Pennsylvania Supreme Court Overturns Hundreds of Juvenile Convictions

180px-pennsylvania_state_sealsvgAs ex-Judge Ann Lokuta tries to force her own reinstatement after the jailing to two of her former colleagues on the Pennsylvania courts, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has overturned as many as 1,200 juvenile convictions.

The convictions and sentenced were handed down by the former president judge of Luzerne County, Mark Ciavarella Jr. between 2003 and 2008, Ciavarella later pleaded guilty for accepting kickbacks to send kids to jail.

The scandal involving judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella reaches a new low for humanity. The question now is whether compensation will be paid to these kids.

For the full story, click here.

12 thoughts on “Pennsylvania Supreme Court Overturns Hundreds of Juvenile Convictions

  1. Draconian punishment of any kind has never seemed sensible to me, however, these two Judges and their cohorts deserve life sentences and the county should pay through its’ nose to those affected by this.

  2. This happens all the time. The only difference here is these two judges got caught. Graft and influence peddling at the expense of both justice and the lives and rights of people are exchanged daily, indeed every minute someone goes into an american courtroom expecting justice and finds themselves caught in the web of falsehearted judges and lawyers. Favors are exchanged between the bench and the attorneys with wreckless abandon for law. Judges can steer a case in whatever direction they choose by simply allowing some information ‘in’ and ruling other vital facts ‘out’ frequently based upon some arcane and manipulative ‘finding’ that allows them to act as king rather than as an impartial investigator. A system of human usury. Fair and reasonable no longer exits as a paradigm nor as an ideal to pursue. It has been replaced by favors, titles, and , as we see here, by cold-cash-for-lives. For this reason alone I am convinced we – as a society – are destined for a violent end. (See Oakland, CA.) And, perhaps that would be appropriate. Then, our little experiement with ‘justice’ would be over which would be a good thing. If justice and people are not united; we are finished. And so, we are.

  3. Robert,
    You’re such a damn pessimist. Here I am in my golden years, a non-believer in heaven, and trying to envision a world better for my progeny. Here you come along speaking of the truth that the system is rigged to favor the elite. What’s a Codger to do, except play “Let a Smile Be Your Umbrella,” while “Whistling a Happy Tune” as I rush towards oblivion hoping for better things for my children and grandchildren.

  4. Sorry Mike, you know me to be decent and that I wish you all the happiness in the world-truly. However, What in my comments is incorrect?

  5. Robert Wales Ph.D.:

    “This happens all the time. The only difference here is these two judges got caught. Graft and influence peddling at the expense of both justice and the lives and rights of people are exchanged daily, indeed every minute someone goes into an american courtroom expecting justice and finds themselves caught in the web of falsehearted judges and lawyers. … Fair and reasonable no longer exits as a paradigm nor as an ideal to pursue. It has been replaced by favors, titles, and , as we see here, by cold-cash-for-lives.”

    **************

    That is utter bullshot. You make the inflammatory generalization; you prove it with more than the exceptional case or your baseless opinion. A study, a peer reviewed paper, even FBI crime stats, would suffice, but an uninformed opinion by one who freely admits he rarely goes to the courthouse, has all the credibility of the crazy on the corner warning me the “end is near.” Lest you slander an entire segment of the population, I suggest you regurgitate some morsel of fact to at least give the pretense of validity for that claimed Ph.D — it’s certainly not self-evident from these accusations.

  6. When Obama stated last week, at his press conference, that he took a couple of days to respond ‘because he likes to know what he is talking about before he speaks’, I ‘knew’ he was speaking directly to moi.

    I, likewise, have no time for people who create ‘situations’ by making unsubstantiated statements and who, when expected to back them up, didn’t know that they didn’t know what they were talking about until the ‘horse is out of the barn’-and aptly so described.

    Perhaps there’s a lesson in the breach, as it were, for a wayward
    wailing whale named ‘Wales’.

  7. Mespo, you fear the truth and so you make your attacks personal. Defending the Titanic or singing along to ‘my country right or wrong’ is no defense at all. Your writing is not an answer nor do I see much of a position from you. Slander is not an answer.

  8. What good would a citation do? It would be too easy to retrieve a paper or work to either support or discredit a position. More words are the problem. That is my exact point. And that is precisely what adversarial law requires in order to perpetuate the dysfunctional practice of law. Your mind wants to tear into more lexicon as you were conditioned to do in your educational platform. Is the article on the PA judges locking away children not a citation in itself? Is it so difficult to see that privatizing the prison system has created a flourishing business at the expense of peoples very lives? Placing unimportant people in a room with lawyers and judges with no Jonathan Turley level of publicity on a case and the result is frequently a complete distortion. Any justice being dispensed is purely by accident.

Comments are closed.