The tale of Judges-for-sale, Michael T. Conahan and Mark A. Ciavarella Jr., who threw away 6500 children for money, is certainly the sort of thing that would overshadow ordinary, run-of-the-mill impropriety. It’s a blot on Luzerne County, Pennsylvania and a lesson for the rest of us about quietly tolerating judicial crime for fear of upsetting the powerful. If this was all that had happened there, it would have been more than enough.
But it isn’t all that was happening in Luzerne County, as unbelievable as that may seem. This place is a judicial cesspool, and the only reason there hasn’t been an overwhelming outcry is that Ciavarella and Conahan were such outrageous criminals that they dwarf pretty much any other impropriety one can think of. That doesn’t make Judge Michael T. Toole look any better, however, and it would be wrong to ignore his misconduct just because it didn’t rise to the level of his fellow judges.
From the Legal Intelligencer :
Federal authorities have charged Luzerne County Judge Michael T. Toole with honest services fraud and with filing a false tax return.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced the charges and an accompanying plea agreement Wednesday afternoon. Toole faces a maximum of 23 years in prison and a fine of $350,000.
Under his plea deal, Toole has agreed to cooperate with federal authorities and provide information “concerning the unlawful activity of others.” He will also resign from the bench as part of his plea agreement.
And if this plain vanilla corruption isn’t enough to make you angry, consider this: Toole entered into his plea agreement on September 25, yet continued to sit on the bench as a judge. Let that one sink in. The judge signed a plea agreement and continued as a judge for months.
One knowledgeable source told The Legal Intelligencer there was frustration on the part of some investigative agencies that Toole was allowed to stay on the bench after he had signed his plea agreement.
When asked about the delay, Heidi Havens, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, directed a reporter to a sentence in the office’s release announcing the agreement, which read:
“Because the Information contains a charge relating to a tax matter, the Office of the United States Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania was required to obtain separate approvals for the charge from Department of Treasury and Department of Justice officials in Washington.”
Luzerne County Common Pleas Court President Judge Chester B. Muroski said Toole, who abruptly notified the court last month that he was taking vacation, never notified him of pending charges or a plea agreement.That Toole was less than forthright about his charges or plea comes as no surprise. The guy is corrupt, and we don’t rely on corrupt public officials to spread the word of their corruption. But there is no excuse whatsoever for the feds to have clammed up, to have shown the disdain for the people of Luzerne County that comes with allowing Toole to remain on the bench without saying a word.
Had he known about Toole’s plea agreement, Muroski said, he would have refrained from giving Toole “any judicial assignments” and would have reported Toole to the Judicial Conduct Board and the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts.
“I don’t know how anyone can function as a judge once they enter into a plea agreement with the government,” Muroski said.
As for the administrative judge, Muroski, his point about Toole is well-taken, but I hate to point out the obvious. Some administrative judge you are, given that you have two judges selling children into prison and another judge selling decisions on the open market, all under your nose and you know nothing about nothing.
Just because Toole isn’t nearly as corrupt at Ciavarella and Conahan doesn’t make him a piker. And just because the plea wasn’t signed off doesn’t mean its admissions never happened. And just because nobody told the admin judge doesn’t mean that pervasive corruption isn’t happening. Luzerne County is an ethical cesspool, and there doesn’t appear to be anyone there who isn’t somehow smeared by this mess.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“Some administrative judge you are, given that you have two judges selling children into prison and another judge selling decisions on the open market, all under your nose and you know nothing about nothing.”
I hadn’t planned to comment in this cesspool any more, but you’re spreading misinformation about my jurisdiction. Perhaps you should buy a clue before you start attacking someone. Conahan and Ciavarella were the two preceding President Judges; it’s part of how they got away with what they did. Muroski was appointed earlier this year, once Conahan and Ciavarella’s crimes became public.
See: http://www.timesleader.com/news/hottopics/judges/President_judge_vote_on_Friday_01-28-2009.html
Amazing. Proof that even a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn. I stand corrected, as Conahan (though not Ciaravella, per your article) was the President Judge during the cash for kids scandal. And thank you yet again Max for providing comic relief to lawyers everywhere.
Just doing my part to make sure your blog is a “destination.” I’m so ashamed not to have made the ABA 100, to be in the mere company of unpopular losers like Gregory Joseph.
Wrong again on Ciaravella; Conahan was President Judge up until 2006, after which Ciaravella took over. The scheme was from 2002-2008.
I defer to you on who was President judge when, though wonder why the local bar (and this would include you, apparently) failed to notice the outrageous conduct happening in your backyard as children were being sold to prison. Were you too busy trying to scare up personal injury clients and make a buck to care about them? Did you hate all those criminal children and agree that they should all go to jail? Were you happy to have your judges rid the community of these threats to your safety? Or were you part of the solution.
As for Gregory Joseph, I haven’t got the slightest clue who he is or what you’re talking about. But what else is new.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Gregory+Joseph
There are plenty of great blogging lawyers out there who happily blog along without a single Alltop or Weblog Awards bag on their page.
I appreciate you implicitly recognize my extraordinary legal prowess by faulting me for the events in a county in which I neither reside nor work, because I happen to be licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania. In turn, I blame you for all crime in New York State; if you were a better lawyer, you’d have advised all these people not to commit crimes by now.
FYI, during the time in question, I did *defense* work in Luzerne, and afterwards was asked to pro bono work on behalf of the kids. They ended up being represented as a class, so the need disappeared.
