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 Has it been revoked, temporarily or permanently?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

.

Advertisements

§ 30 Responses to 2nd Article: Some Attorneys at Dinkes & Schwitzer Still Run Amok Despite “Former” Colleague, William R. Hamel On Trial for Alleged Bribery- UPDATE

  • Robin says:

    It’s remarkable in support of me to have a site, which is beneficial in favor of my experience.
    thanks admin

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      You are welcome too.

      Our mission is to stop these guys from the alleged further abuse of people who are already injured and those who have the intellect and the courage to fight them.

      We are so proud of the litigant!

      Like

  • my life went to hell – those arrogant bastards took my life away. nothing but false promises then kicked me out the door. sinse case ended ive been to living in a painful way emotionaly n physically i hope they suffer eternally. i still would like to know w

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      Dinkes & Schwitzer : No matter how much and to whom, you pay for FALSE positive reviews to be published on the internet, we will not stop publishing the TRUE Negative reviews.

      Dear Reader,

      Thank you for your comment. Your sentiment is very common as it is just one among many. We here at WNM, have to wonder if Dinkes & Schiwtzer skimmed money from your settlement–if you had one, which is what so many of our readers and members of the audience have been telling us and what Dinkes & Schwitzer are allegedly infamous for doing. Please go to this link per the New York Daily News: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/7-bronx-hospital-workers-arrested-bribes-accused-helping-crooked-clinics-insurance-scam-article-1.406941.

      The New York Daily News doesn’t hesitate to alert people about Dinkes & Schiwtzer’s/William Hamel alleged illegal skimming from settlements.

      If you feel that they stole money from you we suggest that you alert the New York State Office of the Attorney General, (OAG) as from what you describe, and what our articles have shown, William Hamel and Dinkes & Schwitzer were allegedly continuing and hiding their alleged illegal racket, from the OAG while Hamel was on trial for the charges exacted against him, plea bargaining and paying a $300K Fine, and being released on a Conditional Discharge–AND need we say that the Conditional Discharge meant that William Hamel was not to violate the law during his encounter with the OAG to fight such charges or after his encounter to fight such charges.

      Please also read our most recent articles. We have just posted what allegedly is proof, in the form of a letter, that William Hamel and Dinkes & Schwitzer were allegedly taking bribes while Hamel was fighting Federal charges for exactly that!

      Like

  • Eunice says:

    I just like the valuable info you provide for your articles.
    I will bookmark your weblog and take a look at once more here
    regularly. I am reasonably sure I will be told a lot of new stuff right right here!
    Best of luck for the following!

    Like

  • Earle says:

    Hello, I think your
    website might be having browser compatibility
    issues. When I look at your
    blog in Ie, it looks fine but when
    opening in Internet Explorer, it has some overlapping. I just wanted to give
    you a quick
    heads up! Other then that, superb blog!

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      Thank you for the heads up and compliment.

      Regarding IE, we use the other browsers with good visual results, so we’ve not seen those you’re speaking of.

      Maybe it’s IE. Or maybe it’s actually Dinkes & Schwitzer trying to quell our efforts. We just don’t know. We say the latter as they’ve tried to monopolize the internet with as many falsely positive references and non-sensical publicity and ads paid by them to a PR company they’ve hired,— (we don’t know which).

      If you notice, you’ll see those other entries above and below this blog. Now really Readers, when have you ever seen that, we ask you?

      However, we can’t say for sure if this is the case. It’s just that we wouldn’t put it past them. After all you don’t see other law firms trying to post ads to lure unsuspecting innocent prospective clients that happen to be above and below a blog that announces their alleged, (need we repeat, Dear Readers, we are dedicated journalists who follow the rules of journalism so we are compelled to write “alleged” when we refer to Dinkes & Schwitzer’s alleged wrongdoings.)—-*****Please be aware though, Dear Audience, we are not compelled to believe or know their alleged illegalities are alleged–Need we say we don’t.*******

      But to return to our original thoughts, Dinkes & Schwitzer, as far as we know, are not known for playing fair. We’ve posted the testimonials and the Felony Complaint of the Office of the Attorney General of New York State to prove it.

