North Carolina State Bar unsuccessfully attempts to gag Attorney Betsy Wolfenden

After Attorney Betsy Wolfenden testified at her State Bar deposition on 1/29/10 to the dysfunction and corruption in 15-B District Court, the State Bar filed a motion to seal the transcript from public view, which was denied.

Betsy Wolfenden's deposition transcript

Comments

What are they trying to hide?

the State Bar filed a motion to seal the transcript from public view

Truth

I have spoken the truth and it is ugly.

Betsy

Betsy J. Wolfenden

and if ONLY a tenth of this...

...is true? Would that help or hurt her case against the, how many is it now, four? seven? nine people she is suing?

http://www.ncbar.com/orders/wolfenden%20order%20of%20discipline%20ocr.pdf

In my humble opinion IF even a tenth of this is true........ If it is all a horrible conspiracy perpetrated by every single attorney [except MadameJusticeWatch, of course], clerk, judge, police office, office assistant, paralegal, sheriff's deputy, bailiff, gossiper, tape-recorder, CD-recorder, court reporter, Plaintiff, Defendant, witness, and bystander in Orange County from 2005 through last week, well "Shame on them...ALL hundreds, perhaps thousands, of them."

You will have to read the transcript and decide for yourself

I think the State Bar wanted to hide my defense from the public. It was an extreme move, taking into consideration the First Amendment. After their motion was denied, the State Bar prevented me from testifying at my public hearing by holding the hearing while I was home recuperating from bronchitis. Not very American.

Betsy J. Wolfenden

Betsy J. Wolfenden

The State Bar and the First Amendment...Not a good fit?

I am cheering for Wolfenden. The allegations against her are pretty serious and it seems that she is the underdog with big, sharp teeth. The State Bar, and I hesitate to broad brush the whole agency, but the State Bar may need a bit of a re-organization. Allegations of corruption and favoritism have haunted them for years [THE PROSECUTION OF DAVID HOKE AND DEBRA GRAVES]. The State Bar president, Barbara Weyher, is involved in a lawsuit and she and her attorney co-defendants have done everything to quash the information including trying to get the pro se litigant incarcerated. The fight is on though and neither side seems willing to give an inch. http://yatesmclambandweyher.blogspot.com/

Do the right thing Chief Justice Parker

Chief Justice Sarah Parker; Do the right thing and remove Chief District Court Judge Joseph M. Buckner from the bench.

This is very disturbing.

I've just had the opportunity to read this transcript. I'd really like to learn more about this - was it covered anywhere by NC media?

Trading court orders for sex

You would have thought that because the judge in question was sued in 1998 for sexual harassment by his assistant for "permeating the courthouse with sexual innuendo and proposition," my allegation that his sexual addiction continued and is at the core of the dysfunction and corruption in 15-B District Court, would have garnered media attention, but so far it has not.

Like any addict, this judge needs enablers, and some attorneys in 15-B District Court have learned that they are rewarded with favorable rulings from the judge if they remain silent when he cancels his docket in the middle of the day and leaves the courthouse, refuses to enter court orders, lies in court, ignores the law, engages in ex parte communications with opposing counsel, fails to recuse himself from cases in which he has had sex with one of the attorneys, and bullies female attorneys he does not find sexually attractive. In other words, some attorneys in 15-B District Court are making money off the judge's mental illness.

It is my understanding that numerous complaints have been made to the North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, but that the Commission has not taken action. One reason may be that if this judge is found to be mentally ill in 2010 when he clearly needed mental health treatment back in 1998, it puts into question many if not all of his court rulings since 1998, and that's a huge can of worms his employer, the State of North Carolina, does not want opened.

Here is one 15-B District Court litigant's story:

www.courthouseforum.com/forums/view.php?id=1063291

Betsy J. Wolfenden

Betsy J. Wolfenden

Good grief

First of all, you SKIPPED your hearing before the Bar because you were home sick? Wow! Obviously, you really cared about your law license! I can only assume that your attorney filed a motion to continue the hearing and that the motion was denied by the DHC? So, in response to this adverse ruling, you decided that the Bar was wrong to deny your motion to continue and you stayed home any way? Your law license was on the line and you stayed home to rest? And then you proceed to characterize this series of events as "the State Bar prevented me from testifying at my public hearing?" How about you take some responsibility for your own poor decisions? Am I correct in assuming your attorney wasn't exactly thrilled with your decision to stay home while the hearing was conducted in your absence?

Second, I've read your deposition transcript (great read, by the way) and you had no more basis to allege that Judge Buckner was mentally ill than you claim the Bar had to allege that you were mentally ill in your defamation claim against it. As evidence for accusing a sitting judge of "sex addiction," you point to a sexual harassment lawsuit that was filed against him (but never adjudicated) and then you gloss over the rest of this supposed evidence with phrases like "it's common knowledge that he's had sex with numerous female attorneys in Orange County." You acknowledge to the Bar's attorney that this is courthouse gossip yet seem to think the gossip was "pervasive enough" to become an adequate basis to disparage a sitting judge. Oh, I forgot, he had sex with your legal assistant's roommate! Never mind, that sounds like enough evidence to put your license on the line!

