Judge Alan M. Black

… one Nation, under God,
with Liberty and JUSTICE for All.

To report objections to the content of this Nomination, review MISSIONDeclaration of Truth.

Hall of Shame Nominee: ALAN M. BLACK

 FOREWORD

Alan M. Black, judge in the Court of Common Pleas of Lehigh County, Pennsylvania, earns his nomination to the PA COURT INJUSTICE Hall of Shame for numerous and egregious violations of law and professional integrity.
“But for” Alan M. Black, this website may never have been developed.

We the People place our Sacred Trust in the honesty and integrity of public officers, especially judges. Public service requires public officers to perform the duties of office in compliance with 5 U.S.C. § 2635.101. Anything less than full compliance identifies the public officer to be a “criminal” for “conflict of interest crimes”. 

Judges are expected, nay, judges are “required” to conduct the business of the court in conformance with the CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT and their Oath of Office which requires performance with “fidelity”. Disregard of that Code should, in every case, subject that judge to discipline and Impeachment from office / removal from the bench.
Alan M. Black violates his fiduciary  responsibility as “Trustee” under the public trust, his Oath of Office and the Code of Judicial Conduct; Canon 3.C. among others. He committed crimes against the State, crimes against individuals, and crimes against We the People.  

The Code of Judicial Conduct prescribes admissible and inadmissible conduct for judges. Canon 3. C. addresses “Disqualification”. Alan M. Black knowingly and intentionally violated this Canon when presiding over a family court case of Ternigan v. Hamoui

During a hearing to correct the record, counsel for defendant challenged the integrity of the audio record of a prior hearing. The examination of court monitor Diane Snell revealed that the chain of custody of the audio record had been broken.  Ms. Snell released the “original” audio tape of the hearing to the judge (Black). 

Black “lost it”, and accused counsel of accusing him of altering the tape. Black immediately interrupted the examination and terminated the hearing at that point. He  announced that he was “recusing” himself. He then terminated the hearing, recused himself and stood up stating “and I can’t wait to testify“. These words, among others, were deleted from the audio tape of this hearing, violating 18 Pa.C.S  § 4911.
Black’s recusal was appropriate because the witness testified that the audio record left her custody in favor of the custody of the judge [Black].  The follow-up question to Snell was to the effect that she could no longer testify to the authenticity and integrity of the contents of that audio tape record.

Subsequently, [judge] Black “WITHDREW” his recusal in direct violation of Canon 3.C. of THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT. Thisw action violates 

“Family law” cases in Lehigh County have pre-determined outcomes. i.e., Cases are “fixed“. Mr. Hamoui was Denied access to a fair and impartial court.

We the People have a right to presume that in all judicial proceedings the court will search for TRUTH, and will not distort or alter the facts presented to the court. A court that “manages” the admissibility of evidence neglects its duty to search for TRUTH. A court that alters the record to remove evidence presented CONCEALS TRUTH and commits “conflict of interest crimes”

The only reasonable conclusion for any court to conceal Truth must be that the TRUTH interferes with the pre-determined outcome.
“Our adversary system depends on a most jealous safeguarding of truth and candor.” Jones v. Clinton, 36 F.Supp.2d 1118 (E.D.Ark. 1999) citing U.S. v. Shaffer Equip. Co., 11 F.3d 450, 463 (4th Cir. 1993).

Courts that tamper with evidence or the official record are criminally corrupt courts. They are only capable of dispensing INJUSTICE.

Criminal alteration of the audio record of “family court” hearings rises to a level of “pattern and practice” in Lehigh County. This administrator identified audio tapes from three (3) judges in LCCCP that evidence “criminal edits” to the original audio record. Facts material to the outcome are deleted or altered to obscure the TRUTH. The audio records are edited to remove or distort evidence material to the outcome. TRUTH is altered.
Tampering with official records is a felony. See 18 Pa.C.S. § 4911. Alan M. Black presides over a courtroom where TRUTH is irrelevant to the final determination and where certain litigants are deprived of their right to a hearing before an impartial court. Court monitors become accomplices.  

 We  the People have a right to presume that our judicial system is administered with  absolute integrity, and that the JUDGES  —  administrators of justice —  will perform the duties of their office in strict compliance with the Code of Judicial Conduct and their Oath of Office to protect and preserve the constitutional rights of We the People. “It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error.” American Communications Ass’n v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382; 70 S.Ct. 674 (1950)

When a judge learns of the commission of a crime, he/she has choice; to perform his fiduciary duty to report that crime or to become a criminal; an accomplice to the crime.  See 18 USC  § 4.  Misprision of felony and 5 U.S.C. § 2635.101.  Basic obligation of public service, supra. 
 18  18 U.S.C. § 4, … whoever having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. 

