LIT COMMENTARY
In this 11th Circuit appeal sat a 3 panel of Judges William Pryor, Jill Pyror (no relation) and a judge sitting by designation. Judge Jill Pryor apparently recused herself AFTER oral argument. Apart from the final order (a footnote confirms her recusal) affirming the conviction of the lower court for disgraced Florida Attorney Livoti, there is nothing on the docket to suggest Jill Pryor recused, either by order or notation on the docket. We would have expected such as it is an untimely recusal, so late in proceedings.
The same was true in the Burkes’ case (19-13015), where she denied the first recusal in an order and then immediately sealed the Burkes recusal motion – to which the Burkes refiled a 2nd recusal and to which she refused to respond, yet in the interim another 5 appellate judges would be assigned at some point to the Burkes case. Weird huh. We think so, it’s what you do when you’re trying to cover up FRAUD. That’s right, what they affirm in this sentence below for Livoti, they do themselves, “Fraud Upon Fraud” is the term judges seem to use today.
What’s even more interesting in the oral arguments is Aileen Cannon, then a prosecutor, was presenting oral argument before the 3-panel and she is now a sitting judge as of January 1st, 2021 – supposedly replacing retiring Senior Judge Ken Marra at S.D. Fl. Marra’s feet are stuck in glue and the same is true as regards the Burke’s complaint with now Chief Judge Bill Pryor – yup, that’s right – the same Pryor in this panel…the Burkes complaint looks like it’s heading for it’s first annual anniversary of percolatin’.
Read on and watch the video towards the end of this article…it’s confirmation that federal judges practice the ‘rule of law’ when they feel like it and become mob Outlaws in Robes (legal term is committing a conspiracy) when it concerns the judiciary.
That’s why judges judgin’ judges is a very, very bad idea.
WHY DID JUDGE JILL A. PRYOR, 11TH CIR., RECUSE AFTER ORAL ARGUMENT?
Judge Aileen M. Cannon Judicial Nomination Questionnaire
Broward lawyer gets 10 years in prison for $826 Million Dollar Scam
April 1, 2014 | Republished by LIT; Jan 26, 2021
Well-known South Florida lawyer Anthony Livoti Jr. was sentenced to 10 years in federal prison Tuesday for his role in a massive life insurance investment scheme that defrauded 30,000 investors worldwide.
He was also ordered to pay more than $826 million in restitution.
Shackled and dressed in khaki jail scrubs, Livoti showed the emotion of a scared man fighting to save himself from spending the rest of his life in prison — but he also displayed the skills of a tough attorney who fought for his clients in more than 40 years of lawyering.
“I had a life that was always filled with joy. I now have a life that is filled with sadness,” Livoti said, speaking of the three months that he has already spent locked up in the Federal Detention Center in Miami since his conviction.
Livoti, 65, of Fort Lauderdale, was best known as a police union lawyer and for his advocacy work for the gay community. He was convicted in December after a three-month trial.
The Ponzi scheme bought out life insurance policies at discount prices from seniors and people who were dying of AIDS, cancer and other terminal conditions. In what became known as the Mutual Benefits Corp. scam, led by Joel Steinger, (who received 20 years jail time out of a possible 50 year sentence) the policies were sold to investors who expected to make a profit by receiving the full insured value when the beneficiaries died.
Appellants and Denied Lower Court Intervenors Give Notice to Eleventh Circuit About Judge Jill Pryor
It is obvious the Burkes intend to file a second motion to disqualify Judge Pryor based the on new facts raised (sealing the motion to disqualify and refusing to unseal with ‘one-liner’ orders) and after the court denied the Burkes’ first motion to disqualify.
Every Tom, Dick and Harry Wants to Seal Records, But That’s Not How the Courts’ Work. Well, Theoretically
Secrecy is fine at the discovery stage, before the material enters the judicial record. But those documents, usually a small subset of all discovery, that influence or underpin the judicial decision are open to public inspection unless they meet the definition of trade secrets or other categories of bona fide long-term confidentiality.
Motion to Intervene is a Right of The Press and the Public
The public thus has a right to access complaints in pending cases, in the weeks before an answer is filed, in the months while a motion to dismiss may be pending, and after any motion to dismiss is granted.
