Luthmann Presses Judge to Find Fresh Perjury Charges Against Special Prosecutor Nelson
Frank Parlato: What will Justice Mundy do?
Investigative journalist Frank Parlato of the Frank Report (www.frankreport.com) is currently investigating the 2018 prosecution of Richard Luthmann for criminal impersonation in New York State.
This publication has raised questions about the appointment of Staten Island Special Prosecutor Eric Nelson.
Nelson’s recent court filing in People v. Luthmann is larded with new perjury by the Special Prosecutor.
Now Frank Parlato asks:
What will Justice Mundy do?
“The next move is Mundy’s, and that move may define her in times to come as either a political operative or serious jurist and as one who, in taking the path less traveled, may have made all the difference.”
Parlato writes:
In People v. Taylor, the New York State Court of Appeals stated that a Supreme Court Justice retains the ability to decide a criminal case with a “fundamental matter” at issue. This rule has applied to situations where there is egregious conduct – i.e., a prosecutor knows the evidence presented in a case is false.
Nelson’s alleged actions are not limited to knowledge of false evidence. Nelson is alleged to be complicit in its fabrication.
Moreover, Nelson utilized a disbarred attorney as his “legal advisor” to assist him in abdicating his proper role as advisor to the grand jury.
Nelson, avoiding instructing the grand jury, who had sincere questions about the First Amendment, instead admonished grand jurors when they began asking questions.
Nelson shepherded and appears to have suborned Judge Castorina’s demonstrably false statements, which Nelson should have known to be false because he billed taxpayers for reading the records.
Nelson represented himself and this case as genuine and forthright.
But a pattern emerges where it can be argued Nelson sold a web of deceit spun with perjury, collusion, lies, and other criminal behavior – and his dishonesty before the Court continues.
Will Justice Mundy order Nelson to appear before her and explain himself? Will she dismiss Nelson as Special Prosecutor? Will she give Luthmann an opportunity to be heard and vacate this conviction larded with criminal misconduct of judges and prosecutors?
Or will Judge Mundy choose not to examine a matter rife with suspicious conduct by those whose positions of power warrant scrutiny of a kind that is not less but should be more than they heaped on Luthmann, an attorney who built some Facebook pages?
A district attorney, his wife a judge, a witless and dishonest special prosecutor, and a state assemblyman, now a judge, all living on an island, which was too small for all of them and Luthmann.
This is as much a test of the judiciary and Mundy as it is of Nelson, McMahon, and Castorina.
This is not over, nor was it over when the powers needed to deceive a grand jury about the First Amendment rights of Luthmann, and they indicted him in consequence.
No, it is not over. It has barely just begun. The next move is Mundy’s, and that move may define her in times to come as either a political operative or serious jurist and as one who, in taking the path less traveled, may have made all the difference.