Probe: Board ignored signs of misconduct

February 3, 2010 at 12:00a.m.

HARRISBURG (AP) — The Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board ignored “red flags” about a judge who took millions of dollars in kickbacks to place juveniles in for-profit detention centers, according to an investigator probing the “kids-for-cash” scandal in Luzerne County.

Kenneth Horoho, a member of a state panel investigating the failures in Luzerne County, questioned Tuesday why the conduct board sat on a 2006 complaint against former county judge Michael Conahan for years and did nothing with it before finally turning it over to federal prosecutors.

“You had red flags. You did nothing with these red flags,” Horoho told conduct board chairman John Cellucci at a hearing in Harrisburg.

The conduct board, which investigates and prosecutes misconduct allegations against Pennsylvania judges, waited nine months before taking up the complaint against Conahan — and then tabled it without ordering its staff to conduct an investigation.

The eight-page complaint contained numerous allegations of cronyism and nepotism, accused Conahan of having mob ties, and, notably, mentioned his close friendship with an attorney who co-owned a Luzerne County detention center where thousands of juvenile offenders were being placed.

Conahan and another former Luzerne County judge, Mark Ciavarella, face federal racketeering charges accusing them of taking $2.8 million in payoffs from the attorney, Robert Powell, and from the builder of the detention center.

The former judges have pleaded innocent and await trial.

Tuesday’s hearing offered possible clues into why the conduct board failed to act on the anonymous complaint against Conahan.

The board’s staff suspected, correctly as it turned out, that it was sent by a staffer of former Luzerne County Judge Ann Lokuta, who at the time was the subject of a conduct board investigation in which Conahan was a key witness against her.

“There were suspicions that it came from Lokuta, somebody who already in our mind had suspect credibility,” the conduct board’s chief deputy counsel, Francis Puskas, testified Tuesday.

Members of the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice also questioned witnesses on ties between Conahan and Luzerne County businessman Patrick Judge, who was chairman of the conduct board when the complaint against Conahan arrived in September 2006. Judge, who had financial dealings with Conahan in Florida and Pennsylvania, never disclosed his relationship with the jurist to the other board members, Cellucci said.

“We had no way of knowing,” Cellucci said. “As far as I know, no one else knew. Nothing was brought up about it.”

He said Judge recused himself in June 2007 when the conduct board voted to table the complaint, but did not explain the reason for the recusal. He said the complaint was tabled on the advice of the board’s attorney, Joseph Massa Jr., because the judge was already under federal investigation.

Patrick Judge has since left the conduct board.

Cellucci bristled under aggressive questioning by Horoho, complaining, “Why are you putting all the blame on a small organization like us?”

The interbranch commission has issued a subpoena to the conduct board to turn over documents related to the 2006 complaint and a second anonymous complaint filed against Conahan in 2004.

The board has refused to comply, saying the state constitution prohibits disclosure. The state Supreme Court last week ordered the board to turn over a limited number of documents under seal.

Interbranch commission chairman John Cleland said Tuesday that the panel may pursue a contempt citation against the conduct board if it fails to provide additional information. That would likely set up another battle before the Supreme Court.

“We don’t want to assume the board has done anything improper, but we can’t draw a conclusion one way or the other because we don’t know,” Cleland said. “We have not drawn any conclusions, but we have developed considerable frustration.”