case who was disqualified in 2011 and removed from the bench in 2013 for sexual misconduct upon his handicapped five year old niece (In re Bryan Hedges).

Also: See New York Times Bombshell Report on the now Disbanded Moreland Commission Dated July 23, 2014 (Click Here)

Mr. Koziol can be reached at (315) 796-4000

Koziol Selected to Speak at Moreland Commission Hearing on Public Corruption


Administrator’s Note:

On Tuesday, September 17, 2013, Parental Rights Advocate, Leon Koziol was selected to provide testimony amongst hundreds of people who had gathered at Pace University in Manhattan to participate in the first round of the Moreland Commission hearings on the subject of public corruption.  Mr. Koziol’s presentation was well received by both the audience and the commission. Outside the event, there were widespread demonstrations and public protests taking place resulting in a number of arrests.

We will keep you updated as details emerge.

Update (1) 11:55 PM :

Public Blocked From Moreland Commission Hearings (Click Link),
U.S. Attorney To Commission: Political Corruption Is Out Of Hand In N.Y. State (Click Link)

Below is a copy of Mr. Koziol’s presentation that was made to the commission:


Parenting Rights Institute
1518 Genesee Street
Utica, NY 13502
(315) 380-3420

September 17, 2013

Moreland Commission on Public Corruption
Commission Hearing
Pace University
One Pace Plaza
New York, New York

Testimony by Dr. Leon R. Koziol, Director
Parenting Rights Institute

Dear Commission Members:

Good evening. My name is Leon Koziol, and I serve as Director of the Parenting Rights Institute, a private consortium committed to systemic reforms in our nation’s domestic relations courts. I am a former school board attorney, chief counsel for an upstate city, and two term councilman. Over a period of 23 years, I secured large recoveries for victims of government abuse and final judgment declaring the largest casino operation in New York unconstitutional.

I am here today because of retributions I sustained after criticizing and reporting unethical judges and lawyers to proper authorities. Serious misconduct committed upon unsuspecting parents in matters of divorce, custody and child support was the common theme. It included exorbitant legal fees, protracted litigation, needless controversy, and money generating schemes that simply “shocked the conscience.” The retaliation I sustained reads like a John Grisham novel, and some of it can be found at Leon Koziol .com

My public complaints and civil rights forums were targeted and suppressed because government has turned our children into a trillion dollar industry. Entire families have been reduced to bankruptcy, productivity in the private sector has been compromised, and our prisons fill to capacity not for any criminal wrongdoing but because of civil disputes inflamed in these courts. Simply put, parents are being required under the current scheme of laws to fight over their own offspring in pursuit of awards that have little to do with the so-called “best interests of children.”

War veterans and public safety officers like the responders at 9-11 are coming home to a court system which continues to feature institutional discrimination against fathers. It is nice to know that our governor has given women 75% of the executive composition on this Commission, but men remain 85% of the child support population according to Census reports. It is problem of epic proportion, and we see the consequences every day in our schools, streets and homes.

Koziol Statement on Public Corruption

Page 2

The files we have generated cannot be summarized here, but I will provide you with pertinent news stories and a series of complaints filed with the state’s Commission on Judicial Conduct. All of them over a period of years have failed to reach the investigation threshold, leading the common citizen to logically conclude that such commissions are mere window dressing which does more to facilitate misconduct than it does to rectify it.

It is one thing to ignore public corruption, but quite another to target and punish the whistle blower in violation of the federal and state constitutions. How can a self governing people become properly informed through qualified attorneys to maintain accountability over their third branch of operations? To bring this all down to earth, how can we stop the first minority commissioner in Utica, New York, a/k/a “sin city” and “mob files,” from attempting suicide in the city lock-up after years of successful litigation because I could no longer represent him?

Today is Constitution Day, and I would hope that our rights do not incur further erosion through suppression, inaction, fear or ignorance in the wake of Edward Snowden, the IRS scandals and the Trayvon Martin case. If the public cannot secure rational justice in our courts, where can this Commission go with its findings? Violence and disobedience are the natural by-products. It is our duty under that same Constitution to demand accountability. This may require a lecture about democracy and equality from the president, but Vladimir Putin is not one of your speakers.

An alarming report was sent to Loretta Lynch, a confirmed presenter, and I discussed my ordeal with her deputy attorney. I have yet to receive a return call six months later. A secretary was planted in my office to orchestrate ethics violations as part of this retribution process. She was finally arrested in a rural county with our assistance for passing herself off as a licensed attorney over a period of years. She remains at large for multiple felonies committed across state lines.

If a reckless secretary can succeed as a professional imposter for so long, how will we know that Homeland Security can track down highly skilled terrorists? More to the point, how can I report criminals without subjecting myself to further retributions from my own government? I authored two books about terrorism with help from a minority public safety commissioner, police chief and military colonel. I can assure this Commission that we remain at serious risk.

Based on my quarter century of relevant education and experience as a parent and trial attorney, I am making the following recommendations to our governor and state before this Commission:

First, I am asking for a review of domestic relations laws for their combined injury to parental privacy. The goal here should be to get our courts out of the “child business” as one family judge put it. Jurisdiction should be limited under the Constitution to child abandonment, abuse or public charge. Custody awards and welfare transfers inflame needless controversy and are not in our children’s long term interests when similarly involved parents are self sufficient.

Koziol Statement on Public Corruption

Page 3

Second, the state’s Commission on Judicial Conduct should be investigated and decommissioned much like the former Commission on Investigations. It is an entity which is politically impacted and ill equipped to properly address judicial misconduct. Only one judge above trial level has ever been publicly admonished, many are town or village judges without law degrees, and the state’s former chief judge, Sol Wachtler, like so many higher level criminals, had to be apprehended, prosecuted and sent to prison by federal authorities.

