ILR comments. The judge-bribing attorney had requested a 30-month sentence (in conjunction with the now-standard set of hundreds of letters listing his supposed good deeds); his plea agreement provided for a five-year maximum sentence, which he got. He’ll still have the jet and millions of dollars when he gets out, even after paying the $250,000 fine imposed at the sentencing. David Rossmiller and Folo will undoubtably continue their excellent coverage, or check our previous Dickie Scruggs coverage.
Posts Tagged ‘crime and punishment’
Milberg settles
Jonathan D. Glater reports that the former Milberg Weiss will pay $75 million over five years; the government will release a statement saying no current attorneys committed wrongdoing. (“Firm to Settle Class-Action Case for $75 Million”, NY Times, Jun. 17; also W$J). The W$J says the firm will admit that it committed wrongdoing in the past, but will not actually plead guilty–i.e., the same sort of deferred prosecution agreement that the NY Times recently condemned in the context of business. (To be clear: I’m not objecting to a deferred prosecution agreement here. Felony convictions for entities are usually effectively death sentences, and that is pointless if the guilty parties have actually left the building.)
June 12 roundup
- As I type this post, I’m listening to Andrew Frey argue Conrad Black’s appeal before Judge Posner and the Seventh Circuit. Posner seems to be confused over whether incorrect jury instructions can be prejudicial in a general verdict. [Bashman roundup; earlier]
- “For years families bogged down in Harris County [Texas] probate courts have accused judges of bleeding estates of tens of thousands of dollars to pay high-priced lawyers for unnecessary work.” [Houston Chronicle; Alpert v. Riley (Tex. App. Jun. 5, 2008) (via)]
- Company sets policy. Employee violates policy. Is corporation criminally responsible for employee’s act? [POL; FCPA blog; Podgor]
- Merrill Lynch banker asks for investigation of Enron Task Force withholding of exculpatory evidence [Bloomberg]
- When calculating the costs of medical malpractice suits, let’s not forget the noneconomic costs. “In the [John] Ritter case, the jury agreed with the defendant physicians and exonerated them of any liability. They were lucky. How lucky? They were able to spend four years with attorneys worrying about their future, including the potential that they would be ordered to pay tens of millions of dollars and be left penniless. So, they didn’t really win. They just lost less.” [EM News via Kevin MD via Dr. RW]
- Nor should we forget the defensive medicine costs. [Kevin MD]
- Legal reform = job creation. [American Courthouse]
- According to Justinian Lane, if you’re reading this post, you’re a “spineless sycophant.” [Bizarro-Overlawyered]
Lerach: “Serving Time, but Lacking Remorse”
In today’s NY Times, Joe Nocera lambastes Bill Lerach’s lack of remorse and notes that his crimes weren’t victimless. To which I would add: given that Lerach’s Portfolio defense of his crimes demonstrates that he lied in his sentencing letter to the court and the allocution he made, and given that Lerach got a reduced sentence under the Guidelines for “acceptance of responsibility” because of those false representations, why isn’t the government looking to make a criminal contempt or perjury charge? (We’ll give John Keker the benefit of the doubt that he didn’t know what was in Lerach’s heart when he falsely told the court “Mr. Lerach has stepped up and accepted responsibility.”) Surely Judge John Walter doesn’t condone this sort of thing.
If the government doesn’t step up here, it’s further evidence that they got rolled in their plea negotiation with Lerach.
Tracy Barker v. Ali Mokhtare
For those interested in an update on the Tracy Barker case, where litigation lobby activists falsely stated that an arbitration agreement prevented her from getting civil justice in the case of her alleged sexual assault, Barker’s suit against her alleged assaulter Ali Mokhtare proceeds before Judge Leonie M. Brinkema in the Eastern District of Virginia, case no. 1:07-cv-01231-LMB-BRP. Mokhtare denies the allegations. Barker appears to have fired Todd Kelly or vice versa. Discovery closed April 17. After discovery closed, Barker moved to amend her complaint a second time to add new allegations; Mokhtare moved to substitute the United States in his stead; the US rejected Mokhtare’s request and opposed the motion, arguing that he was not acting in the scope of employment. Judge Brinkema rejected both motions. Mokhtare is appealing the US’s decision to the Fourth Circuit (No. 08-1560).
Fingerprinting mortgage professionals?
If the feds are really in search of types of jobholders with a high risk of scandal and defalcation, we could probably come up with some other nominees for them. (John Berlau, CEI “Open Market”, May 23). New York apparently has such a system already (North Country Gazette); see also Reason comments (employees of SEC-regulated financial institutions).
“Newark must pay $4.1 million for missteps in student’s death”
New Jersey: “An Essex County jury has ordered Newark to pay $4.1 million to the family of a murdered Seton Hall University student because of mistakes made by a police dispatcher and 911 operator during her abduction. The jury’s verdict came after the attorney for Sohayla Massachi’s family argued that prompt action by the Newark police may have prevented her murder after she was abducted by a jilted boyfriend in May 2000.” The jury attributed 25 percent of its $5.5 million award to Seton Hall and its security agency, Argenbright Security Inc., but those defendants had already settled. (William Kleinknecht, Newark Star-Ledger, May 16).
Testi-lying in NYC firearms cases
In more than twenty felon-found-with-firearm cases, judges have found the testimony of New York City police “to be unreliable, inconsistent, twisting the truth, or just plain false. The judges’ language was often withering: ‘patently incredible,’ ‘riddled with exaggerations,’ ‘unworthy of belief.'” Yet “with few exceptions”, the testifying officers have faced no consequences, “prosecutors did not notify police authorities about the judges’ findings”, and the Police Department says it has no official knowledge of most of the cases. Could this relate to the arrogance of a city administration hardened in the belief that individual rights always have to give way to the greater social good of “getting guns off the streets”? (Benjamin Weiser, “Police in Gun Searches Face Disbelief in Court”, New York Times, May 12)(& welcome Instapundit readers).
Great moments in forfeiture law
First-time marijuana-possession offenders are typically not punished very severely, and it appears that retiree Luther Ricks of Lima, Ohio, and his wife Meredith aren’t going to face charges at all. So aside from the confiscation of their $400,000 in life savings, they should come out of it just fine (Greg Sowinski, “Man wants his $400K back from the FBI”, Lima News, Dec. 18; Radley Balko, Dec. 21 and Mar. 21; “Forfeiture Folly”, Reason, April).
Against victim impact statements
I’ve never liked this innovation in the criminal justice system and explain why in this comment left at Scott Greenfield’s:
What seems to me most obviously wrong in Judge Cassell’s outline [a lecture by lawprof, formerly judge, Paul Cassell, for National Crime Victims Rights Week] is his point #4, about how impact statements restore to victims “some of the dignity that was taken from them by criminal offenders”. Every day these procedures induce family members to stand up in court and read aloud “rot in hell, you’ve destroyed our family” statements which are then reported in the local press. I can’t be the only one who sees these statements as a grievous surrender of victim families’ dignity. And family members who might prefer silence as the more dignified course must often feel intense pressure to make a statement, the more demonstrative the better, for fear of appearing in others’ eyes as insufficiently loving or appreciative of the victimized member. (The figure of Cordelia comes to mind.)
I have no idea what effect victim impact statements have on the guilty person being sentenced; I think they are worth opposing because of their barbarous effect on the innocent.