      We might add, we take credit for most of the legal profession knowing about the alleged,(Really!) disrepute and dishonor of the subjects, of which we speak……….

      Like

  • Dave says:

    is it too late to switch lawyers 3 years in the case? i just feel they are taking way too long to take care of my case

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      We are not attorneys, however, as in any situation, if the customer/client is dissatisfied with no or substandard service, he needs to move on and or fire the firm/professional who is supposed to be providing that service.

      In our opinion 3 years with no results is way too long. Mind you this is a firm, that as we have seen, dysfunctions and is in disrepute. They are supposed to give you, –and in writing,– periodical/monthly updates on their progress. We suspect they’ve not done that. We also suspect they’ve not returned your calls–Lawyers are notorious for not returning calls–The nerve of them. If any other professional were to do that, they’d be fired on the spot!

      A Question you may want to ask is how far along are you in your case. Are you in the beginning, middle of your case or on the cusp of a settlement? If it’s the one of the 1st two, you may have a better chance of having another attorney take your case. No attorney wants a case at its end because supposedly they’ll get a lesser payment. And by the way YOU are in charge of what and how the attorneys divide any monies between them. (Check the Bar Association’s Rules of Professional Conduct)

      What we do know, and what everyone should know and what lawyers don’t like to hear—-but that is too bad as if more people would tell them what we are about to tell you their/the lawyers ears would not burn at the mere utterance of such– is that they are working for you, the client.

      Within the confines of the law and your case, they must do your bidding–not vice versa. You are boss.

      Furthermore, in our culture, –if the client fires a lawyer, the former is often looked at as a “difficult” client by the subsequent lawyer. It’s time that the stigma that is inflicted upon clients who want good service from their lawyers thus want to leave them, is removed. (For those of readers who may recall, it took years for patients to seek 2nd opinions and/or to switch doctors without a similar stigma imposed on them.) This is the 21st Century. Such stigmas are throwbacks to an ancient era when only doctors and lawyers were formerly educated. ——–That time is long passed. That philosophy is long passe.

      Having said all of the above, if you are still thinking of firing Dinkies and Shyster–(Er- we mean Dinkes & Schwitzer, Hamel, Schwitzer, Jensen…..) we would suggest you find a new lawyer first; someone you trust and have a good feeling about–(Do as much research as you can. See how many cases they’ve won. And when you sign a Retainer make sure that such things as agreeing to periodical progress updates are included, —in writing).

      Also of essential importance: get your records. If they filed it in court, go there and see what and if they’ve done anything. –Knowing them however, the “if” is more likely. Tell them you want to see your records– in full–They’re not going to like it. But so be it. Incidentally, the more they dislike it, the more you know that unethical and possibly illegal behavior is going on/is and has been ongoing.

      As a caveat: if any attorney refuses to put that or anything else in writing, then something is radically wrong.

      And finally, if you want to you want to base your research solely on your local Bar Association, or any other attorney organization, bear in mind that ofttimes, these organizations are staffed by attorneys who may be friends and colleagues of the lawyers you are complaining about. Therefore try to broaden your research, have the lawyer show you what cases they’ve won or tell you where to find the information on such. If you must go to the local Bar Association, or the like, take what they tell you with a grain or two of salt.

      Like

  • Right here is the right site for anyone who would like to find out about this topic. You understand so much it’s almost tough to argue with you. Not that I personally would want to. You certainly put a brand new spin on a topice that has been discussed for a long time. Wonderful stuff, just great!

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      Thank you. We hope we are helping to prevent more alleged victimization by Hamel, Dinkes & Schwitzer as a firm and the staff therefrom, and The Dinkes & Schwitzer Three.

      Like

    • Publisher says:

      We all thank you and agree. It’s so about time that these hoodlums were exposed so that they can no longer greedily harm the public. And mind you, just because your collar is white does not mean you’re not a hoodlum. In fact, we believe we’ve all learned within recent years, that, ‘the color of your collar is irrelevant to the commission of crime”.

      In fact very often white collar crime is far worse than blue collar as it effects so many more people.

      Like

  • John Doe says:

    I know a lot about the internal workings of the firm and Bill Hamel in particular. There is nothing he or the firm could ever do that would surprise me.