Third, I am asking this Commission to investigate our current chief judge, four appellate division judges in the Third Department and one in the Fourth Department for their unlawful targeting of my civil rights activity. In a highly unprecedented move, an entire appeals court disqualified itself from my professional and family matters after I filed a complaint in federal court. On May 24, 2013, ethics lawyers engaged in the witch hunt against me conceded in open court that they were targeting my public statements. Weeks later, they were terminated for falsifying time sheets, apprehended not by a self regulating court but by the Inspector General.

Compelling precedent behind my requests can be found in the case of ex-chief judge Sol Wachtler. He directed publicly paid court staff to investigate a New Jersey lawyer to impair his licensing interests in New York because he represented a threat to the judge’s criminal activity. Given the limited time allotted to me here as a speaker, I am offering print material for your deliberations. The notion that judges are immune from accountability is answered here by a sampling of misconduct cases which should have every parent and family in America concerned.

From the top down, judicial misconduct reads like a docket sheet in any criminal court. Examples include New York Supreme Court Judge Gerald Garson, convicted of bribery and official misconduct in 2007. He was caught on camera accepting a $9,000 bribe from a divorce lawyer in chambers to fix a custody case. Had the mother not sought assistance from the FBI, she would have lost her children for a payment much less than most contested divorce retainers. The judge served minimum time in prison due, in part, to the many references from his colleagues.

Supreme Court Judge Thomas Spargo was convicted for soliciting $10,000 from a lawyer facing a personal divorce in exchange for favorable treatment. The money was required for growing legal fees to defend against ethics charges. Much of the misconduct in my case involved judges with offices in a Syracuse courthouse. The chief administrative judge there was among the defendants named in a civil rights action brought by the chief court clerk alleging political espionage against a competing judge of the Family Court. It resulted in a $600,000 recovery.

Another named defendant was Family Court Judge Bryan Hedges who was removed from the bench in a recent published decision. He admitted to sexual interactions with a handicapped 5 year old niece. The sordid details are better left to the decision, but only months prior to his removal, this same judge presided over my ongoing custody case. My motion for his removal

Koziol Statement on Public Corruption

Page 4

was opposed by the divorce and child attorney on grounds that he was beyond reproach. It was fortunately granted prior to the standard child session in chambers without the parents present.

Only last month, a Michigan judge was exposed for presiding over a child support case in which the mother was his secret lover. He admitted a practice of allowing the female litigant privileged access to his chambers for the purpose of engaging in “special” relations. It caused an unplanned pregnancy and major back peddling to explain impartiality. The list goes on: a Pennsylvania judge convicted for imprisoning 4,000 children in newly built facilities in exchange for contractor kickbacks, and a Texas family judge exposed on his daughter’s video for child abuse.

This is only a sampling of judges actually caught for their misconduct. Many more would be exposed if judges honored related code obligations which mandate accountability for unethical conduct. In my case, they simply passed the damage on to successor proceedings as a mode of retribution, thereby causing serious injuries, costly appeals and vacated orders. There have been 30 trial level judges and more than 50 decisions requiring an appeal. How is this even possible? How does it comport with minimal requirements of due process and an orderly system of justice?

On the lawyer end, collusion between the bench and bar is implicated in civil rights cases brought by New York City ethics counsel, Christine Anderson and Nicole Corrado. They paint a very disturbing picture of insider protection for lawyers committing serious misconduct and discipline for targeted lawyers outside the system. In my case, the targeting process carried over to my children in Family Court and the same appeals court where my law license was impaired.

The misconduct here is extensive, but suffice it to state, an agenda was put in place to orchestrate child support violations for incarceration purposes. To do this, various judges fabricated degrees and accomplishments behind imputed income so that support orders could be artificially elevated to unmanageable levels. One judge awarded me a PhD in the text of his formal decision. I filed a complaint regarding gross incompetence. It concluded with deference to the appeals process.

When I filed my appeal, a higher judge agreed that I possessed no PhD, but he whitewashed the incompetence as a mere “passing” and “harmless” error. The appeals judge then awarded me a Masters degree in his formal decision. I have no such degree, my ex-spouse possessed that one. Indeed the litigation process has become so retaliatory, so demented and so torturous to my children, career and income producing capacity that I was forced to ask our state courts for no more degrees, no more concocted employments and no more phantom awards.

I leave you with a true story about a former client upstate which demonstrates the enormity of work entrusted to you by the people. He was arrested on multiple criminal charges within days of his dismissal from city employment after exposing secretive salary hikes to the media. I was able to get a jury acquittal in less than 20 minutes and dismissal of a felony charge for a $16 city gas card purchase made within hours of his discharge. It was a standard reimbursement for his last week of services. At the same time, here in New York City, a man stole more than 50 billion dollars before he was finally arrested and charged with any crime.

Koziol Statement on Public Corruption

Page 5

The relative aspects of public corruption on these two cases must be placed in perspective. The one here in this city involved not a mere $16, not a hundred dollars. It was not thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. It was not hundreds of millions or even the big “b” word. It was more than 50 billion dollars. How did this happen with all the commissions and regulatory agencies in existence when Bernie Madoff was guarding the chicken coop and running loose on the streets of Manhattan? Will the Bernie Madoff of the legal profession finally be held accountable after my presentation before this Commission?

I appreciate this opportunity to share my concerns about public corruption in New York State.

Respectfully submitted,
Dr. Leon R. Koziol
Parenting Rights Institute

cc:  New York Times
Associated Press
USA Today
CBS 60 Minutes