Tuesday, April 7, 2009

Interesting Exchange In Judge Ann Lokuta's Application For Supersedas, Stay, And Extraordinary Relief

The following statements were contained in Judge Ann Lokuta's Motion for Supersedas, Stay, And Extraoridary Relief before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found on the Citizen's Voice website.

4. Lokuta testified at her Trial before the Court of Judicial Discipline that she initiated contact with the United States Attorney and the Federal Bureau of Investigation concerning irregularities that she witnessed with respect to the Judicial operations and functions taking place in the 11th Judicial District. [N.T., 1-14-08, pp. 2861-2862].

A. In fact, during her deposition taken on August 25, 2006, by Deputy
Counsel for the Judicial Conduct Board, Lokuta specifically informed
Atty. Puskas, through her then Counsel, the areas that she was looking at
concerning the interrelationship between Judge Conahan, Judge
Ciavarella, and other Courthouse employees, and the impact it had over
Lokuta’s ability to function as a Judge in the 11th Judicial District:
The following exchange took place:
MR. STRETTON: I can tell you, having served as the solicitor for the
Prothonotary up there and as the solicitor for the Controller, I see
the control that Conahan has and I’ve seen what he’s done up
And I was there when lawyers called Steve Flood and said,
“Judge Conahan called us and said, ‘If you give him one penny in
his campaign, you will not win another case in this county’”
MR. STRETTON: So I want you to understand that this is not the
normal County.
MR. PUSKAS: I understand that.
MR. STRETTON: This is a county where I issued subpoenas for the
Controller to get evidence on Conahan and Ciavarella on the
judicial–the Juvenile Justice Center and problems there. We had a
hearing with Judge Toole, Jr., and he never acted on it, and it sat
there for a whole nine months until Flood went out of office.
[Deposition of Lokuta, August 25, 2006, at p. 167, lines 2-25].
B. Later in Lokuta’s Deposition of August 25, 2006, in an attempt to explain
how her Judicial role was being marginalized to the point that she was not
able to function based upon the control and actions of then President Judge
Conahan, another exchange relative to what was being reviewed by
Lokuta’s Counsel took place:
“...LOKUTA: So when you say you can’t understand this, let me suggest
to you sir, that it’s pretty apparent what goes on in this district.
MR. STRETTON: And I just want–
MR. PUSKAS: I appreciate –
MR. STRETTON: – to add, before we go any further, – because I know
this summer, last summer, Judge Muroski approached me through
Steve Flood and asked to testify at the Controller’s hearing. He
asked me to give him a Controller’s subpoena. We had set the
hearings up and he was going to testify about the problems with
the Juvenile Justice Center, which is the baby of Ciavarella and
MR. STRETTON: A week before that I get a call from Taylor Williams, a
very close friend of mine from the Court–AOPC’s counsel’s office.
She said, “Sam, Judge Muroski has retained me. He’s extremely
upset that you issued this subpoena. We’re going to move to quash
I told Taylor, I said, “Taylor, I’ll withdraw the subpoena.
He asked me to give it to him.” I said, “What’s going on?”
And Judge Conahan gave Judge Muroski his chambers, allotted
$30,000 of repairs, and Judge Muroski won’t talk to us anymore.
I want you to see what’s happening to people up there,
‘cause your whole tone here has been, well, you say this, but all
these other people say that.
I’m going to tell you–and if we get to trial on this, I know
where the bodies are buried up there, and you’re gonna see the
same thing is happening to each person, I suspect.
And that’s why people are giving versions, because they’re
offered things like Susan Weber is, even though she’s totally not
competent to do her job.
I want you to see that though. You’ve got to live through it
to appreciate it.
MR. PUSKAS: I understand that, Sam. I understand what you’re saying,
and I understand what Judge Lokuta’s saying.
MR. PUSKAS: My point is this, is that what you’re describing is an
atmosphere in this county that’s making it difficult–this is your
perspective–to function as a judge.
MR. STRETTON: It makes people lie.
MR. PUSKAS: And what I’m saying here is, these are complaints we are
investigating, and the complaints we are investigating by and large
deal with Judge Lokuta’s behavior against other people.
MR. STRETTON: But every one of them have benefitted.
[Deposition of Lokuta, August 25, 2006, at pp. 178, lines16-25, p. 179,
lines 1-25, p. 180, lines 1-18]. [Lokuta’s Deposition are attached hereto as
Exhibit “B” and incorporated herein by reference]

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

And not ONE word of it was printed in our local newspapers at the time...hmmmmmm. I believe the reporters also moved on to bigger and better things after the trial.