A Matter of Justice Coalition

Voice (toll free) (877) NOW-JOIN; Fax: (540) 644-1333

E-mail: matjust@crosslink.net, URL: http://www.amatterofjustice.org

 

Ralph F. Boyd.Jr., Assistant Attorney General
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
Washington, D.C. 20530
Tel.(202) 514-2151

 

Jacob Roginsky, Ph.D.,
President, A Matter of Justice
P.O.Box 1209
Dahlgren, Virginia 22448-1209
Tel. 202-277-7454
E-mail: jrogins@crosslink.net

 

March 23, 2003

 

Dear Mr. Boyd:

 

The organization A Matter of Justice (AMOJ) is the largest legal reform coalition in the country (see www.amatterofjustice.org). We wish to call to your attention a case involving an egregious deprivation of federal Constitutional rights of one of our members, Attorney H. Beatty Chadwick. A petition for writ of certiorari has been filed in this case with the U.S. Supreme Court:  H. Beatty Chadwick v. Barbara Crowther-Chadwick.

 

The petitioner, Mr. Chadwick, has been imprisoned without trial for eight years in Delaware County, Pennsylvania for ‘civil’ contempt because he has been unable to deposit with the court $2.5 million in cash, funds which he maintains were part of an illiquid overseas real estate investment he does not control.  The District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted habeas corpus relief in January 2002.  However, his former wife (but none of the state respondents) appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed the judgment because of technical issues under the standard of review mandated by the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA).

 

The case raises several important issues.  Amongst them are a) whether the due process clause limits the length of time a person may be incarcerated for "civil contempt" and b) whether procedural due process requires the contemnor actually have the "key" for his own release and c) that the court select the most appropriate and least intrusive means of carrying its civil orders into effect, like for instance, appointing a receiver to locate and bring property before the court, rather than imprisoning a person indefinitely where it is not certain that he possesses the key to his own release.  It also raises the interesting question, which may be of more than passing interest to your department, whether a private party has standing at all to appeal the grant of a writ of habeas corpus where no state respondent has appealed 

 

In the AMOJ amicus brief that is currently under preparation, we are also raising issues of the violation of Mr. Chadwick's Fourteenth, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendment rights.   Although the Sixth and Eighth Amendments pertain to criminal cases, treating Mr. Chadwick’s case as a civil case after the eight years of his incarceration is unreasonable.  No one proved beyond a reasonable doubt, or, for that matter, even by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Chadwick holds the "key" to his release, as is required in cases of civil contempt.  Yet he has served more time than most citizens convicted of crimes and has been denied the protections of the process afforded to the criminal defendants.  What would the founding fathers say of such treatment of a citizen?  

 

Mr. Chadwick's suffering has recently increased due to the discovery that he has lymphoma, for which he has begun chemotherapy.  The sense of despair that he feels due to his circumstances cannot be conducive to heeling, making his incarceration even more unjust and inhuman.  Looking at Mr. Chadwick's circumstances, both Americans and citizens of other countries may appropriately ask, "Do the Americans really possess the constitutional rights, or is it just a farce?  They may also ask, “How can the American government preach democracy and justice to the world when it permits such violation of human rights in its own country?"

 

We urge you to consider the filing of an amicus brief supporting the grant of certiorari in Mr. Chadwick's case, and to consider intervening in a separate state court proceeding brought by Mr. Chadwick to secure his release.  The latter is now on appeal in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Chadwick v. Caulfield, No. 3528 EDA 2002, since the trial court once again denied Chadwick's release.  Further information on Chadwick’s case and a copy of his Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the US Supreme Court may be viewed at: http://www.amatterofjustice.org/cfdocs/50casespage.cfm?caseno=5  and

http://www.amatterofjustice.org/cfdocs/50casespage.cfm?caseno=6, or from me: Jacob Roginsky, President, A Matter of Justice Inc, P.O. Box 1209, Dahlgren, Virginia 22448-1209, Tel: (202) 277-7454.

 

I greatly appreciate your prompt consideration to assist in rectifying the injustice that has occurred and continues to occur in this case.

 

Sincerely,

 

 

Jacob Roginsky, Ph.D., President

A Matter of Justice Coalition