2nd Article: Some Attorneys at Dinkes & Schwitzer Still Run Amok Despite “Former” Colleague, William R. Hamel On Trial for Alleged Bribery- UPDATE
August 4, 2011 § 30 Comments
The Tribulations and Trials of the Trio, Hamel, Jensen, and Schwitzer at Dinkes & Schwitzer-
Well as promised, we are keeping you up to date on the above-mentioned law firm on what seems to be their road to ruin.
Profiling Hamel in the 1st degree:
Hamel, according to our sources is known in the community as this railed and hunched over bird-like creature who has tremendous trouble with authority-which is something that has gotten him in trouble in the first place. They say people are not enamored with him -quite the contrary as he exudes airs of “Uday” dictatorship exacting revenge if he thinks he is being challenged. Satisfying his needy nature seems to be what comes first not the clients case.
Let us examine some circumstances. Firstly, William R. Hamel, is on trial for alleged bribery, Whereas he is accused, and the activities are alleged, we find the charges hard to dispute as according to the Felony Complaint, as he was, among other things, recorded by the government in the act. (Felony Complaint # 04794-2009)
In fact apparently so did the judge who in May 2011, in a Motion to Dismiss, filed by Hamel and his defense attorney denied the motion. One has to wonder at quick glance, what Hamel based this motion on. Maybe he thought his voice didn’t sound good enough on the government’s alleged recording of him, and/or he wasn’t photogenic in the government pictures taken of him allegedly in the act, or simply that he, Hamel, that may think he is a lawyer who is above the law. We don’t know. But we do know that his arrogance is beyond that of imagination given the alleged evidence against him. We tend to think he’s guilty.
Whatever, we may think, the judge in the case wouldn’t have any of it.- And it’s a good thing and that’s not alleged. As Hamel is now working behind the scenes at Dinkes & Schwitzer, which is why we put the word “Former” in the headline in quotes. Additionally, Dinkes & Schwitzer refuses to reveal to clients and the world, whether or not Hamel is allowed to practice. Dinkes & Schwitzer removed Hamel from their roster of lawyers on their website. They’ve also removed his picture that was prominently posted on the same. So why are they loathe to reveal Hamel’s law license status? Has it been revoked, temporarily or permanently? Or is he allowed to practice while the government has exacted Criminal Charges against him?
If he is allowed to practice why eradicate him from their own website. Why hide him in the background? And why not reveal this information to whomever? Fear of guilt by association? If he’s not guilty, why fear the association.
Articles regarding his alleged criminal activities have been reported by other news outlets, including, The Daily News, (deservedly calling Hamel “ambulance chasing”), and Law.com, (one of the law profession’s own news journals), that sought comment from Hamel only to be rebuffed by being informed he was out of the office at that time.
Beyond his own legal troubles, we do know that he leads the Dinkes & Schwitzer office with a vengeful, iron and despotic fist as Dinkes & Scwitzer has been defendant in other cases, i.e., Thomas v. Dinkes & Schwitzer where they were accused of, among other things, unjust enrichment and fraud. The details of the case can be found at this url in addition to othersBeyond his own legal troubles, we do know that he leads the Dinkes & Schwitzer office with a vengeful, iron and despotic fist as Dinkes & Scwitzer has been defendant in other cases, i.e., Thomas v. Dinkes & Schwitzer where they were accused of, among other things, unjust enrichment and fraud. The details of the case can be found at this url in addition to others: http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2010/2010_51666.htm Now, they got off on a legal technicality, because the former client was pro se, (the poor ex-client didn’t know of the specific and rules to follow in a complaint in small claims court), we find it no coincidence that he and other persons have sued them. But we find it no coincidence that he and other persons have sued them.
In fact, to instill and create such anger in clients says plenty in negative terms in regard to this law firm, Dinkes & Schwitzer. And there’s more-we’ll reserve it for the next article as these guys have a false sense of influential protection and security.
Readers, his Court date in Bronx Criminal Court is August 23, 2011-only 20 days away. Let’s see what else he and as one reader called them, Dinkees and Shyters, try to pull…….Stay tuned