No Judge who is corrupt, who condones corruption in others, can possibly remains on the Bench.

Saturday, June 20, 2009

Jail house for Judge Samuel Kent

Jailhouse Judge: Judge Samuel Kent Begins To Serve Jail Sentence Without Resigning From the Bench”

The federal prison system has plenty of jailhouse lawyers. Now it has its first jailhouse judge (not to mention of jury of his peers). U.S. District Judge Samuel B. Kent began to serve his jail sentence today while still a member of the federal judiciary.
He continues to refuse to resign. For those who were initially supportive of Kent, few people defend him now after his outrageous effort to bilk the judiciary for every possible dime of salary and benefits while dragging both the courts and Congress through the scandal that he created.
Four months ago, Kent, 59, pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and received a 33-month sentence. As noted earlier, he is clearly delaying his resignation to continue to receive benefits — calculating that it will take a year to hold a trial in the Senate for his impeachment. Kent was able to secure a favorable prison facility: Devens Federal Medical Center, a 1,300-bed facility near Boston. The facility houses felons with long-term medical and mental health problems.
Kent is accused of molesting of two former female employees, case manager Cathy McBroom, 50, and legal secretary Donna Wilkerson, 45.

June 19, 2009 5:48 PM

It is a rare occasion when the House of Representatives must vote on articles of impeachment against a federal judge.

Indeed, the last time this occurred was 20 years ago. However, when evidence emerges that an individual is abusing his judicial office for his own advantage, the integrity of the judicial system becomes compromised, and the House of Representatives has the duty to investigate the matter and take the appropriate actions to end the abuse and restore confidence in the judicial system.

Just days ago the House of Representatives considered and passed, without any dissenting votes, four articles of impeachment against Judge Samuel B. Kent.

Kent is only the 14th federal judge in the nation’s history to be the focus of an impeachment in the House. The charges include two articles on the grounds of sexual assault, one article on the grounds of obstruction of justice, and one article on the grounds of providing false statements to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice.

This vote came after a thorough investigation and much work by the Task Force on Judicial Impeachment, on which I serve as Ranking Member. The Task Force conducted an investigatory hearing on the matter, at which two court employees who were victimized by Judge Kent testified about the extent of his sexual abuse. While Judge Kent and his attorney were both invited to testify and participate in the hearing, both declined to attend.

Judge Kent pled guilty to felony obstruction of justice and to committing repeated acts of nonconsensual sexual contact with court employees. Earlier this month, he reported to prison to begin his 33 month sentence.

However, because the Constitution provides that federal judges are appointed for life, Samuel Kent, despite the fact that he is sitting in prison, continues to collect his taxpayer-funded salary of $174,000 per year, continues to collect his taxpayer-funded health insurance benefits, and continues to accrue his taxpayer-funded pension unless he resigns his office or is impeached.

This amounts to an attempt to extort hundreds of thousands of dollars from the American people and is simply unacceptable.

It is not a pleasant task to impeach a federal judge, yet when a judge so clearly abuses his office, as in the case of Judge Kent, it becomes necessary to take the appropriate action in order to restore the confidence of the American people in the judicial system. The Constitution gives the House of Representatives the power and responsibility to impeach federal judges and it is a power that Congress utilizes only in cases involving very serious allegations of misconduct. The case now goes to the United States Senate for a trial to determine if Judge Kent should be removed from office. The Task Force on Judicial Impeachment, the House Judiciary Committee and the full House of Representatives worked together in a bipartisan fashion to ensure that swift action was taken to root out corruption in our judicial system.

Judge Samuel Kent begins to serve Jail Sentence without resigning from the Bench.................

Mothers Fighting Back Group

Mothers Fighting Back Group

This group is for mother’s who have lost custody of their children in the biased family court system we face today.
If you are not ready to stand up and fight for equal rights, treatment, justice and reform, then this group is not for you. Mothers, it is time for change. There are several laws and sly strategies that have made it easy for judges to strip fit mothers of their rights to their children. The one Id like to address in this group is Third Party Intervention. It is a law that allows one party to obtain legal custody during divorce proceedings. The way it works is, any Joe Scheme can be given permission by a judge to intervene into a divorce and ask for visitation of the children involved, so long as they cite that it is the best interest of the children. More often than not, the intervening parties are of some relationship to the husband. More often than not, that husband has been abusive and too often, the mother has no choice but to fight TWO attorneys. Imagine that. Well, unfortunately I don’t have to. Needless to say with my ex husband’s extra leverage in court, he was able to gain and keep physical custody of our daughter. Although the United States Supreme Court deemed this sort of law essentially ridiculous and a violation of the 14th Amendment, most states like in my case, Virginia, do not honor this declaration.
We mothers who have done nothing but love, nurture and protect our children need to demand that state courts reject intervention from third parties, who only seek to either aid the father in obtaining a legal license to control and punish the mother or gain custody of the child themselves.

The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution is one of the amendments that was enacted after the Civil War as part of the Reconstruction Amendments, along with the Thirteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. It was adopted on July 9, 1868.
The amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) which had excluded slaves, and their descendants, from possessing Constitutional rights and was used in the mid-20th century to dismantle racial segregation in the United States, as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Its Due Process Clause has been used to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states. This clause has also been used to recognize: (1) substantive due process rights, such as parental and marriage rights; and (2) procedural due process rights requiring that certain steps, such as a hearing, be followed before a person's "life, liberty, or property" can be taken away. The amendment's Equal Protection Clause requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions. The amendment also includes a number of clauses dealing with the Confederate states and their officials.

Message from Group Moderator
We are forming this group to seek women who have been abused by partners and then further abused by the court system. Our goal is to work to change laws, inform the public and self help through peer groups. Do you feel that things are not quit right in the handling of your case? Join in. If you are male, and have experienced this treatment, you may also join.