William Hamel And Dinkes & Schwitzer : Alleged Malpractice And Disciplinary Committee Defense Attorney Office In Same Building As Disc. Committee: By Coincidence Or By Contrivance, Coincidence, And Conflict Of Interest?– We Think the Latter Three- Part 2- Open Letter To The Disciplinary Committee

April 26, 2013 § 1 Comment

Dear New York State Supreme Court appellate Division First Department  Departmental Disciplinary Committee,

As the world, –yes the world knows, that William Hamel not only plead guilty by admitting to paying for patient information and was convicted of the Class A Misdemeanor, i.e., Facilitation of a Crime, only because part of his Plea bargain was to pay all of us a whopping $300K in penalties. Frankly, we can’t find anyone, –and we’ve interviewed plenty,–who have ever heard of a Fine of that monetary magnitude.

The Fine alone is emblematic of the severity of the crime.

Considering, the above, we want to know, Disciplinary Committee, what are you going to do about it?  As far as we know, and please correct us if we are wrong, you’ve done nothing. And, the Disposition of the case was 3/28/13.

As we have posted, in 2 articles, Hamel’s own attorney, Gustave Newman has mentioned in a letter what is oft given as punishment is a two, (2), year suspension. Now if you, the Disciplinary Committee do not impose that punishment, at the least, then you, who allegedly sanctimoniously claims to be in place to protect the public from at minimum, renegade lawyers, are allegedly accusing Mr. Gustave Newman, of lying, or you are allegedly thoroughly engaged in the full blown practice of cronyism and corruption.

As far as we are aware, such things as suspensions of attorneys are supposed to be accessible for the public’s purview.

We the of the Public and of the Press would like to know. We are open to an apropos response from you, New York State Supreme Court appellate Division First Department  Departmental Disciplinary Committee.  Your potential/alleged non-response, will give us our answer.

THE INTERNET IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD.

Advertisements

§ One Response to William Hamel And Dinkes & Schwitzer : Alleged Malpractice And Disciplinary Committee Defense Attorney Office In Same Building As Disc. Committee: By Coincidence Or By Contrivance, Coincidence, And Conflict Of Interest?– We Think the Latter Three- Part 2- Open Letter To The Disciplinary Committee

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading William Hamel And Dinkes & Schwitzer : Alleged Malpractice And Disciplinary Committee Defense Attorney Office In Same Building As Disc. Committee: By Coincidence Or By Contrivance, Coincidence, And Conflict Of Interest?– We Think the Latter Three- Part 2- Open Letter To The Disciplinary Committee at world-news-media.com.

meta

%d bloggers like this: