Can Judges and Prosecutors be Indirecty Bribed or Extorted – The Cash for Prosecutions or Leniency Kickback Schemes

In both civil and criminal cases, judges and prosecutors wield significant influence over the legal process, with the expectation that their decisions remain fair and impartial. However, these officials can sometimes be subject to indirect pressures that, while not overtly illegal, mimic the effects of bribery or extortion. One such method is the offering of indirect benefits, such as jobs or board positions to a judge’s or prosecutor’s family members.

This form of influence can be subtle and difficult to trace, but it can create a sense of obligation or bias that may affect how a judge or prosecutor rules on a case. A family member being offered a lucrative job, board position, or other opportunities may induce the official to lean in favor of the party providing these perks, whether consciously or subconsciously.

These indirect “quid pro quo” benefits, while not appearing as traditional bribes, undermine the integrity of the judicial process, leading to skewed decisions that can unjustly affect the outcome of both civil and criminal cases. Such tactics blur the lines of ethical conduct and erode public trust in the fairness of the legal system.

The reality is that filing lawsuits against your political opponents is a cost effective method to generate negative PR and News about your opponent even if the case goes nowhere. Further, if the judge or prosecutors have already publicly given money to the opponent’s campaign or promised prosecution of the political opponent prior to election, this may already be enough to constitute a conspiracy or crime.

Further, we have now already seen that fake evidence, fake dossiers, and political prosecutors in collusion with media can virtually overthrow the US Government using fake evidence and hyperbole. Billions of dollars in losses in productivity, expenses and damages were caused by the fake evidence and “Russian Dossier” fraud perpetrated on the citizens of the USA.

If a judge or prosecutor directly or indirectly receives money or bribes to prosecute someone, several laws and ethical rules are likely violated. These include:

1. Bribery Laws

• Federal Bribery Statutes (18 U.S.C. § 201): It is illegal for public officials, including judges and prosecutors, to solicit, receive, or accept bribes in return for influencing their official actions. A violation can result in imprisonment and fines.
• State Bribery Laws: Each state has its own statutes criminalizing bribery of public officials. Penalties vary but often mirror federal statutes.

2. Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C. § 1951)

• The Hobbs Act makes it a federal crime for public officials to extort money through abuse of power. Accepting bribes or illegal payments in return for favorable or unfavorable legal decisions could qualify under this statute.

3. Honest Services Fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1346)

• This federal law makes it illegal for public officials to deprive others of their "honest services," such as judicial impartiality. If a judge or prosecutor takes bribes, they are not providing the honest services required by their office, which constitutes fraud.

4. Conspiracy Laws (18 U.S.C. § 371)

• If two or more people conspire to commit bribery or other illegal acts, they can be charged with conspiracy to commit a crime, even if the illegal act itself was not successfully carried out. A larger question arises when judges know that they family are receiving direct benefits from people who hate the defendants in their court. Is this a crime?

5. Obstruction of Justice (18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512)

• Taking bribes to prosecute or manipulate a case may also constitute obstruction of justice, as it interferes with the fair administration of law. Again, if a judge or prosecutor has been offered a promotion or any benefits by those who detest the defendant? Is this a crime?

6. Ethical Violations

• Judges and prosecutors are bound by codes of ethics, such as the Model Code of Judicial Conduct and ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Taking indirect kickbacks, “quid pro quo’ or bribes would violate these ethical standards, leading to disciplinary action, including disbarment or removal from office.

In the above violations, e are looking at a minimum of 6 federal and state criminal charges against any dirty judge or dirty prosecutor who takes a penny to violate the civil rights of any defendant.

Violations of these civil rights laws can lead to criminal charges, removal from office, fines, and imprisonment for both the prosecutor or Judge and the family members that participated in the crimes.

Examples of sentences for judges and prosecutors convicted of accepting bribes or giving secret plea deals typically vary based on the specifics of the case, such as the amount of the bribe, the severity of the corruption, the jurisdiction, and whether they cooperated with authorities. Here are a few notable examples:

1. Judge Thomas J. Maloney (Illinois)

• U.S. District Court Judge Maloney was convicted in 1993 of taking bribes to fix murder trials. He accepted bribes in exchange for favorable outcomes for defendants in criminal cases.
• 15 years in prison.
  
  2. Judge Mark Ciavarella (Pennsylvania)
• Ciavarella was involved in the "Kids for Cash" scandal, where he accepted kickbacks from private prison developers in exchange for sentencing juveniles to detention facilities. Convicted in 2011.
• 28 years in prison.
  