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      Nor us as more and more clients and employees, curent and former are coming to the fore to either tell us their terrible, and in some cases unlawful experiences at the hands of these “guardians of the law”. Others are justifiable commenting in the same vein. We say bravo to you all.

      Like

      • Ellie Rose says:

        As an ex-employee I can tell you that they are all very shady. William Schwitzer in particular. Hamel is at Schwitzers beck and call whenever Schwitzer yells from his office. SCHWITZER is the mastermind behind this and HAMEL is the FALL GUY, the PATSY. And their is NO DINKES because he has been deceased for quite sometime. They lose client files constantly as well as LIE to their clients who are none the wiser regularly. They take advantage of unknowing, unsuspecting and misinformed clients who are mostly Hispanics and who quite often do not speak English. There are cases that have been in that office for over 10 years for absolutely NO REASON. Schwitzer also has tricks up his sleeve when it comes to trials. He will have his Hispanic staff sit behind him at the trial in order to gain the jurors admiration and trust. He will have his Caucasian staff sit on the defendant’s side of the court room in order for the jury to believe he is the good guy, the Robin Hood for injured minority workers. These are only a few of the tactics he uses regularly. HIs favorite story to tell is that of him growing up on a farm. Give me a break guy, you’ve been loaded ALL your life! There have been many a times where I have been in his office and his “interior decorator” comes by to pick up money. Hmmmm…. I am sure that many former -and unfortunately current clients- can attest to the lack of ethics morale and inconsistent work they have experienced at the hands of WILLIAM SCHWITZER. Schwitzer has been reported to the Dept of Labor on numerous occasions and will fire ANYONE on a whim. I remember an occasion where he threatened to fire me if I couldn’t miraculously get someone on the phone for him. Their system is so outdated it’s pathetic. For goodness sakes they use MICROSOFT ACCESS!!!! Not SAGA or some other law office specialized computer software. I can tell you HORROR stories from this place. I would have never taken the job had I known what I was getting into. However, as a poor, struggling college student with an ill relative, not too much legal experience, rent to pay and mouths to feed, what’s a girl to do? I was fired after about 2 years as the shelf life at Dinkes and Schwitzer isn’t too long. You are belittled and ridiculed on a regular basis not to mention YELLED at constantly. It’s ILLEGAL and it’s VERBAL ABUSE. It’s unfortunate because Dinkes who is deceased, had a wonderful reputation and was the founder of the firm along with a man named Morelli. Morelli left (or passed, not sure) and Dinkes put Schwitzer in his place. When Dinkes passed, everything was left to Schwitzer. MAKE NO MISTAKE PEOPLE IT IS SCHWITZER WHO IS BEHIND THIS and I am POSITIVE Hamel is getting a hefty sum to take the fall. Beth Diamond is also a conspirator as is Naomi Skura and Sylvia Butrymowicz. Naomi and Sylvia are avid cocaine abusers and it is my understanding that Sylvia has slept with doctors in exchange for their cooperation on cases. I don’t know what Joelle Jensen has to do with this but she came after this scandal broke out as did I. I believe they are being sued by 3 ex-paralegals who were fired because they were PREGNANT. I hope they win and I wish them the best. Schwitzer, Hamel, Diamond, Skura and Butrymowicz should be locked in a cage in GITMO somewhere. But EVERY dog has their day and I can’t wait until they get theirs! Thanks for the article.

        Like

        • Publisher says:

          Dear Reader,

          Firstly thank you for your input. Having said that we want to say that although we’ve never been an employee, we’ve heard other horrors from former ones, just like you. Though one has to wonder however, why you didn’t report them for their illegalities inflicted on you as well as on their poor unsuspecting clients who were suffering which is why they went to these hooligans in the first place.

          Since they’ve already been reported to the authorities, why didn’t you report them to the Department of Labor as well? Indeed, abusing employees is illegal. You may, (and we stress may as we are not lawyers), have grounds to at the least report them to the government. If we were abused and fired without cause, we would try to find out what our rights are. Surely you deserve better and in the end, you may,(again we stress may), be able to obtain deserved reparations.

