Judges are not beyond scrutiny. Nor are they beyond making mistake. They are suppose to be beyond corruption and lying under oath. Today, the U.S. Senate begins the impeachment trial of federal judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. The judge is accused of corruption, accepting kick backs and lying about his past to the Senate and FBI regarding his nomination. Some say the judge is getting screwed. Others say he is not. Keep in mind, this is the first impeachment trial since President Bill Clinton's trial in 1999. (And we all know how that one turned out.. oral sex is not sex.)
In March, the House of Representatives voted unanimously to impeach Porteous. Porteous is the nation's 15th federal judge to be impeached. Porteous is accused of "intentionally made material false statements and representations under penalty of perjury, engaged in a corrupt kickback scheme, solicited and accepted unlawful gifts, and intentionally misled the Senate during his confirmation proceedings." According to U. S. Rep Adam Schiff, the House investigation "... found that Judge Porteous participated in a pattern of corrupt conduct for years."
Previously, Porteous' lawyer Richard W. Westling said the Justice Department had decided not to prosecute because it did not have credible evidence. The House, however, has decided otherwise. No criminal charges are pending. Among the issues the Senate must address is whether the judge failed to recuse himself from a case he was involved in and whether he made false and misleading statements, including concealing debts and gambling losses.
Porteous, 63, has not been on the bench since he was suspended with pay in the fall of 2008.Impeachment of judges is not unprecedented. Last year, Judge Samuel B. Kent of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas resigned after being impeached on charges of sexual assault, obstructing and impeding an official proceeding and making false and misleading statements. The Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, dismissed the articles.
In 1989, Judge Walter L. Nixon of U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi was impeached on charges of perjury before a federal grand jury. The Senate convicted him and removed him from office. What will happen to Porteous? Presumably justice and not a new definition for "failing to tell the truth."
9-23-10 Update: It is hard not to love Kate. She is always very complimentary of Legal Pub articles and the comments. Here is Kate's recent comment along with a links to some interesting opinions on Judge Porteous, Jr.
"Hi Legal Pub guys, I just saw your post about Judge Thomas Porteous’ Senate impeachment trial. I agree with you in that corrupt conduct should not be tolerated in office if the general public ever hopes to get a fair trial. Thanks for pointing out his debts and gambling losses--I hadn’t heard that, and it seems that not too many people are talking that up in the media. I wonder how much his personal life was affecting his ability to do his federal job. I wanted to share a video with you from Newsy.com that I thought you might find relevant to your post. It takes a look at much of the recent coverage from multiple sources regarding the Porteous case. However, it also raises the question about whether the trial is just the Senate’s attempt to save face because of their previous knowledge of the allegations, or if it’s true purpose is to serve justice: LINK.
I think that you and your readers will find this very relevant and hope you might consider embedding this video in your blog. Thanks so much for your time. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments."
Kate Keranskatherinek@newsy.com
Update 12-8-10: U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. was found guilty on four articles of impeachment by the U.S. Senate. He was thereby removed from his lifetime appointment to the federal bench in Louisiana. Impeachment also denies him the right to recieve a federal pension. Porteous, 63, is the eighth judge in American history to be removed from office by the Senate.
Posts
14 comments:
Here come da judge!
The real shame is that if he is guilty he should have been subject to criminal liability.
The U.S. Justice department cleared him of any criminal charges. They declined to prosecute for lack of evidence. Shouldn't the Senate be held to the same standards?
I agree with anon 7:52.
Yeah, is this just a political witch hunt or do they actually have the goods? If they had the goods why did the Justice Dept not prosecute?
we truly live in exciting times...
Spam filters are making it easier to edit the crap. If you have a legitimate post that does not make the site, you may submit it directly to legalpub@legalpub.net for consideration.
"Judge Thomas Porteous and the ‘Devil’s Den’ from Whence He Came"
http://newsblaze.com/story/20100922041842lawg.nb/topstory.html
". . .even after exposure of irrefutable facts and truths at Porteous' impeachment trial, scandalous behavior will continue because Porteous is not the only problem --just the most conspicuous culprit. . ."
Interesting comment with citation. What constitutes corruption may depend upon one's perspective. From a position looking at this matter without the benefit of all the evidence, I tend to put a lot of weight on the Justice Department's decison not to prosecute.
It could get interesting...
Love Kates comments. Patted myself on the back as a frequent reader/contributor.
I didn't realize impeachment was so rare. LOL.
Hard not to like Kate.
I do not come with everything you announce ' but I bring into the world to grant that you take a tremendous blog.
Update 12-8-10: U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. was found guilty on four articles of impeachment by the U.S. Senate. He was thereby removed from his lifetime appointment to the federal bench in Louisiana. Impeachment also denies him the right to recieve a federal pension. Porteous, 63, is the eighth judge in American history to be removed from office by the Senate.
Legal Pub, I like your site better than Kate, but she is much better looking! :)
Post a Comment