I look forward to reading more about all of this. It is very entertaining. And if the Court of Appeals rules in your favor and holds that skipping one's disciplinary hearing before the Bar is a constitutionally protected activity and gives you back your license, I think you should form a partnership with Madame Justice. And then do a reality TV show. Seriously.

Getting the facts straight

Ms. Wolfenden, your reply illustrates one of your problems -- you didn't get your facts straight before making some very serious allegations about a sitting judge. You did NOT accuse Judge Buckner of being a "sexual harasser" as you state in your reply above. You accused him of being a "sex addict" and suffering from "sex addiction." There's actually a difference between the two. One is a tort; the other is a condition whereby a person cannot manage their sexual behavior. If every word of Ms. Riley's complaint was true (and if you had personal knowledge of this truth -- which you clearly do not), then you would have an adequate basis to state that Judge Buckner is a sexual harasser. However, the conduct described in the complaint does not describe a sexual addiction, which you accused the judge of suffering from. Perhaps we arguing semantics but semantics become very important when one is accusing a judge of unfitness.

You also accused the judge of using illicit drugs in open court and the only basis you cited was the "word on the street." Can you not see how this could easily be interpreted as a "reckless disregard" for the truth?

I understand you think Judge Buckner is a terrible jurist and perhaps you are correct. But it appears to me that you have allowed your negative feelings about him to overshadow your own professional responsibilities. If you're going to state a judge is unfit, you better be prepared to back your opinion up with something besides gossip and flawed logic. And you're STILL doing it by writing on this blog that this judge suffers from a mental illness without having a shred of evidence to support it.

As for Ms. Riley's settlement, it's pretty clear you have no idea why she agreed to settle. I don't either. But she did for some reason. As an attorney who I assume has represented a defendant before, you must realize how unfair and misleading it is for someone to recite allegations from a complaint in a disputed lawsuit as true fact. Using this logic, President Obama was born in Kenya because Orly Taitz filed a complaint saying so.

Sexual addict verses sexual harasser

You obviously weren't in the courtroom. Get a copy of the court transcript from your source and I'd be happy to discuss it with you line by line after you have identified yourself.

As far as semantics go:

Behaviors associated with sexual addiction include:

Compulsive masturbation (self-stimulation)
Multiple affairs (extra-marital affairs)
Multiple or anonymous sexual partners and/or one-night stands
Consistent use of pornography
Unsafe sex
Phone or computer sex (cybersex)
Prostitution or use of prostitutes
Exhibitionism
Obsessive dating through personal ads
Voyeurism (watching others) and/or stalking
Sexual harassment
Molestation/rape

Sexual addiction

Betsy J. Wolfenden

Betsy J. Wolfenden

paging Doctor Wolfenden...

Signs and symptoms of paranoid schizophrenia may include:
* Auditory hallucinations, such as hearing voices
* Delusions, such as believing a co-worker wants to poison you
* Anxiety
* Anger
* Aloofness
* Violence
* Verbal confrontations
* Patronizing manner
* Suicidal thoughts and behavior

Schizophrenia is a group of severe brain disorders in which people interpret reality abnormally. Schizophrenia may result in some combination of hallucinations, delusions and disordered thinking and behavior. The ability of people with schizophrenia to function normally and to care for themselves tends to deteriorate over time.

Signs and symptoms of schizoaffective disorder may include:

* Strange or unusual thoughts or perceptions
* Paranoid thoughts and ideas
* Delusions — having false, fixed beliefs
* Hallucinations, such as hearing voices
* Unclear or confused thoughts (disorganized thinking)
* Bouts of depression
* Manic mood or a sudden increase in energy and behavioral displays that are out of character
* Irritability and poor temper control
* Thoughts of suicide or homicide
* Irrelevant or incoherent speech
* Catatonic behavior — lack of response, sometimes with an extreme agitation that's not influenced by the environment
* Deficits in attention and memory
* Lack of concern about hygiene and physical appearance
* Changes in energy and appetite
* Sleep disturbances, such as difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep

If one looks only at what you want to look at, anyone can be diagnosed with something. It seems like Ms. Wolfenden is (was) not only a Juris Doctor, but also a Medical Doctor, hence the diagnosis of the Judge based on rumors, innuendos, and her general dislike for him. I'm very glad my own doctor doesn't diagnose me based on what someone standing on a street corner "...heard whispered...by someone...sometime...at someplace..." because I think that would be malpractice and justify him losing his medical license.

Calling Out

I think SQUIB and GRIZZLY are a little too close to this case for their comfort. I bet they might even be some of the folks Ms. Wolfenden is fighting against. It appears to me like they might be attempting to silence Ms. Wolfenden's attempts to bring out the truth of what is really going on.

call me out...

....all you want. I'm sorry, what was YOUR name again?

It appears that no one can silence anyone. Charles Manson, despite his obvious disconnect from reality, is not silent despite his murders, prison life, etc. And I seriously doubt that my comments on this Blog are going to silence the good Doctor or her conspiracy-theorist followers. My best guess is that the most my posts might do is point out the fallacies, irrational postings, and absurd reasoning that the Doctor continues to post despite a complete lack of evidence.

And I am not one of the people the Doctor is fighting against...unless you are talking about "all sane people." Then, yes, I am one of them. But still not a Mormon.

Wow, somebody took that

Wow, somebody took that personally....I'm guessing I know why :)