If a judge is suspected of corruption in, say, New York City, would he or she be investigated by the police, or the district attorney's office?
A bajillion thanks.
A bajillion thanks.
Corrupt Big City Judge
- Thread starter Noah Body
- Start date
More times than not they wouldn't be investigated at all because any criminal who ever went before them would have an immediate appeal, but there's a special Judicial conduct board in most places for this.
There's a serious burden of proof too.
There's a serious burden of proof too.
For sure there's going to be burden of proof, as there would be in any case. But who would be responsible for collecting the proof and conducting the investigation? A judicial board sounds great, but would they still need cops and DAs to actually run the nuts and bolts portion of the investigation?
There are Judicial Rules that all judges must follow in the state. If it's New York, It would be the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct that would investigate. (http://www.scjc.state.ny.us/). Every state has it's own Judicial Rules or Ethics... They are their own separate department.
Judicial boards deal with ethical issues, which admittedly this is. But it is more a criminal matter. In the case of the judges in Pennsylvania, the investigation was done by the F.B.I. and that's usually the case.
But the investigation would be started by who figures out there might be corruption first. Whoever starts the investigation would be very, very quiet about it.
Most cases start by a letter complaining about a judge that fits a pattern of behavior. Local attorneys are probably hearing things, but getting solid information is difficult. It takes someone who can collect from a variety of sources to get enough information to make a case. And then the usual approach is a sting.
The other way these cases come up is when one of the small players get caught, and needs something to trade. Getting a judge is a big bargaining chip in plea bargains.
In the one case where I actually knew the judge (John Fairbanks), the investigation was done by New Hampshire attorney general's office, with assistance from the state police.
Best of luck,
Jim Clark-Dawe
But the investigation would be started by who figures out there might be corruption first. Whoever starts the investigation would be very, very quiet about it.
Most cases start by a letter complaining about a judge that fits a pattern of behavior. Local attorneys are probably hearing things, but getting solid information is difficult. It takes someone who can collect from a variety of sources to get enough information to make a case. And then the usual approach is a sting.
The other way these cases come up is when one of the small players get caught, and needs something to trade. Getting a judge is a big bargaining chip in plea bargains.
In the one case where I actually knew the judge (John Fairbanks), the investigation was done by New Hampshire attorney general's office, with assistance from the state police.
Best of luck,
Jim Clark-Dawe