But that’s just mean, and it pales in comparison to your contribution. You keep your entertainment destination going — three or more posts a day are an invaluable “part of the solution.”
Cute, but still no clue what that has to do with anything. As for your responsibility, you wrote that Luzerne County was your jurisdiction. Don’t blame me that you get caught in your own baloney. If anything like that was happening in mine, you can bet I would have something to say about it.
And since you’re on a roll to prove your point, despite being the omnipresent jackass in your comments, your characterization of blogs that gain a readership as “entertainment destinations” is awfully convenient considering the wholesale lack of interest in your efforts. Eric Turkewitz blogs about personal injury, like you, and has a strong following. John Hochfelder blogs about personal injury, like you, and has a strong following. Both made the ABA list. You didn’t. So do you ridicule them as “entertainment destinations,” or could it just be you?
You take perverse pride in being a misfit. You attribute deliberate mischaracterizations to explain why no one appreciates you. I’ve certainly come to realize from your comments here (and oddlyt, you keep coming back even though it’s a “cesspool”) that you offer nothing of substance, that you’re just a nasty, angry little nobody trying to prove your existence by being a troll to annoy others. Is that really all you want to be in life, Max?
Take a hard look and ask yourself, why does no one but appreciate how brilliant and wonderful you are? Forget me, since you hate me, and explain why Turk and Hochfelder are appreciated and you aren’t. You have made yourself into a joke. You don’t have to perpetuate it. You could chose to stop being an asshole any time you want. If I’m so horrible, then be like Turk and Hockfelder. Just stop being a nasty, angry little man.
As much fun as this has been, and to the extent that I appreciate that you’ve actually contributed something to the post for once, it’s time to get back to business, and so this tanget comes to an end.
“A nasty, angry little man?” Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You rant all day at everyone, including law students, rape victims, and children. The only people outside of your wrath are those with blogs more popular than your’s; you lavish them with praise every chance you get. The past week alone you posted odes to Tom Goldstein and Eugene Volokh.
Eric’s blog is great. So is John’s. (Soo, too, are Tom’s and Eugene’s.) Your’s is a good read, too, which is why I keep reading it. I’m not telling you or any of them to do anything different; it’s obviously quite successful for all of you.
You’re the one who made an issue out of it, blasting Kevin O’Keefe for daring to suggest that a blog that isn’t in the ABA 100 just plain isn’t worth it. Your argument was that every blogger needs to engage in a “Darwinian” struggle to entertain readers and make their blog a “destination” — a term usually reserved for major media sites like Yahoo — for readers. Bloggers who did not do that were ipso facto failures.
Why did you do that? I dunno, maybe because you’re “a nasty, angry little man.” I don’t know why it bothers you so terribly that someone could be happy (and profitable!) with a blog that doesn’t top the charts.
You started this debate, and since then have “updated” your own remarks to eviscerate their own meaning. What really is your point? All I can gather is some internal need to put people down, not substantive commentary on the merits of blogging.
Sigh. This will be your last hurrah, as you used to be funny and are now just bizarre and annoying. How do you manage to twist everything to fit your sick little paradigm? I write what I think, whether you agree with it or not. Rape victims and chidlren? You’re just too pathetic. I praise what I believe deserves praise. I criticize what I believe deserves criticism. That’s what real people do, Max. Don’t project your desperate purposes onto me. I’m sorry that you are so sad about your lot in life, but it’s neither my responsibility nor fault. I’m not your keeper.
You have so fundamentally missed the boat. You blog in the hope of getting business. I write because I like to write. You can’t begin to understand the concept, because it’s so totally foreign to your way of thinking. You’ve completely misapprehended my point to Kevin, but it would be impossible for you to grasp it since you’re perspective is skewed by your myopic view of why people blawg. Others have tried to explain it, from Hermann to Elefant to Randazza to me. We have no motive. We just write. You, on the other hand, have a singular motive, to try to get business, and you’re offended that you aren’t appreciated?
I’m truly sorry that you’re so obsessed with me, and that your own life is so empty and pathetic that you have to come here to play the troll. But t’s not my lot in life to give you the attention you so desperately crave. Go find someplace else to obsess about and try to prove that you exist. You are really one of the saddest people I’ve ever seen.
Wow, this is getting tough to follow. Max believes Scott is “spreading misinformation about my jurisdiction,” and then states 47 minutes later that these events happened in “a county in which I neither reside nor work.”
I’d probably stop talking there if I was Max.
Don’t mind Max. He hates me so much that he can’t think straight. It doesn’t stop him from reading, though. Just thinking clearly.
Max;
I take a very strong exception to anyone that calls Simple Justice a cesspool. Scott writes with highest level of integrity, a factor probably lacking in his critics. I’ve been here every day for over two years and if nothing else I find Simple Justice very educational. This is a great blog. Scott is a good man, a good citizen, a patriot, and Constitutionist Your remarks are baseless, empty and without merit. As for integrity, either you have or you don’t, has nothing to do with pay and consideration. The cesspool is Luzerne County and it’s political infrastructure, not Simple Justice.
I do not understand this at all.
In this case we have a judge accepting money for verdicts, apparently/allegedly, and he is pursued and pushed into a plea deal.
In the other case we had two judges accepting money for verdicts, and they are granted immunity?
Why the double standard? Either judges are allowed to sell verdicts or they aren’t. Which is it?
While the two judges, Conahan and Ciaravella, are immune from civil liability for their “judicial acts” of selling children into prison, they are not immune from criminal liability.