In one of the more bizarre clashes of competing government interests, all naturally to the end of protecting our nation from the threat of terrorism something, comes the case of Lorraine Henderson, convicted after trial of employing an illegal immigrant, her cleaning lady.  Henderson, you see, works for the Department of Homeland Security, charged with keeping New England’s ports secure from terrorists cleaning ladies illegal immigrants.

From the Boston Globe :

Standing before him in a hearing that lasted two hours, prosecutors told [US District Court Judge Douglas P.] Woodlock that they had charged Henderson because of the unusual circumstances of the case. She had worked as the Boston area port director for Customs and Border Protection, knew about an internal warning for employees not to hire illegal immigrants, and had been told by a coworker that her cleaning woman was in the country illegally.

Nonetheless, prosecutors said, Henderson continued to employ the woman, Fabiana Bitencourt, 31, of Peabody, to clean her four-level townhouse in Salem every couple of weeks from 2004 to 2008. The cleaning woman testified at trial that she charged $75 each time.

In a sting operation worthy of our government, they wired up the cleaning lady and nailed the perp, who was taken to trial and convicted.  Nobody gets away with their house being cleaned by an illegal in this country, you can bet on that.  We are safe.

Judge Woodlock, however, had misgivings at the time of sentence:

A federal judge rebuked the government today for prosecuting a Department of Homeland Security official who employed an illegal immigrant as her housekeeper, saying prosecutors had been “overreaching” and “crushed” the defendant for what he characterized as a minor offense.

“This is a cleaning lady,” he told prosecutors, a remark he made several times. “There must be some sense of proportion.”

Woodlock conceded that it was no surprise that Henderson ended up “in your crosshairs,” given her job. He said the case represented “hapless hypocrisy on the part of Ms. Henderson” colliding with a “stern and solemn sanctimony” by prosecutors.

It’s almost impossible to avoid the overwhelming sense of schadenfreude that permeates this case.  Hapless hypocrisy (I’m a sucker for alliteration) collides with solemn sanctimony.  It doesn’t get a whole lot better than this.

Considering that no one other than Henderson has ever been charged with hiring an illegal cleaning lady, according to Judge Woodlock, and that DHS has internal procedures and sanctions for consorting with the enemy illegal cleaning ladies, the government’s “need” to make an example of Henderson emits an unpleasant odor.  There were ways of dealing with her hapless hypocrisy that didn’t involve her arrest, incarceration, prosecution and trial.  Even at sentence, the government’s position is that while Henderson doesn’t need imprisonment, 4 months in a halfway house, followed by 4 months of home detention, will do the trick.

Yet, there remains a dodgy issue that isn’t easily shaken.  While the Judge was angered with the United States Attorney’s waste of time and resources in pursuing this case, the matter went to trial before Judge Woodlock and proceeded through to verdict.  One would assume the judge was there the whole time. 

So what was the judge thinking as such titillating covert tape recordings were admitted into evidence with Henderson telling Bitencourt, “No, Fabiana, the bubbles don’t actually scrub by themselves.” 

There are numerous junctures where a judge can toss a trial.  There are even more ways for a judge to scuttle a prosecution before it reaches trial.  Was Judge Woodlock taken by surprise when the government rested, unaware up to that point that the case before him involved the dreaded crime of aiding terrorists using an illegal cleaning lady?

If nothing else, the prosecution of Lorraine Henderson should conclusively prove one thing. Our government, in all its manifestations, is no less absurd when it comes to dealing with its own than when it comes to dealing with the rest of us.  Small comfort, but it’s all we’ve got.

H/T Reader John “Rumpole” O’Connor