          But additionally, and perhaps more importantly for the sake of the innocent clients who are the most vulnerable and thus, unfortunate victims of these alleged criminals, why didn’t you report Dinkes & Schwitzer to the authorities? These clients went to these bandits because they were injured or ill or victims in the first place.

          By going to the authorities–and we are talking about the governmental authorities– you may have been able to not only protect yourself but protect others from the clutches of alleged, probable outlaws.–(Dear readers, please always remember as we are moral journalists we are compelled to write the word alleged–To be sure, and euphemistic, we don’t doubt anything outside of the confines of the law, that by now, so many people tell us they’ve done, is alleged).

          We believe every negative testimonial posted by former clients, and former staff of Dinkes & Schwitzer’s–not to mention that of our readers, contacts, sources, and theirs and the government’s documents that we’ve seen–some of which we’ve posted.

          And, we must say that as far as we’ve heard Dinkes was as crooked as Schwitzer allegedly, (right!) is–and we believe it, since Dinkes put Schwitzer in the place of the former’s predecessor, he had to choose his equal in crime. It does not make sense that someone truly upstanding and honest would choose someone his diametric opposite.

          Furthermore, from what we’ve heard, our knowledge is thoroughly substantiated. Mind you, you say Dinkes has been deceased for quite a while and Dinkes & Schwitzer has clients’ files for 10 years. Well Dinkes hasn’t been dead for that long, (we looked it up), thus Dinkes had to know!–Sorry to burst a bubble here but what looks, smells and sounds like the truth, is so. You may want to look up an article published and posted by New york Magazine:
          http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/crimelaw/features/2323/ , about Morelli, whom you mention, was a former partner of the aforementioned and late, Dinkes. According to this article, which, be aware is under the crimelaw/features sections in New York Magazine, tells of, among other things when the partnership between them was dissolved, it was done via a court proceeding of which, the terms of the separation were sealed. We wonder why……….

          Now onto the infamous Hamel who is on trial in Bronx Supreme Court for Bribery: Whatever your experience with Hamel against whom, the Office of the Attorney General of New York has provided unmistakable and undeniable proof –because it is taped proof (of his crimes), no one could be paid enough to be anyone’s patsy, so that in doing so, their actions(s) of which, would yield them possible prison time, loss of their license to practice law, and a hefty fine as well.

          Dear Reader, we are talking about consequences that are tantamount to a life sentence, and in this instance, the terms of the outcome will NOT, (unlike the Dinkes v Morelli case,— we repeat the decision against Hamel, as it is a public criminal case, will not be sealed.

          Hamel was perfectly conscious of what he did and when he did it–as was Schhwitzer. Otherwise Schwitzer would have lots of “splainin” to do to his clients being unconscious while “practicing” law and unconsciously overseeing his unconscious lead attorney, Hamel, (who also has lots of “splainin” to do to the clients while also being unconscious), while practicing law and lawlessness.

          Need we add, you worked there, (so as you say) + according to you, Hamel chooses to answer to Schwitzer + Hamel chooses to allegedly take bribes, (mind you the evidence in the Felony Complaint, which was based on recordings of Hamel caught in the act of taking the bribes, proves he didn’t allegedly take bribes, but rather, SINCE HAMEL WAS CAUGHT IN THE ACT OF TAKING BRIBES ON TAPE ACCORDING TO THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW YORK’S FELONY COMPLAINT, the evidence proves Hamel did take bribes) = Hamel’s no fall guy, + (logically), + Schwitzer had to know about what was going on as well.

          As for the other henchman of the Dinkes & Schwitzer gang, that is, the ones mentioned in our articles as well as the ones you’ve mentioned, since we have heard from many former clients of Dinkes & Schwitzer who have been injured by Dinkes & Schwitzer’s lawyers and have come out worse than when they went in, we have absolutely no doubt that they know exactly what is going on, and are fully complicit. And we believe that because lawyers, just like everyone else, talk to each other, and there are no secrets within a law firm.

          Like

        • Publisher says:

          We would like to add as our Disclaimer displays that we are firstly not responsible for the opinions of others. And more importantly we are not responsible for the experiences of others as well.

          We do not know and thus cannot attest to whether Skura and Butrymowicz are Cocaine users/abusers or not.