Background:

A man is defined by his deeds. A man who commits despicable acts is by self-definition a despicable person. Bearing “false witness” against another is a despicable act.
From “Eternal Principles of Commercial Law:   “In Commerce, Truth is sovereign,”

[ Thou shalt not bear false witness ] (Exodus  20:16; Psalms 117:2; John 8:32; II Corinthians 13:8) 

Alan M. Black presides over a courtroom where criminal alteration of the audio record is vigorously condoned and protected. Black obstructed access to the audio record until after it could be edited. He conspired with the Office of District Attorney of Lehigh County to obstruct an investigation into the criminal alteration of audio records in his court.
Black perjures himself and suborns perjury of others, crimes against the State. He acted knowingly and intentionally to deprive persons of their civil and constitutional rights, a federal crime. He brought “false witness” against this Administrator.
When confronted with possible criminal charges for the alteration of audio records in his court, Alan M. Black took steps to conceal the crime, even suborning perjury of his court monitor, Diane Snell. Snell and Black conspired to mislead Hamoui’s attorney into believing that the audio tape copying machine was out-of-order. Black and Snell were determined to obstruct immediate access to a copy of the audio record. It is not unreasonable to conclude that Alan M. Black and Diane Snell were on a more important mission …. to conceal the “criminal” pattern and practice of Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas to edit audio tapes of court hearings, thereby engaging in a “criminal enterprise”. This obstruction ensures that the criminal operatives* who alter audio tapes would have the opportunity to continue to  illegally edit the original audio record.
* Court monitors have a duty to maintain exclusive custody of audio records. When the chain of custody is broken, the integrity of the audio record is compromised.

See JUDICIAL ATROCITIES: Hamoui.

Black subsequently conspired with the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (DBSC) to prosecute false charges against attorney Eugene A. Wrona, Administrator of PACOURTINJUSTICE.  Alan M. Black, the criminal, and the disciplinary board prosecuted the complaint with “unclean hands“.

Black filed a “retaliatory” disciplinary complaint [123 DB 2004] for the express purpose of inflicting irreparable harm upon the character and reputation of Eugene A. Wrona. A collateral purpose was to remove a “whistle-blower” lawyer from the practice of Law when that lawyer demonstrates the integrity to report judicial misconduct.  See 18 Pa.C.S. § 4953. Retaliation. 

Government officials are barred from bringing charges they would not have pursued absent retaliatory motive, regardless of whether they had probable cause to do so. MOORE v. HARTMAN, No. 03-5241 (D.C. Cir. 2004)

Black initiated the disciplinary action in retaliation for accusations and allegations that he, Alan M. Black, was engaged in assisting an attorney, Susan G. Maurer, Esq., violate the Rules of Professional Conduct. [Slusaw case] In so doing, Black was violating Canon 3.B(4) of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The alleged reason Black offered in testimony at the disciplinary hearings is PRETEXT, a false cover for his TRUE retaliatory motive.
Note: Susan G. Maurer was “opposing counsel” in each instance of an edited audio tape. She was also identified by an Assistant D.A. as one of 4 persons who had access to the “original” audio tape in judge Ford’s courtroom. 

Black’s Complaint against this Administrator was fabricated in collusion with DBSC attorney(s) (Alan J. Davis et al). This false prosecution joins the DBSC with Alan M. Black as “criminals” and should require the DBSC to answer to the same crimes as Alan M. Black. The Complaint accuses Wrona of making false statements about a judge in violation of Rules of Professional Conduct (“RPC”) Rule 8.2(a). Black fails to identify with any specificity any individual remarks by the accused against the judge that are “false”. DBSC failed to present “evidence” on the record of the hearing. The respondent was denied is right to face his accusers with material evidence.
Prior to the hearings, DBSC submitted a List of Exhibits that allegedly proves that Wrona made false statements about Black. Among these exhibits is a “flyer” to Impeach Black which was distributed by the defendant outside the courthouse accusing judge Black of UNACCEPTABLE CONDUCT. DBSC included this Flyer in the list of Exhibits for the Board.
During the hearings, DBSC refused (failed) to introduce this Flyer into evidence.
The Flyer contains 18 accusations against the judge (Black).
Black’s Complaint fails to refute even one of the 18. In other words, all 18 accusations made about Alan M. Black on that FLYER are TRUE.
It is Not Surprising that DBSC did Not enter the Exhibit into evidence and that the “DBSC hearing panel”  Did NOT PERMIT the accused respondent to place this Flyer into evidence.
Black and DBSC are unable to identify ONE FALSE STATEMENT by the accused against the Complainant.

