The details of said citizen complaints are more particularly set forth in my Case Study as complaints 1, 3, 4, 6, and 7.
PROSECUTOR'S QUESTIONABLE CONDUCT LEADS TO ETHICS COMPLAINT
In the Arraial complaint (Case Study, complaint 1), Samson sent me on a wild goose chase by demanding that I obtain an N.J.S. 2C:52-19 Order that he purported he needed to prosecute. I immediately complied, and within one month, I had been before Judge Rubin on a motion for said Order, and had important information to convey to Mr. Samson.
Mr. Samson instead buried his head in the sand, failed to return my phone call, and failed to respond to my letters regarding same. At an October 28, 2010 Motion hearing in the Arraial matter, Mr. Samson didn’t even show up for court, and the substitute prosecutor appeared to know nothing about the case.
Furthermore, according to defense counsel Richard J. Guss, Esq., Mr. Samson advised Mr. Guss to make the Motion to Dismiss (based on Mr. Samson’s refusal to provide discovery), which Mr. Samson did not oppose. Judge McGeady dismissed my complaint.
It appears that Mr. Samson sent me on a wild goose chase to get an N.J.S. 2C:52-19 Order he claimed he needed to prosecute; he simultaneously advised Arraial’s defense counsel to file a Motion to Dismiss based on his [Samson’s] refusal to provide discovery; then he ignored my phone call regarding Judge Rubin’s opinion on the N.J.S. 2C:52-19 Order; and didn’t show up for a Motion hearing in the case, which he apparently orchestrated in advance with defense counsel, so that his substitute prosecutor could be blindsided, leaving the illusion that Mr. Samson had nothing to do with the dismissal of my complaint.
On November 1, 2010, I wrote a letter to Mr. Samson alerting him of Judge Rubin's opinion regarding the N.J.S. 2C:52-19 Order that he purported he needed to prosecute, that Mr. Samson should file the Motion himself, on notice to me as defendant/beneficiary of the Expungement Order. In said letter, I also requested that Mr. Samson appeal the improper dismissal of my Arraial complaint.
Mr. Samson failed to file the appeal, and has never responded to this communication.
Before scheduled probable cause hearings on November 18, 2010 in the Guss and Williams complaints (Case Study, complaints 3 & 4), Mr. Samson preempted the probable cause hearings by representing to the court that if probable cause were found, he would refuse to provide discovery, which would result in the same dismissal as in the Arraial matter.
It appeared improper for Mr. Samson to say anything to prejudice the court against these matters. Mr. Samson seems to have meddled where he didn’t belong.
Furthermore, Mr. Samson’s communication to the court was particularly egregious because he withheld his knowledge of an easy remedy in the form of an N.J.S. 2C:52-19 Order available to him pursuant to Judge Rubin’s October 25, 2010 ruling. This information was clearly communicated in advance to Mr. Samson in my November 1, 2010 letter, and verbally before he addressed the court on November 18, 2010.
Mr. Samson appears to have ignored my letter and appears to have withheld material information from the court. As a result, Mr. Samson caused both the Guss and the Williams matters to be dismissed before the scheduled probable cause hearings could be conducted.
On November 23, 2010, I wrote letters to Mr. Samson regarding the dismissal of the Guss and Williams matters respectively. In my letters, I once again informed Mr. Samson of Judge Rubin’s opinion regarding the option of an N.J.S. 2C:52-19 Order, and I requested that Mr. Samson take steps to appeal Judge McGeady's improper dismissal of both complaints.
Mr. Samson failed to file the appeals, and never responded to either letter.
I ultimately refiled the Guss and Williams complaints (Case Study, complaints 6 & 7), only to be thwarted again when Mr. Samson failed to show up in court on May 12, 2011 in the Guss matter in response to a motion by Mr. Guss’ defense counsel.
The substitute prosecutor did not have the case file, and offered only token opposition to defense counsel’s motion. I was not privy to the motion filing discussed by defense counsel, so I could not offer guidance to the substitute prosecutor.
As a result, the Judge McGeady dismissed my complaint.
Here is a second example of Mr. Samson not showing up for a Motion hearing in a case, which it appears he orchestrated in advance with defense counsel, so that his substitute prosecutor could be blindsided, leaving the illusion that Mr. Samson had nothing to do with the dismissal of my complaint.
By way of a letter to Judge McGeady dated May 16, 2011, copied to Mr. Samson, I requested that Mr. Samson appeal the improper dismissal of my refiled Guss complaint. On May 31, 2011, I once again wrote to Mr. Samson to request an update as to the status of the appeal of the refiled Guss matter.
Mr. Samson failed to file the appeal, and never responded to either of these communications.
At that time, Mr. Samson was well aware of my pending ethics complaint against him, yet he did not even disqualify himself, and it appears that he continued to act in bad-faith.
On June 9, 2011, I was in court for scheduled probable cause hearings in the latest Guss and Pfund matters. Prior to the probable cause hearings, I moved on the record for Judge McGeady to recuse himself from all cases involving violation of my Expungement Order. Judge McGeady advised me that such a motion would have to be made by Prosecutor Samson. Mr. Samson feigned ignorance and said that he would first have to know my reasons. I then communicated my reasons on the record.
I cited Mr. Samson’s past failure to cooperate and communicate with me regarding various complaints before that Court; Judge McGeady’s orchestration of the State’s disadvantage, and systematic dismissals of all my complaints in that court with the complicity of Prosecutor Samson; Judge McGeady’s denial of my right to speak; various harassment and bullying of me by Judge McGeady’s Court Officers; etc., etc., etc. I argued that “the fix has to stop now.”
Mr. Samson refused to advocate my position, and Judge McGeady declined to recuse himself.
The stats so far:
- Five complaints, five dismissals;
- Two motion hearings, two Samson no-shows causing two dismissals with no explanation;
- One phone call to Mr. Samson, no response with no explanation;
- Four letters to Mr. Samson, no response with no explanation;
- Three requests to appeal the improper dismissals of my complaints, no response with no explanation;
- One request for a motion to recuse, ignored and refusal to advocate victim's [my] position;
- One victim [me] of three criminal defendants (Arraial, Guss, and Williams) who has been additionally victimized by Andrew C. Samson, Esq., for no good reason except Mr. Samson’s apparent failure to conform his legal practice to the Rules of Professional Conduct.
PROSECUTOR STALLS ETHICS COMPLAINT FOR SIX MONTHS
In August of 2011, I spoke with ethics investigator Joseph A. DeFuria regarding my ethics complaint. Based on that conversation, and on information currently in my possession, Mr. Samson knew about my ethics complaint on or about February 9, 2011. Mr. Samson responded to my ethics complaint on or about August 8, 2011. During those intervening months, Mr. DeFuria tried to contact Mr. Samson by phone, with no success.
It appears that Mr. Samson is as likely to ignore a complainant/victim as he is to ignore an attorney ethics investigator.
My ethics complaint against Mr. Samson is currently pending.
