If U.S. District Chief Judge Edward Nottingham resigns from the bench as expected in order to defuse a sex scandal, it will be a serious punishment in and of itself for the 60-year-old. But Nottingham will nevertheless have gotten off easy if in fact he attempted to get a former prostitute to lie about their relationship in order to thwart a probe into his conduct by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.
It’s hard to think of anything more dangerous to the rule of law than brazen attempts to obstruct justice through cajoling or threatening witnesses into misrepresenting the truth. Like other powerful men before him, Nottingham – if the reports are true and he resigns – will have been a casualty not of the original misconduct so much as the attempted coverup.
It’s not that we’re suggesting it’s just fine for a federal judge to hang out with prostitutes and to pay for sex. The former is unseemly for a person in his position and the latter is illegal. If a judge has a problem obeying a particular law then he shouldn’t be a judge. Consorting with prostitutes is especially risky for someone in a judge’s position because of the obvious potential for blackmail – and for pressure to be brought to bear for him to rule in a particular way.
Still, paying a prostitute – even for as many times over two years as Nottingham is said to have seen this employee of the escort service Bada Bing Denver – would pale in comparison with any attempt to get her to lie to investigators.
Yeah – I’m more than a little tired of being judged by hypocrites. Including those in lifetime-guaranteed black robes.
“Yeah – I’m more than a little tired of being judged by hypocrites.”
Here’s an better one!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcee_Hastings
That judge looks like a sleazy bastard.
Wait… Dad?
Legalize prostitution.
Problem solved.
“I’m more than a little tired of being judged by hypocrites. Including those in lifetime-guaranteed black robes.”
Sheesh, Ed, EXACTLY HOW OFTEN are YOU getting judged? And for what?
By hypocrites? Practically every day. Right here, John.
Black robes? By joining in civil rights and civil liberty suits – or class actions against corporate thieves? Just about every year.
You might try it sometime, John.
#1, Cow-Paddy,
So what is your point? He wasn’t convicted in any court. The only court he appeared in front of he was found NOT GUILTY. Neither the House nor the Senate have to give anyone the same guarantees that a criminal court gives. In fact, the Supreme Court called Impeachment a political statement. That is why Congress may only remove someone from office.
*
Subversion of the Judicial process or Political process are extremely serious events. I am not in favor of trying the people in the court of public opinion. If there is a criminal charge, then lay it and let the process take its course. Quit trying people in the public eye, that is not justice.
I have no problem with anyone using an escort service, no matter how often. Keep it consensual and pay the bill.
I’d be less angry if the Judge comitted perjury by denying it and it stopped there. To suborn perjury by compelling others to testify falsely, is over the line. It goes far beyond perjury to witness tampering, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, etc.
Everyone in jail looses their job. What do you say to the folks in jail for doing the same thing? “Hey, he lost his job, that was enough because he was a judge?” What happened to a higher standard for those in a position of public trust?
Suborning Perjury and Obstructing Justice are BOTH FELONIES !!! They forced Nixon to resign, and this “Justice” has to go also !!!
#8, I take it then that you supported removing CLinton from office too?
#9 – nutballs worry about justice and dicks. Tee hee.
#9, Lyin’ Mike,
The difference is this Judge supposedly encouraged others to lie about a criminal activity (prostitution) as well as perjured himself. Clinton was accused of lying about something that was not criminal and was no one’s business. The really bad thing here is that idiots have a hard time understanding that.
#6 Mr. Confusion said, “So what is your point? He wasn’t convicted in any court.”
Umm, yes. He was convicted in a court as set out in the US Constitution (a document you should read sometime). kidding.
Did you read the entry?
#11
Actually, Clinton was *also* accused of obstructing justice. You said that he lied about something that was not criminal. Is that how it works now? Anyone is free to lie to the grand jury if the subject does not appear criminal? The really bad thing is that idiots like yourself do not understand that.
He also encouraged others to lie, including arranging for jobs in exchange for the lie.
Ah, here we are in another Republikan circle jerk over Clinton.