The record preserves irrefutable evidence that Alan M. Black used his office for the benefit of Susan G. Maurer in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Code of Judicial Conduct and his Oath of Office. Such action satisfies the definition of “Corruption” found in Black’s Law, 6th Ed.

Alan M. Black is comparable to Michael Nifong. He deserves equal consideration from the State Attorney General.

CRIMINALS ARE RUNNING OUR COURTS!

FACTS

Alan M. Black presided over two cases where attorney Wrona represented clients in Lehigh County ‘family’ court. In both cases [Hamoui and Slusaw] audio records of court hearings were “criminally” edited prior to the certification of the transcribed record. Third person Affidavits and Testimony identify discrepancies in the audio records.

The Hamoui and Slusaw cases will be available for review in the Judicial Atrocities section. Both cases illustrate irrefutable evidence of judicial and criminal misconduct by officers of the court.

Attorney Wrona appealed to Governor Edward G. Rendell to convene an investigating grand jury for the purpose of investigating the conduct of Alan M. Black (and others) in Lehigh County Court to determine whether judge Black:

  • is an accessory to the criminal alteration of audio records in his court; See 18 Pa.C.S. § 4911 – Tampering with public records or information.
  • conspired with the Lehigh County Office of District Attorney to obstruct a party’s right to file criminal charges for the illegal alteration of audio records;
  • conspired with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, to wit, Alan J. Davis, Esquire, to bring false charges against [attorney Wrona] with the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, case # 123 DB 2004;
  • perjured himself in documents to the Judicial Conduct Board; #
  • perjured himself in his testimony before the Disciplinary Board;
  • conspired with the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, to wit, Alan J. Davis, Esquire, to suborn the perjury of others in the disciplinary action against attorney Wrona;
  • suborned the perjury of court monitor Diane Snell;
  • knowingly conspired with others to admit perjured testimony of one or more witnesses in a custody matter;
  • conspired [with] Susan G. Maurer, Esquire, to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct; RPC 1.5(a)(4) among others;
  • violates the Code of Judicial Conduct, including Canon 3.B(4);
  • engaged in conduct that constitutes NEGLECT OF DUTY, MALFEASANCE, or [any] CORRUPT ACT OR PRACTICE.

Hamoui filed a formal complaint with the Judicial Conduct Board. When the complaint was quashed without an investigation, Hamoui filed a Petition to Impeach Alan M. Black with the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. The House neglected its duty under the Constitution of Pennsylvania, and took NO ACTION.

Further, Black conspired with court monitor Diane Snell to falsely state that the machine used to copy audio records was broken, an intentional lie (perjury) to obstruct defendant’s access to the audio record until after the audio record could be criminally edited.

Alan M. Black and Diane Snell become accessories to the criminal alteration of court records.

Black also obstructed the “Discovery” process, violating Pa. Rules of Civil Procedure, the Code of Judicial Conduct and his Oath of Office, failing to perform the duties of his office with fidelity.

CONCLUSION

Non-custodial parents have been irreparably harmed by the corrupt and criminal practices of Lehigh County judges, including Alan M. Black. His covert actions to undermine the constitution and the rights of non-custodial parents qualifies Alan M. Black as a “domestic terrorist” – a criminal at war with the federal and State Constitutions.

Alan M. Black is a “criminal” under 18 USC 242 for conspiring with others to deprive persons of their civil rights, and as an accessory, if not a participant, in the criminal alteration of audio records in his courtroom. See 18 Pa.C.S. 4911. The victims of these crimes deserve and are entitled to remedial action by the government. The extent of the remedies, including reparations to victims, will be discussed with each case.

Farouk Hamoui has been irreparably harmed by the despicable criminal misconduct of Alan M. Black and his associates. Eugene A. Wrona has been irreparably harmed by the insidious, despicable, malicious and evil conduct initiated by Alan M. Black.

