A winning strategy in not reporting judicial misconduct: play dumb

I watched recently a documentary regarding the "Kids for Cash" scandal in the Luzerne County Court in Pennsylvania where two judges were convicted of, among other things, the crimes of racketeering and receiving kickbacks.

The judges ruined more than 2000 lives.  Lives of juveniles, of children.

In the documentary, the Luzerne County Public Defender, in an interview, stated that he "thought" that the juveniles in question who the former judge Ciavarella sent to the juvenile jail in return for kickbacks in proceedings where children were not represented by counsel, actually "validly waived" their right to counsel.

Now, that explanation was, to me, stunning.  The statement gives a new meaning to the phrase "do not insult my intelligence".

A public defender who have worked in this field, including representation of juveniles, for decades, should have known that a child may not legally make a waiver of counsel without such a counsel present.

At the very least, the counsel must be present at the time when a juvenile waives his or her right to counsel, to make sure that the juvenile is properly advise what legal consequences such a waiver entails.

Former judge Ciavarella's misconduct continued for years.

Former judge Ciavarella has sent to juvenile jail without the benefit of counsel 2000 children over the course of several years.

And the public defender would pretend with a straight face that he did not know of any of that?

Good try, counselor, but wasn't it in reality easier not to report judicial misconduct and retain your law license than try to save the kids and put your license on the line risking retaliation from the judiciary?