MovieChat Forums > Kids for Cash (2015) Discussion > Just saw the trailer...

Just saw the trailer...

posted 10 years ago by lasvegasira
7 replies | jump to latest

This looks like a very disturbing film.

You have to imagine how many judges out there are on the payroll of the NUMEROUS for profit detention centers in this country and if there really is such a thing as a fair trial...

"You know what a cautious fellow I am..."

[–] blipsycat 10 years ago

A "fair trial" has never existed, and never will.

[–] grolaw 10 years ago

Not true.

Juries and the presumption of innocence are the keystone of our justice system - from the Magna Carta to the U.S. Constitution we have the ability to have fair trials. In this case the PA Juvenile Courts had no juries and no presumption of innocence.

But, what do I know after 25 years as a trial attorney?

[–] xoomis 10 years ago

no fair trial with a conflict of interest. Anyone with half a brain would tell you that.

[–] grolaw 10 years ago

Clearly, conflicts of interest are serious issues for honest members of the judiciary. Within the canons of judicial ethics are the provisos that a judge must (Canon 1)

A judge shall uphold and promote the, independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.

and (Canon 3)

A judge shall conduct the judge’s personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with the obligations of judicial office

In Pennsylvania, the judges would have had to post their financials where any counsel (or, layperson) could examine them for investments that would have presented an actual conflict of interest or created the appearence of impropriety. The obvious problem here is that the judges did not disclose their kickbacks (or, pay taxes on the income - a number of very sharp folks committing financial crimes have made anonymous payments to the IRS and state taxing authorities in order to minimize tax-related charges - making the charge a "failure to file" rather than a "failure to pay" taxes on illegal gains - something these two jerks didn't consider).

This case is not about a "conflict of interest" this case is about corrupting two judges by bribing them to imprison children in for-profit facilities. The circumstances are, and were, grossly felonious.

Alternately, and depending upon the nature of the conflict of interest, the conflict may never constitute a criminal wrong. Most judges voluntarily recuse themselves whenever "the appearance of impropriety" manifests itself. Any attorney can file a motion to recuse a judge where a conflict is manifest. Consider a judge with $100,000.00 in Apple stock v. a Judge with $100,000.00 in a Mutual Fund that holds some Apple stock - Judge 1 should recuse herself in any case where Apple is a party and Judge 2 does not have the same duty where his holdings are not directly effected by his court rulings in a case with Apple as a party.

At root, this is a case where more attorneys were needed - it was a children's public interest law operation that brought the cash for kids bribes to light - had the children been represented before these two judges when they were first charged the rampant incarceration practices of these judges would have come under intense scrutiny. I doubt that the kickbacks could ever have been profitable if every time one of these two judges attempted to simply lock away the child the judge would have to deal with a ticked-off fact-finder and/or an appeal.

[–] doggie_rodriguez 9 years ago

Very good post! Sorry that it went completely ignored by the people you were arguing with. Judging by their posts, I'm assuming they realized they were outmatched.

[–] zanity 10 years ago

But PA juvenile courts had HUNDREDS of legal staff who had gained their legal training in the EXACT same system as you. How many of these people raised concerns about the absolutely sickening abuse of American children and their families? Exactly ZERO. Read that number again. ZERO.

As a 'trial attorney', had you had a job in that court under some other legal description, you too would have turned a blind eye. Members of the 'tribe' protecting their own.

One lady, whose daughter had been subject to the most vile and evil treatment by the US legal system, helped bring the whole corrupt house crashing down in this State. And don't give me any rubbish about how she was helped, AFTER THE FACT, by legally trained people.

In the UK, years ago, we saw the exact same thing happen. Two mothers, appalled that they could not prevent their children from being subject to disgusting and perverted physical assault in schools in Scotland, took the UK government to the Human Rights court. The Court of Human Rights ruled overwhelmingly against the perverted teachers who beat children, and school 'corporal punishment' against the wishes of parents was finished in the UK.

It is a little known fact that the NSPCC, a charity supposedly working for the protection of children in the UK, had always lobbied in FAVOUR of child beating in British schools and institutions, when ever the issue had come up for consideration by the British government.

In the USA, kids all across the nation are TODAY being imprisoned for the exact same reasons as happened in the 'cash for kids' case- Texas in particular boasts it runs programs that criminalise EVERY form of offence against school 'discipline'. In Texas, they convict 17-years old students to prison, for simply being late to school.

When, a couple of years back, one perverted judge was forcing parents to beat their teen daughters in his court, for his sexual satisfaction, the judge suffered ZERO penalty when the scandal became widely known. There is good reason why the USA and Ukraine have the highest level of serial killers, by a massive margin, per million of population.

[–] PPPuro 9 years ago

Who is this judge with the kinky needs?