Alan M. Black epitomizes the deceit, arrogance and despotism that permeates the ‘family’ courts of Pennsylvania. Black was afforded the opportunity to DENY in Affidavit form each of the above charges. He chose to remain silent. By his silence, Black admits the TRUTH of every accusation and allegation brought against him by Eugene A. Wrona and others. He is forever estopped from denying the truth of these accusations, and therefore stands ‘convicted’ by his silence.

Alan M. Black is a “criminal” under 18 USC § 242 for conspiring with others to deprive persons of their civil rights, and as a participant or accessory in the despicable criminal alteration of audio records in his courtroom. See 18 Pa.C.S. § 4911. Black is a LIAR and a PERJUROR for attempting to conceal his involvement in the criminal alteration of audio records, and for knowingly and intentionally bringing “false charges” against attorney Wrona.

Alan M. Black commits egregious violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct and his [sacred] Oath of Office. He engages in acts of moral turpitude that satisfies the parameters for Impeachment under Title 11 PACODE § 11.8-806 for engaging in corrupt acts or practices.

DEMAND

In order to clear his name and Restore his Sacred Honor and Reputation for integrity, Eugene A. Wrona confronts Alan M. Black, the father of 2 children, with the ultimate litmus test for Truth and Integrity. Wrona challenges Alan M. Black to look his children in the eye, and DENY before each of his children that he did not knowingly and intentionally violate: the rights of litigants in his court; the Code of Judicial Conduct; and his Oath of Office. His Denial must speak to each and every allegation listed in the demand for an Investigating Grand Jury and those charges brought forward in this indictment of his character.

Based on the uncontested TRUTH of the criminal accusations and allegations against him, Alan M. Black is a disgrace to the legal profession and unfit for office. He must be investigated for impeachment by the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. His conduct undermines the integrity of the judicial system. Disbarment is appropriate. Anything less infers consent and complicity.

Every elected official pursuant to impeachment proceedings may be impeached, suspended or removed from office in the event of mental incapacity, incompetency, neglect of duty, malfeasance , mismanagement or for any corrupt act or practice.
Title 11 PACODE 11.8-806. Grounds for Removal  – Impeachment.

Our Constitution and Laws provide for the removal from office of public officers whose conduct includes “any corrupt act or practice”. Criminal misconduct or “Dishonesty” or “Neglect of Duty” by a public officer in the performance of his/her duty is a “corrupt act or practice”.

We the People must demand that all public officers found guilty of “corrupt acts or practices” be removed from office. This is only a first step.

Legislators in Pennsylvania’s House of Representatives have a Duty under their Oath of Office to investigate Alan M. Black for impeachment. His performance includes criminal misconduct, “Dishonesty” and “Neglect of Duty” that undermines the integrity of the judicial system. Disbarment is appropriate. Anything less infers consent and complicity. Pending the findings of the impeachment investigation, Black should be suspended from further participation in any judicial proceedings.

No one is above the Law. Judges are NOT afforded immunity from criminal prosecution. As an accomplice and accessory to the criminal alteration of audio records in his court, Black must be prosecuted under the law. It is irrelevant whether the crimes were committed in the personal or professional conduct of the perpetrator. When a prima facie case supports accusations of criminal misconduct, the accused must be prosecuted under Pennsylvania criminal statutes and suffer the penalties for those crimes.

By his evil and malicious covert actions, Alan M. Black is proven to be a despicable person without Honor and lacking integrity. He has earned the title of “domestic terrorist” for undermining the Constitution of the United States. He practices his EVIL with a smug arrogance that Alan M. Black is above the Law;

i.e.HE IS GOD!

 

May God have mercy on his soul.

 

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Dis-Honorable Mention:

Diane Snell  —  Court Monitor

Kimberly Brader  —  Court Monitor

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

 

The Hamoui and Slusaw cases and the disciplinary case [ 123 DB 2004 ] are in development and will appear soon at this site. Check frequently for updates.

Eugene A. Wrona (Administrator) offers no apology for any lack of decorum or civility in his description of this Nominee. Details published with the Judicial Atrocities cases and the Disciplinary case [123 DB 2004] justify the plain truthful language employed.

2 thoughts on “Judge Alan M. Black

  1. Andrea McLaren

    Injustice to McLaren in the matter of Miller vs McLaren. Unbelievably wrongful forced settlement ruling against Defendant McLaren after a trial outcome that was declared a hung jury. Read Google info about case which Alan Black presiding Judge.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *