Somerset County Judge Accused of Impropriety

Share Article

Judicial watchdog groups are accusing a Somerset County judge of judicial impropriety for refusing to recuse himself from hearing the case of a woman who is suing him for misconduct.

In one of several cases being watched by Freedom’s Cry Foundation, The Conservative Newsletter and several judicial watchdog groups, a judge in Somerset County’s Superior Court has embarrassed the judiciary yet again by refusing to recuse himself from hearing the case of a woman who is suing him. Claiming that he is unbiased and competent, Judge Thomas Dilts (affectionately known as Ditzy among some of the watchdog groups who have been reviewing his recent rulings) referred to a response that doesn’t even exist in the case record when he ruled on the recent Motion to Recuse. It is unclear at this time whether he accepted ex parte communication from the other party to the case, or simply imagined the supposed comments. Accepting ex parte communications would be a crime, while the other possibility would merely be a sign of insanity and mental incompetence.

The basic rule is that any time a judge’s impartiality may be reasonably questioned, he should recuse himself and allow another judge to handle the case. In his order denying the Motion to Recuse, Dilts explained that since he was confident of winning the federal case (Beddini v. Diltz, US District Court, District of New Jersey... case no 04-3526 SRC), but even if he were to lose that case it would be the state that ended up footing the bill, he felt like he could remain impartial and he simply would not recuse himself. He also stated that he knew the case and the parties to it well, and it would be a disservice to the people and the courts to recuse himself and place another judge on the case who would have to start over in becoming familiar with it.

“He says he knows the parties well,” retorted Plaintiff Beddini. “ He should, he’s been screwing me over for nearly 10 years. All I asked for is an impartial judge with a brain in his head. Instead I got Dilts and have spent 10 years trying to get rid of him. Now we’re in the Federal court, and if we need to we’ll slowly work our way all the way to the Supreme Court. The Injustice has gone too far, and I’m not going to let him destroy any more of my life. Enough is enough, and what he’s done to me and my family for the last 10 years is simply too much.”

“This guy isn’t a judge, he’s a smudge,” states legal researcher and author Robert Marlett, “He’s a smudge on the good name of the judiciary and a disgrace to the American system of Justice. A review of the case makes it entirely clear that he has no respect for law whatsoever, no idea what the Code of Judicial Conduct is, and absolutely no intention of following it. Punks with judicial robes are what destroys the integrity of the judicial system and makes it a laughingstock not only to the American people, but to the world.”

Marlett, the Chief Executive Officer of Freedom’s Cry Foundation, and the leader of an online legal research and litigation group, doesn’t stop there though. “This case goes beyond judicial activism. It goes beyond even simple injustice or unfairness. It’s a simple matter of a judge retaining jurisdiction for the purpose of exacting revenge. Ditzy is a disgrace, and I dare to say that in the next couple of years, he’ll meet justice for the first time face to face. From what I understand several watchdog groups and a couple of judicial reform groups have been watching this guy for a while now, and this case isn’t going to go away. I’d like to be a fly on the wall when this guy meets a just judge for the first time. Something tells me he’s never seen one.”

The Code of Judicial Conduct is a set of ethical rules by which a judge’s conduct is governed. Jan Beddini, the Plaintiff in the federal law suit against Judge Dilts and a party to the case being heard by him, has accused Dilts of violating several portions of that Code, and relied upon that code for the recent Motion to Recuse… which would have meant Judge Dilts would have to step aside and allow another judge to hear the case. Judge Dilts decided the Motion himself… and denied it. A similar motion is pending in the Federal case, and a federal judge may order that Dilts recuse himself when that motion is heard.

Neither Judge Dilts nor his attorney were available for comment at the time of this writing.

Contact: Nancy Capps (864) 984-2305

# # #

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Nancy Capps

Email >