In Brooklyn, Fixing a 'Corrupt' Court System ; Series of Judicial-Bribery Scandals May Lead to Changes in Way Judges Are Selected

Article excerpt

The tale starts last October: A Brooklyn mother, afraid she'd lost a custody battle, was approached by a man in a municipal building and told that with a little cash, the judge could be persuaded to see things her way.

Flash to a hidden camera in the judge's chambers - and a lawyer allegedly giving that judge some money and a box of Dominican cigars.

In April, Judge Gerald Garson was arrested on charges of accepting "money and gifts in exchange for giving preferential treatment" to him. This week, the Kings County district attorney, Charles Hynes, brought a new bribery charge against Judge Garson. He says more indictments are coming.

Thus begins the most recent bribery scandal in the Brooklyn courts, one that's prompted a full investigation into judicial corruption and into the borough's Democratic machine. Ultimately, it's expected to overhaul judicial selection in New York, and perhaps provide a model for reform nationwide.

"This is a typical situation where scandal creates the opportunity for what might turn out to be a major change," says Prof. Roy Schotland at the Georgetown University Law Center.

Watchdog groups consider Brooklyn one of America's most corrupt judicial systems. In this most heavily Democratic borough of New York, party control is extreme: Voters choose delegates to a nominating convention who then pick judges; the powerful Democratic machine usually controls the delegates. That, critics say, gives the party almost virtual control over judge selection.

In the parochial maze of Brooklyn politics, the buzz here has been that Democrats reward loyal service and big contributions - qualifications or not.

But partisan election of state judges across the country is increasingly raising alarms about political influence.

More than half of state civil-court judges and 3 of every 4 trial judges are elected in partisan battles. The lawyers and businessmen who donate cash to get judges on the bench may later appear before them in court. And judicial reformers say that can lead trouble.

"It limits the independence of judges and injects politics, cash, and partisanship into the judicial system," says Ken Jockers, executive director of the Committee for Modern Courts, the largest New York citizens' group bent on reforming the justice system.

In some states - Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Texas, Alabama, and Missouri - a vast spending increase in local judicial races, by special-interest groups from abortion foes to the NRA, is fueling calls to reform judge selection. …


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.