          We however, have no reason to disbelieve you as they haven’t rebutted your feedback to us and they’ve had all the time and opportunity to do so.

          In fact we’ve repeatedly given Dinkes & Schwitzer ample opportunity to rebut any of our articles and assertions.

          We will say that when people dont’ defend themselves it’s usually because they can’t……..

          Like

    • Publisher says:

      Nor us as we’ve heard horror stories time and time again. As is evidenced by our readership, some of which have commented justifiably in the same vein–To whom we say bravo!. We have received comments from horrified, damaged clients as well as disgusted attorney colleagues who feel shame and ashamed that they are in the same profession. There are attorneys who really want to help clients and believe in the law and in our system in particular. These are not idealistic people. Rather these are hones people who wanted to become lawyers.

      Hamel, Dinkes & Schwitzer, The Dinkes & Schwitzer 3, taint the profession and every other lawyer by their actions we have enumerated in our articles.

      There is no difference between a blue collar criminal who is a serial criminal and serial white collar criminals. In fact oftimes, the latter is worse as they create and inflict themselves on more victims.These are alleged common criminals, (again we emphasize we write “alleged” due to journalistic ethics). As we have no tolerance for common recidivists we will state categorically, we have no tolerance for Hamel, Dinkes & Schwitzer, The Dinkes & Schwitzer 3, and whomever else allegedly promotes such criminality and are allegedly white collar recidivists.

      Like

    • Publisher says:

      From what you’ve written you didn’t take the job. How wise and advantageous for you. We too would not want a professional connection with them.

      Like

  • Concerned says:

    This animal has abused the trust people placed in him, as an officer of the court. He has harmed the reputation of the justice system, the legal profession, and injured victims everywhere. Decent injured claimants will suffer because people will remember what this creep has done. He is the corrupt apple that makes everyone cringe with disgust! I have no doubt that if Hamel is convicted, as he likely will be, the sentencing judge will make an example out of him. His firm should dissolve. They’ll never get out this one.

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      We have heard tell that the lawless, (in these instances the word “lawyers” which is supposed to conjure up thoughts of members of a noble profession cannot be used as it is malapropos), at Dinkes & Schwitzer continue to rack up more complaints from people who innocently signed up as clients not knowing that they, and their cases would, allegedly-(we write allegedly only because this is in print and as ethical journalists we are bound to do so by those ethics) be knifed in the back in favor of whatever opposing side.

      We’d love to hear more about your experiences. Please elaborate………

      Like

    • Ellie Rose says:

      RIGHT ON!

      Like

      • Publisher says:

        Well your comments continue to prove that the anti-Dinkes & Schwitzer Syndicate testimonials just keep on accumulating. They further prove that the Dinkes & Schwitzer Syndicate has no intention of stopping it’s alleged, (yeah, right!), shifty actions and inflicting them on upstanding citizens of the public.

        Perhaps the Felony indictment against William Hamel will be one among many against the members of the Dinkes & Schwitzer and William Hamel Syndicate……….

        Like

  • […] a look: 2nd Article: Some Attorneys at Dinkes & Schwitzer Still Run Amok Despite “Former” Colleague,…. This entry was posted in X. Problems with your lawyer and tagged Lawyers, problems with lawyers. […]

    Like

    • Publisher says:

      Have you noticed that since the we published this blog that Dinkes & Schwitzer have gone on a “positive” publicity campaign to try to counter our allegations?

      Please tell your story either on your blog or on ours. Those we’ve been hearing from would love to compare notes.

      It’s not going to help them…..As the truth will out, so does untruth.

      Like

      • Paula Rimer says:

        A current update – The infamous William R. Hamel and Dinkes & Schwitzer have recently filed a summons – based on a FRAUDULENT INJURY CASE! It is a shame that they are still allowed to “practice” and to continue this bogus charade – reprehensible! This is belligerence beyond belief!
        The facts of this situation have been presented to attorneys of companies who have been victimized – next will be the office of OAG and Cuomo’s offices along with the BAR association and the office of ethics.

