U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of justice today and retired from the bench. In exchange, the prosecution will drop sexual assault charges. He will also avoid impeachment with the plea, though the status of his pension remains unclear.
Kent, 59, quietly pleaded guilty in open court. He was appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1990. He is likely to receive only a few years in jail under the obstruction charge. That will make his pension a likely point of contention.
With the new women coming forward with sexual assault claims, Kent was looking as a bruising trial with a significant chance of conviction. If convicted on the full mix of charges, he would likely have faced decades in jail.
For the latest article, click here.
The pension should never have been removed from the negotiation table. Since he’s off the bench, the impeachment is moot. But to allow him to retain his pension after these types of allegations speaks to the type of political favoritism which too often allows politically connected miscreants to escape the full measure of the law. It’s not right that he is getting off easy.
From the linked article:
{Quote: “It also is possible, if not likely, that the Congress will now look at impeaching Kent to take him off the federal payroll and retirement package he gets as a federal judge. Yates said he expects Congress to act on this very quickly.” End Quote}
_______________________________
I do not think that the judge should receive his federal pension because he violated his oath of office, codes of conduct, and the trust he owed to the public that he was employed to serve. That same public could now be compelled to pay for his retirement package, which would continue the injustice and insults to citizens resulting from Judge Kent’s extremely inappropriate acts as a person in high trust.