In re:                                                                                             Bankruptcy No. 93-07643

Eugene Walter Alpern                                                               Chapter 11

                                                                                                    Judge Thomas James
 

        I, Scott Bernard, declare as follows:

        I was a visitor to the court hearing on March 12, 1996 in the above titled cause, held before Judge James, of the United States Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

        I am not a party to this case, nor am I a relative to any party in this matter, nor an employer of any party, nor an employee of any party to this case.

        Relative to this case, I am a detached and reasonable observer of the actions in that court of that date.

        In the foregoing hearing, I had observed many instances of the Judge's inequity and undue biases. In the aforementioned open court hearing Judge James flagrantly conducted the March 12, 1996 open court hearing with a great degree of partiality, unduly siding with the trustee/creditors. It is my opinion that it was quite apparent that Judge James' demeanor was one of which unquestionably showed predisposition, collusion, partiality and a demeanor of over all predetermined rulings in support of the creditors/trustees in the above mentioned case. In support of my objective observations and opinions, in furtherance, I, Scott Bernard, in support the foregoing observations of the aforementioned open court hearing, attest to aforementioned hearing by bringing forth the following statements of which supports my observations of the conduct and demeanor of Judge James.

        The Debtor, Mr. Alpern, presented many strong arguments by citing new, cogent, case law arguments supporting his Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection position. When Mr. Alpern made his presentation Judge James conveyed blatant signs of disinterest, apathy and arrogance. The Judge's lack of due care and diligence, and the preceding stated prejudices as to his hearing of the Debtor's presented arguments had, undoubtedly, hampered the Judge's own ability to render objective, fair and equitable rulings.

        One of the Judge's showings of undue prejudice against Mr. Alpern appeared when Judge James expressed sarcastic remarks and fun like or levity type atmosphere, directed at Mr. Alpern's current case law citings. The Judges condescending attitude toward Mr. Alpern gave me a clear indication of the Judges undue prejudices, biases, and partiality. Over all, Judge James had clear showings of predisposed and predetermined rulings in the above stated matter.

        As an objective observer, in the aforementioned open court hearing, the Judge seemingly expressed a deep-seated antagonism to Mr. Alpern. I can truly state that Mr. Alpern was defeated before he had appeared before Judge James.

        If called as a witness, I could competently testify to the foregoing.

        FURTHER, DECLARANT SAYETH NAUGHT.
 

                                                                                ________________________
                                                                                Scott Bernard
 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my information and belief.
 

Dated: March 15, 1996
 

                                                                            ________________________
                                                                            Scott Bernard

Scott Bernard
P.O.Box 958461
Hoffman Estates, IL 60195

Copyright 1996 by Citizens for Legal Responsibility®.
                    All rights reserved.

    email: clr@clr.org