Judges in “Kids for Cash” Scandal Drop Pleas and Demand Trial

The former Pennsylvania judges charged in the “kids for cash” corruption scandal — Luzerne County Judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan — have withdrawn their guilty pleas and demanded a trial. They took the step after Senior U.S. District Judge Edward M. Kosik refused to accept their plea agreement with prosecutors in light of their failure to take responsibility for their actions.

U.S. District Judge Edwin Kosik has rejected the plea bargain given the two former judges who previously pleaded guilty in a scheme to steer juveniles to for-profit detention facilities for $2.6 million in kickbacks. The decision of Kosik shows the dangers of defendants speaking to the media between pleas and sentencings.

It is good news for many critics who objected to prosecutors agreeing to the 87-month sentence for the two judges as insufficient punishment for their alleged misconduct.

The problem occurred after the guilty plea. Ciavarella made comments after his plea that indicated that he still claimed innocence. Kosik also noted with disfavor objections filed by Conahan to the presentencing report. Conahan, the court notes in the order below, refused to discuss his motivation with the probation staff and denied critical facts in his plea. He calls these objections “obstructive.” For his part, Ciavarella (right) is not criticized for his presentence interviews or report but is criticized for public statements where he denies that there was a quid pro quo — the central allegation in the plea agreement.

For a copy of the original order, click here.

For a prior story, click here.

The two judges tried to get Kosik to reconsider his decision but when he refused they opted for trial. The alternative would have been to allow Kosik to sentence them outside of the plea range. They clearly expected a much higher sentence given Kosik’s statements. The fraud charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years. For the tax charge, the maximum is five years.

The risk is now that they will get no benefit from avoiding a trial and admitting guilt. Given their positions of authority and trust, the guidelines would allow a sentence near the high end of the range. That would please the hundreds of former juveniles and their family members who accuse the judges of ordering their incarceration for kickbacks.

For the full story, click here.