  3. Judge Abel Limas (Texas)
• Limas, a former state district judge, accepted bribes to grant favorable rulings in civil cases. He was convicted in 2011.
• Six years in federal prison after pleading guilty to racketeering.
  
  4. Judge Samuel Kent (Texas)
• U.S. District Court Judge Kent pleaded guilty in 2009 to obstruction of justice after he was found to have engaged in sexual misconduct and lied about it to investigators. Although not a bribery case, it's an example of judicial corruption.
• 33 months in prison.
  
  5. Judge Richard Baumgartner (Tennessee)
• Baumgartner was convicted in 2011 of official misconduct for accepting prescription painkillers from defendants appearing in his court and engaging in various other forms of corruption.
• He was sentenced to two years on probation and later six months in federal prison for failing to report a crime.
  
  6. Prosecutor Robert Mericle (Pennsylvania)
• Involved in the same "Kids for Cash" scandal, Mericle, a businessman, paid bribes to judges, including Ciavarella, to funnel juveniles into detention centers. Convicted in 2011.
• One year in prison for failing to report a felony.
  
  7. Judge Wayne Cresap (Louisiana)
• Judge Cresap accepted bribes from bail bondsmen in exchange for giving favorable rulings and reduced bonds for their clients. Convicted in 2009.
• Five years in federal prison.
  
  8. Former Brooklyn Prosecutor John O’Mara
• O’Mara was found guilty in 1995 of taking a bribe to drop a criminal case. He accepted payments from a drug dealer to make the case disappear.
• 12 years in prison.
  
  9. U.S. Federal Judge Robert Collins (Louisiana)
• U.S. District Court Judge Collins was convicted in 1991 of accepting bribes in exchange for reducing sentences for convicted felons. He was the first federal judge to be convicted of such charges while in office.
• 82 months in prison.

These cases against dirty judges and prosecutors highlight how seriously the judicial system takes bribery and corruption, with sentences ranging from a few months to decades in prison, depending on the scale and impact of the offense. Some defendants, especially those who cooperate with authorities, may receive reduced sentences through plea deals.

Here are 10 ways a judge or prosecutor could improperly influence a case, including fraudulent jury instructions that could harm the defendant:

1. Suppressing Exculpatory Evidence

• A prosecutor may intentionally withhold evidence favorable to the defendant, such as witness statements or physical evidence that could exonerate the defendant. This violates the defendant's due process rights under Brady v. Maryland.

2. Excluding Key Defense Evidence

• A judge may improperly exclude critical evidence presented by the defense, such as testimony from an expert witness, alibi evidence, or medical records, making it difficult for the defendant to present a complete defense.

3. Admitting Illegally Obtained Evidence

• A judge may admit evidence obtained through unlawful searches or seizures in violation of the Fourth Amendment. This could include evidence gathered without a warrant or through police misconduct.

4. Preventing Certain Defenses

• A judge could refuse to allow the defendant to present valid legal defenses, such as self-defense, insanity, or duress, thus limiting the defense’s ability to argue a crucial aspect of the case to the jury.

5. Allowing False or Misleading Testimony

• A prosecutor may knowingly present false testimony from witnesses or allow witnesses to lie on the stand without correcting the record, violating the defendant’s right to a fair trial under Napue v. Illinois.

6. Admitting Fabricated or False Evidence

• A prosecutor could submit falsified documents, tampered physical evidence, or fabricated forensic results into the trial, misleading the jury and tipping the balance toward a wrongful conviction. Even a recent case against Trump, the prosecutors were caught tampering with evidence.

7. Improperly Limiting Cross-Examination

• A judge might restrict the defense's cross-examination of key prosecution witnesses, preventing the defense from fully exploring witness credibility, biases, or prior inconsistent statements.

8. Favoring the Prosecution in Rulings on Objections

• A judge may consistently rule against defense objections while sustaining prosecution objections on similar grounds, making the trial unfairly biased by limiting what the defense can present or argue.

9. Fraudulent Jury Instructions

• A judge may issue incorrect or misleading jury instructions, making it harder for the jury to understand the legal standards needed to acquit. For example, a judge might:
  • Fail to properly instruct on reasonable doubt, leaving jurors to convict without fully understanding the high burden of proof.
  • Misrepresent the elements of a crime to make the defendant’s actions seem criminal when they may not meet the legal standard.
  • Misstate the law on self-defense or other defenses, biasing jurors against the defendant’s case.

