Do you think you have right to speedy and public trial,
as defined by the Constitution?
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER
PETER PETROV, Plaintiff, against-
Mariya Basheva-Petrova, Defendant.
STATE OF NEW YORK )
COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) ss:
AFFIDAVIT OF INCOMPETENCE OR DELIBERATE VIOLATION OF THE US CONSTITUTION
To the Motion to Recuse Judge Sam Walker
Comes now Plaintiff, PETER PETROV, pro-se, who, being first duly sworn, states that:
Honorable Walker has shown incompetence or worse, he deliberately violated two basic concepts of the Constitution of the United States:
1. The Right to speedy trial as defined in the Sixth Amendment
2. The presumption of innocence as defined in the Fourth Amendment
1. Judge Walker effectively postponed my trial process and my constitutional right to speedy and public trial because of my refusal to attend a program that he referred me to
On Dec 8, 2005 my wife filed unfounded stalking charge against me. In January 2006 this charge was transferred from Westchester County Court to IDV Court before Hon. Walker.
Since I felt that Hon. Walker’s bias would disallow him to properly try the charge and my request for immediate dismissal was rejected, I requested jury trial and was granted one by Hon. Walker.
In February 2006 this case was forwarder for jury trial before Judge Colangelo.
I had [pre] trial conferences on March 8 and April 5 before Judge Colangelo.
On May 17, Judge Walker effectively postponed my trial due to my refusal to go to “Domestic Violence Program for Men” and transferred back the case to himself in IDV Court.
When again I requested jury trial on May 21, Judge Walker re-granted it and scheduled a pretrial conference for July 12, but only after a so called “compliance” court appearance scheduled for June 22 takes place. “Compliance” refers to attending the “Domestic Violence Program for Men”.
With his acts Judge Walker demonstrated to me that I would get a trial only on condition that I attend the so called “Domestic Violence Program for Men”. I have reasonable fears, based on my previous experience that my right to trial would be revoked again by Judge Walker if I refuse to go to this program.
With imposing condition on my constitutional right to trial and delaying it due to “non compliance” Judge Walker effectively violated the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
2. Judge Walker violated the principle of presumption of innocence by imposing me to attend a program called “Domestic Violence Program for Men”
On January 19, 2006 Hon. Walker referred me to a “Domestic Violence Program for Men”, as a result of unfounded stalking allegations against me. At this time he was aware that I deny any allegation and plead not guilty.
My multiple requests to Hon. Walker to cancel the referral, backed by my non guilty plea were denied even after I requested a jury trial on the matter.
This is clearly a presumption of guilt since only domestic aggressors and never the general population is referred to this program. By presuming my guilt Judge Walker effectively violated the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the instant Order to Show Cause be granted in its entirety, and the Court grant such other and further relief as may seem just and proper under the circumstances.
Dated: …………..., 2006 _________________
White Plains, New York PETER PETROV
This site was last updated 05/18/07