It’s hard to figure out exactly where, along the spectrum of horrible acts, any particular wrong falls, but this is one of the most despicable I’ve ever learned about.  Two judges in Pennsylvania sold children into a private juvenile prison.  The names of these scum are Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. and Michael T. Conahan.  Let them be forever memorialized in the blawgosphere, so that every search of these names shows what they did. 

The opening of this New York Times article captures the horror.

At worst, Hillary Transue thought she might get a stern lecture when she appeared before a judge for building a spoof MySpace page mocking the assistant principal at her high school in Wilkes-Barre, Pa. She was a stellar student who had never been in trouble, and the page stated clearly at the bottom that it was just a joke.

Instead, the judge sentenced her to three months at a juvenile detention center on a charge of harassment. 

She was handcuffed and taken away as her stunned parents stood by.

“I felt like I had been thrown into some surreal sort of nightmare,” said Hillary, 17, who was sentenced in 2007. “All I wanted to know was how this could be fair and why the judge would do such a thing.”

Forget the freedom of speech stuff.  I can’t think of an epithet strong enough to call the judge who did this.  This wasn’t an issue of higher order legal concepts, but the lowest order.  The judges sold children for profit.  $2.6 million.  How many children have to be sold to make that much?

Now that the judges have pleaded guilty to a deal of 87 months, a piddling sentence, and with every expectation that they will meet some folks in prison who feel that they were treated far too kindly by the prosecutors, let’s turn to the larger question.  How is it possible that a rogue judge could do this and no one was capable, or willing, to stop him?

For years, youth advocacy groups complained that Judge Ciavarella was unusually harsh. He sent a quarter of his juvenile defendants to detention centers from 2002 to 2006, compared with a state rate of 1 in 10. He also routinely ignored requests for leniency made by prosecutors and probation officers.

“The juvenile system, by design, is intended to be a less punitive system than the adult system, and yet here were scores of children with very minor infractions having their lives ruined,” said Marsha Levick, a lawyer with the Philadelphia-based Juvenile Law Center.

“There was a culture of intimidation surrounding this judge and no one was willing to speak up about the sentences he was handing down.”

An advocacy group, the Juvenile Law Center, tried to act upon the complaints, but were rebuffed by the courts.  After all, no judge could ever be so bad.  The black robes of silence surrounded their brethren to protect them from selling children into jail.

Last year, the Juvenile Law Center, which had raised concerns about Judge Ciavarella in the past, filed a motion to the State Supreme Court about more than 500 juveniles who had appeared before the judge without representation. The court originally rejected the petition, but recently reversed that decision.

How bold the Supreme Court is, to take it seriously only after the feces and fan collide.

Many lawyers believe that it is wrong to be critical of courts and judges; that it diminishes respect for the legal system.  They are often critical of me for doing so, clinging to platitudes about honesty and integrity, and how it’s the best system ever created, as if mouthing words of feigned respect changes anything.  Will your platitudes give these children back their lives?

This is what comes when anyone, any group, any function, becomes immune from critical oversight.  When a judge is able to create a “culture of intimidation” that protects his horrible crimes against children, there can be no question that the power in their hands is far too great.  When the appellate courts, whose only reason to exist is to oversee the lower courts, refuse to believe it possible that wrongs happening before their eyes, they share the blame and bear the disgrace for their failure.

I am sick to death of hearing people proclaim that judges try their best, and sincerely care, and deserve our respect.  They must earn our respect with every case, every decision, every life that comes before them.  Some judges do.  Some judges don’t.  Do not lump them into some group that is above scrutiny, inherently beyond reproach.  Judges are not gods, immune from the harm they do others.  The ones who possess integrity will take no issue with scrutiny.  The ones like Mark A. Ciavarella Jr. and Michael T. Conahan deserve no respect.

Who amongst you wants to lecture the children of Wilkes-Barre about the dignity of the judiciary today?

Update:  A helpful reader sent over this Scranton Times article :

In 2003, 778 of the 1,499 delinquent juveniles were placed in secure detention. In 2004, the rate was 914 of 1,369 and in 2005, 491 of 1,241.

If this was Manhattan, it would be shocking.  For Scranton, these numbers are astronimical.  In 2004, about 66% of all JDs were put in detention.  And nobody in the system noticed this?