10. Preventing or Manipulating Discovery

• A prosecutor might improperly withhold critical evidence during the discovery process, such as police reports, witness lists, or forensic analysis, which the defense is legally entitled to review in order to prepare an adequate defense.

These tactics undermine the fairness of the trial and violate constitutional protections, such as due process, civil rights, and the right to a fair trial. Fraudulent jury instructions, in particular, can mislead jurors about the law and effectively strip the defendant of their legal defenses, increasing the likelihood of an unjust conviction. Further, some anti-Trump judges have gone out of their way to create legally-flawed conviction news where media can spread the political hoax. However, news organizations are now getting sued for hundreds of millions for defamation or fraud.

If judges and prosecutors are hiding exculpatory evidence and testimony, it significantly raises the likelihood that they are on the take, biased, under undue influence, or subject to nefarious pressures such as bribery or extortion. Statistically, such actions are red flags pointing to corruption or manipulation, as these tactics undermine the very foundation of due process.

The U.S. has a long-established legal tradition of protecting citizens from false prosecution through fair trials and the exclusion of fake evidence. Any deviation from this standard suggests that external forces or incriminating leverage may be influencing judicial and prosecutorial behavior, leading to wrongful convictions and a betrayal of justice.

In recent months, we have seen democrats bring flimsy cases to court where a democrat judge gives the case a full review and maybe a trial where ordinarily, these speculative cases would be thrown out as baseless fraud. With roughly 80% of all district attorneys being in conservative or republican counties, the frivolous lawsuits conducted by democrats could backfire quickly.

Let’s face it, you could prosecute or sue just about anyone complicit in the Russia Hoax for treason or prosecute anyone participating in the 2020 riots with the White House attack for insurrection and sedition and it could be a viable criminal or civil case.

In conclusion, when judges or prosecutors receive direct or indirect benefits to manipulate cases, especially by using or allowing fake evidence to wrongfully convict someone, it signals a profound abuse of power and criminal corruption in the legal system.  As they say, “Follow the Money”, and even Judge Merchan in New York is now being sued to disclose where his family money is coming from.

However, it does not need to be money as it can also be extortion with naked pictures, nude photos or videos. Whether the pressure comes from political parties, those seeking to force a conviction or individuals offering financial incentives, these actions violate the principles of criminal law, justice and fairness.

If any judge or prosecutor engages in such conduct, particularly by utilizing false evidence to put someone behind bars, they must be held accountable and imprisoned to the fullest extent of the law. Even Judge Engoron in New York is now under investigation for conducting a trial against Trump that had no victims.

As they say, using the rule of “Occam’s Razor” which forces us to look at the most obvious offender, there is only one set of reasons why judges and prosecutors would pursue frivolous cases and work to suppress exculpatory evidence, and that would be money, power and prestige both directly and indirectly.

Bribery, extortion, and quid pro quo criminal behavior not only destroys lives but also undermines integrity and “civil rights” of the entire judicial process. To preserve the trust of the public in our legal system, it is critical that those who betray their oaths and violate civil rights in this manner face the harshest legal consequences and even prison time.

In closing, please remember that the Russian Dossier was used by untold numbers of insurrectionists who knowingly using fake evidence to overthrow the US government while intentionally defrauding US Federal Judges and wiretapping untold numbers of folks. In reality, 40 got Felony convictions for one attempted wiretap under Nixon, and if judges and prosecutors and government agents continue to get caught perpetrating frauds using fake evidence, karma will eventually backfire on these offenders.

*All references to convictions or sentencing are from public records. If any corrections need be made, please notify the editors.

________________

Commissioner George Mentz JD MBA CILS CWM® is the first in the USA to rank as a Top 50 Influencer & Thought Leader in: Management, PM, HR, FinTech, Wealth Management, and B2B according to Onalytica.com and Thinkers360.com. George Mentz JD MBA CILS is a CWM Chartered Wealth Manager ®, global speaker - educator, tax-economist, international lawyer and CEO of the GAFM Global Academy of Finance & Management ®. The GAFM is a EU accredited graduate body that trains and certifies professionals in 150+ nations under standards of the: US Dept of Education, ACBSP, ISO 21001, ISO 991, ISO 29993, QAHE, ECLBS, and ISO 29990 standards. Mentz is also an award winning author and award winning graduate law professor of wealth management of one of the top 30 ranked law schools in the USA.