On Copper vs Silver Justice and (Corporate Wives) PlayBoy Bunny Judges - the justice for sale galore

Two heads of New York State Legislature, Sheldon Silver (Assembly Speaker) and Dean Skelos (Majority Leader of the Senate) were convicted of corruption charges.

On May 3, 2016, Sheldon Silver was sentenced to 12 years in prison.

On May 12, 2016, Dean Skelos was sentenced to 5 years in prison.

Yet, in both of their cases, judge Valerie Caproni (for Silver) and Judge Kimba Wood (for Skelos) unanimously allowed these two public officials convicted of corruption, whose corruption was proven to juries through testimony and documentary evidence, to remain free pending resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court of a case pertaining - coincidentally - to government corruption.

Here is the procedural history of the U.S. Supreme Court case that these two federal judges used to give a summer break from prison to convicted felons Silver and Skelos.

Such unanimity, from two different federal judges - to keep three convicted felons (Silver, Skelos-father and Skelos-son) - out of prison, defying the jury verdict, defying the statutorily enacted power of the people of this country to criminally prosecute corruption in the government.

Here is judge Valerie Caproni, former wunderkid, former General Counsel for the FBI, former Chief of Special Prosecutions and Chief of the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section in the U.S. Attorney General's Office,  former "white-collar" criminal defense attorney.   Jane of all trades, who already has a history of using her knowledge acquired in a taxpayer-paid job for personal gain.

Let's see how her career will develop after the seminal decision to keep convicted corrupt public officials free until a corrupt court will decide the issue whether corruption is corruption or just "business as usual" for politicians:

Here is Judge Kimba Wood.  The country should know the faces of its anti-heroes.

Judge Kimba Wood, by the way, is married, by her 3rd marriage, to a Wall Street millionaire financier Frank Richardson III, where Richardson's diaries about his affair with Wood was an explosive part of his divorce action.  Frank Richardson is reportedly Judge Wood's law school classmate.

Judge Wood was reportedly in training as a PlayBoy Bunny in London, which did not prevent her from becoming a lawyer or a federal judge.

Quite a colorful past, and marriage to a rich corporate investor did not prevent Judge Kimba Wood from (1) presiding over a case which can benefit her husband; or (2) throwing herself into the public spotlight by her decision to let convicted corrupt politicians roam free.

It is definite in my mind that Judge Wood should be investigated as to whether her husband Frank Richardson ever engaged in lobbying activities or large campaign contributions to politicians, because then it is an irreconcilable and disqualifying conflict of interest for Judge Wood to preside over the case.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected, within 2 months, to hand down a decision in the case of corruption of Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell in order to rule "what constitutes corruption as opposed to everyday government action for a benefactor".

Now, WHAT is a "government action for a benefactor" OTHER than corruption?

Yet, the U.S. Supreme Court (1) took the case of Bob McDonnell (in their discretion, remember, while tossing certioraris of Copper Joes left and right, without an explanation) and (2) expressed "concerns" - about this:

"Justices on both sides of the ideological divide expressed concern about federal corruption laws that could criminalize what they variously called “routine” or “everyday” actions that politicians perform for campaign contributors or supporters who have provided them with gifts."

Idiot-logical divide, rather.

First of all, judges CANNOT be "ideological".  If they are admittedly so, they should not be on the bench.

And, is there an issue at all in a reasonable person's mind that politicians' "actions" for "campaign contributors" and "supporters who have provided them with gifts", IS corruption?

Here, a couple of governing legal principles that must spring into action in the McDonnell case:

1) The restriction of the U.S. Constitution, Article III on jurisdiction of federal courts - such courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, may not legislate, only the U.S. Congress has such a right, under Article I of the U.S. Constitution;  thus, the U.S. Supreme Court may not change a federal statute by interpretation;

2) the rule of statutory interpretation - a court does not get to interpret a clear and unambiguous rule;  and, there is no ambiguity in the federal statute as to the "quid pro quo" - what the court expressed "concerns" about cannot be read by any reasonable reader OTHER than corruption.

Another interesting issue here is the exercise of discretion by the U.S. Supreme Court and the timing of such exercise.

Isn't it interesting issue here is - out of all constitutional issues tossed by the U.S. Supreme Court in their "absolute discretion", THIS is the most important issue for the country that the top court must consider - the distinction between "corruption" and "everyday government action for a benefactor"?

And shouldn't the FBI and the U.S. Congress start an impeachment investigation of ALL the U.S. Supreme Court justices in connection with this "timely" exercise of discretion on this particular issue?

The extra-busy U.S. Supreme Court, the court that regularly tosses petitions for a writ of certiorari by pro se litigants and attorneys suffering judicial retaliation for making motions to recuse and for fighting for their clients, those Joe Copper petitions - why such court would suddenly, and "coincidentally" in time as to convictions in Silver and Skelos' cases - decide this particular issue at this particular time?

Is this a bad case of "Silver Justice" - even though the "hunting trip" judge Scalia is already 6 feet under?

Is the power of money, corrupt money, such that the U.S. Supreme Court would take the case of the Virginia Governor while tossing cases of suffering average American citizens - so that Dean Skelos and Sheldon Silver would not have to spend one day in prison, despite conviction and sentencing, and without an inconvenience and uncertainty to have to go through their own appellate process, just through another case, "coincidentally" "timely" decided right about the time when Silver and Skelos must go to prison?

Now, imagine that not a Sheldon Silver, but, let's say, a Joe Copper, was just sentenced.

And, Joe Copper asks the judge to delay his reporting to prison because the U.S. Supreme Court may rule on an issue important for Joe Copper in Joe Copper's criminal proceeding.

Do you have a slightest doubt that Joe Copper will be awaiting the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in prison.

I actually have no doubt that the U.S. Supreme Court would not even undertake a review of an issue beneficial for Joe Copper at the time of Joe Copper's conviction and sentencing.

But, that's, ladies and gentlemen, is Copper justice - reserved to us, mere mortals.

As to what will be the outcome of the Silver justice - the "coincidental" decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that Silver and Skelos are waiting for while roaming free despite their conviction and sentencing - I will cover the story further, so stay tuned.

But, let me tell you this - in a country where a top court has lost its moral compass to the point of considering, in its "discretion"  no less, a distinction between "corruption" and "everyday government action for a benefactor", we are doomed unless we fire that court and institute governmental reform from top to bottom, through constitutional amendments if necessary.