Leo Donofrio vs Danny boy Bickell (Nov 12th)

March 24, 2009

Some of you have asked for more examples of Danny Boy Bickell’s interference of the cases before the Supreme Court. After the attack on my *Orly Taitz* posts, I am reluctant to return to her site. Leo Donofrio had several contentious interactions with him as a result of Bickell’s misfiling of the case. Here is a post from Donofrio’s site from November 12th, which goes to the crux of the matter.

At issue: Bickell listed Donofrio’s case incorrectly on the docket by omitting that it had reached the NJ Supreme Court, which qualified it to go before the US Supreme Court.

Specifically, per Donofrio’s November 12th 2:10 update post:

I have an order handed down from the New Jersey Supreme Court which makes reference to the Appellate Division case as well, but the US Supreme Court Clerk’s office refuses to acknowledge the NJ Supreme Court’s review and it is that review which allows my case to go before the US Supreme Court. The Appellate Division case avoided the Constitutional issue, but the NJ Supreme Court decision raised the Constitutional issue when it specifically said in its order of denial that it had relied on  “movant’s papers” while at the same time it made no mention of Judge Sabatino’s Appellate Division order and opinion.

Here is his  regarding his conversation with Bickell.

UPDATED: 2:10 PM: Leo C. Donofrio was just contacted by Mr. Danny Bickell, Stay Clerk of the United States Supreme Court as a direct result of Mr. Bickell receiving phone calls from the public. THREE ISSUES WERE DISCUSSED:

1. He says he is now in the process of correcting the Docket to reflect that my case is before the US Supreme Court from a direct ruling of the NJ Supreme Court wherein a Constitutional issue had been raised.

2. Mr. Bickell informed me today that after he decided, improperly, not to pass on my Emergency Stay Application to Justice Souter on Nov. 3rd, that he did not owe me any special notification of such disposition of my case according to his interpretation of Supreme Court Rule 22(6) which states:

“6. The Clerk will advise all parties concerned, by appropriately speedy means, of the disposition made of an application.”

Mr. Bickell insisted that by “appropriately speedy means”, the Court Rule only demands he use ordinary mail.  I then asked him how is that different from the ordinary means by which you notify litigants as to the disposition of their cases?  And he replied, “It’s the same.” And I said, then how is that by “speedy  means”?  And he said I wasn’t entitled to a phone call or anything else.  And I said, “Then it’s your official position that Rule 22(6) calls for nothing more than the same notification as an ordinary case and that the words “appropriately speedy means” really have no special meaning at all.  And to this he replied, “That’s my official position.”

He also stated that he sent me a letter informing me of the disposition of my case.  I don’t know what he means.  On Thursday, Nov. 6th, by way of a phone conversation that I initiated, he informed me that he decided not to submit my Emergency Stay Application, which I filed four days earlier on November 3rd, to Justice Souter, which as I’ve said before was blatant Clerical misconduct since it’s not his job to play Supreme Court Justice.  Regardless, he never sent me a letter stating that he disposed of the case on his own.  After speaking to him on Thursday, he agreed to finally Docket the case.  But he did so erroneously as I have previously documented.  On Friday morning, he somewhat corrected the Docket, but he also made it reflect that Justice Souter had already decided the case.  And then he sent me a letter as to Justice Souter’s denial dated November 6th.

Speaking to Mr. Bickell a few minutes ago, I asked him what happened to my letter informing me of the first disposition back on Monday Nov. 3rd when he decided not to pass the Stay Application on to Justice Souter.  To this he replied, “That wasn’t a disposition so I didn’t have to give you any notice.”  Incredible.  He disposed of my case illegally and then said that since it wasn’t a proper disposition I wasn’t entitled to notice thereof, and certainly not by “appropriately speedy means”.  Sabotage.

This is truly unprecedented, my friends.

3.  Mr Bickell has also informed me that my renewed Application for an Emergency Stay will certainly be submitted to Justice Clarence Thomas on the day it is received.  His word isn’t worth much to me so I still need to keep trying to make the public aware of my case so that the other Justices might hear about it before the renewed Emergency Stay Application arrives.

Bickell also requested that people stop calling him, and I told him that these people are just citizens, I don’t know who they are, and I can’t command them to do anything but that they are watching the Supreme Court’s actions and they want to see that Justice is done in this case, and that Justice pertains not just to the substantive case but to the procedural aspects as well under the Supreme Court Rules which have not been followed.

I don’t think calling Mr. Bickell will do anymore good, although it certainly did influence him to get in touch with me.  So Im asking people to concentrate on sending letters to the attention of Justice Clarence Thomas and the other Supreme Court Justices US Supreme Court instead of making phone calls.  The phone calls were very helpful and served to alert Mr. Bickell and other interested parties at the US Supreme Court that the public is very interested in this case.

I still find it amazing that regular citizens could get through to Bickell and that he persisted in his (alleged) hijinks anyway.


(3-13) Orly Taitz delivers documents to Chief Justice Roberts
(3-13) AP reporter’s take on Taitz – Justice Roberts interaction
(3-16) Orly Taitz shout out to Mr Richard Holley in Moscow Idaho for his assistance
(3-16) Orly Taitz questions Chief Justice Roberts (audio/text)
(3-21) Orly Taitz questions Chief Justice Roberts (video)
(3-17) Orly Taitz outs Danny Bickell to Justice Roberts
(3-18) Explanation: Danny Bickell
(3-18) Leo Donofrio vs Danny boy Bickell (Nov 13th)
(3-24) Leo Donofrio vs Danny boy Bickell (Nov 12th)

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s