        Like

        • Publisher says:

          We’ve no familiarity with what seems, (as this is in print, and we don’t know the facts, we are compelled to say, “seems”, however we are doubtful that, given Dinkes & Schwitzer’s and Hamel’s past and present misconduct, that any other accusation of misconduct is untrue–Past (mis)behavior is indicative of that of the present and future), to be yet more sinister activity by the notorious Dinkes & Schwitzer and William Hamel. Although, given their other atrocities, we wouldn’t put it past them.

          Are you a client? Please tell us more……

          As we have repeatedly said–and will continue to do so, and we have additionally published—- Hamel was indicted for Bribery—a Felony— in Bronx Supreme Court, Criminal Term with irrefutable evidence,– that is, he was caught in the act—– ON TAPE. And Dinkes & Schwitzer are mentioned as his law firm in the same Felony Complaint.

          Dinkes & Schwitzer has a very high turnover of staff as honest attorneys, (some have written us and commented on this blog), don’t want to be stigmatized by any association with them.

          World-News-Media and obviously its readership, are stating that it is our opinion that Dinkes & Schwitzer, William Hamel, William Shcwitzer, Joelle Jensen, and whatever other dishonest staff members that continue to engage in such ignominy have discredited themselves. We have not villified them. We’ve just told the truth.

          And apparently, the law and the government agrees as we have published and have said–(and will continue to do so), William Hamel has been caught in the act, -ON TAPE- and thus indicted by the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York, with Dinkes & Schwitzer, mentioned as his law firm in the same Felony Complaint. We do not know for sure of course, but it’s our opinion that it sure would seem unlikely that while Hamel was engaging in the bribery of a government official, (per the indictment), he would have been doing it without the knowledge of his “higher-ups”.

          Perhaps that’s why he is still ambulance-chasing and dealing with clients yet his photo is not on their website.

          Ah, honor among thieves is so admirable……

          Like

    • Publisher says:

      Have you noticed that since the we published this blog that Dinkes & Schwitzer have gone on a “positive” publicity campaign to try to counter our allegations?

      It’s not going to help them…..As the truth will out, thus does untruth.

      Please tell your story either on your blog or on ours. Those we’ve been hearing from would love to compare notes.

      Like

    • Publisher says:

      We hope you are right and that the judge’s allegiance is to the law, not to his good standing within the legal profession. We say this because we have all of late seen the, shall we say, unusual reactions of both judges and juries. All we know is Hamel has tried to get the bribery charges dismissed–incredible!. If you google NY Unified Court System and get yourself to the Criminal Courts in NY County, you will see that he attempted to get off scot free by calling for a dismissal, (which of course in our society is a an alleged criminal’s prerogative). Notwithstanding any prerogative, not only does it seem that he and his firm have no compunction to alter the rules of our culture and society to their benefit and to others’ detriment, but they feel that they are entitled to do so at the taxpayer’s expense.

      We have heard from some that they have allegedly swiftly become poison in the profession.–Mind you again, we solely write the word “allegedly” as we are bound by our journalistic ethics to do so. There are clients and trustworthy attorneys alike, (and there are some of the latter that do exist), that don’t want to be associated with them. Frankly, we are in accordance.

      Like

    • Publisher says:

      We hope you are right and that the judge’s allegiance is to the law, not to his good standing within the legal profession. We say this because we have all of late seen the, shall we say, unusual reactions of both judges and juries. All we know is Hamel has tried to get the bribery charges dismissed–incredible!. If you google NY Unified Court System and get yourself to the Criminal Courts in NY County, you will see that he attempted to get off scot free by calling for a dismissal, (which of course in our society is a an alleged criminal’s prerogative). Notwithstanding any prerogative, not only does it seem that he and his firm have no compunction to alter the rules of our culture and society to their benefit and to others’ detriment, but they feel that they are entitled to do so at the taxpayer’s expense.

      We have heard from some that they have allegedly swiftly become poison in the profession.–Mind you again, we solely write the word “allegedly” as we are bound by our journalistic ethics to do so. There are clients and trustworthy attorneys alike, (and there are some of the latter that do exist), that don’t want to be associated with them. Frankly, we are in accordance.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading 2nd Article: Some Attorneys at Dinkes & Schwitzer Still Run Amok Despite “Former” Colleague, William R. Hamel On Trial for Alleged Bribery- UPDATE at world-news-media.com.

meta

%d bloggers like this: