Two ex-judges want corruption trial held in Delaware

SCRANTON – Former Luzerne County judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan are seeking to have their corruption trial transferred to federal court in Delaware based on a telephone poll and other evidence they say shows jurors in this area are prejudiced against them.

In a legal brief filed Monday, attorneys cite results of a poll conducted by DecisionQuest, a national trial consulting firm, of people who live within the 33 counties that comprise the Middle District of Pennsylvania.

The poll showed that of the 409 people interviewed, 295 said they were familiar with the case. Of those, 72.5 percent had seen television reports on the case, 51.9 percent had read newspaper stories and 40.3 percent had been exposed to conversations about the case.

The poll further revealed that of respondents who said they were familiar with the case, 68.8 percent said they believed the men were “definitely or probably guilty.”

A similar poll conducted in Delaware revealed that only 28.3 percent of those interviewed were familiar with the case and that 14.7 percent of the persons contacted believed the former judges were guilty, according to the brief.

The brief notes that the case has been subject to extensive media coverage since the former judges were first charged in January 2009. They initially agreed to plead guilty to charges of honest services fraud and tax evasion, but the deal later fell apart after a federal judge rejected terms of a plea agreement.

A 48-count indictment was filed in September charging the men with racketeering, bribery, extortion, money laundering and other offenses.

An analysis of media coverage, also conducted by DecisionQuest, showed that local newspapers and television stations produced a combined total of 2,200 stories from January to November 2009.

Many of those stories dealt with topics, including unrelated allegations of case fixing, that would not be permitted as evidence in the corruption trial, the brief says.

“There is no question that the charges in this case are sensational in nature as evidence by the widespread media coverage in this matter. This factor alone supports the pending transfer of venue motion,” the brief says.

The brief was among more than a dozen filed Monday in support of various pre-trial motions.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office will have an opportunity to respond to the motions, which will be ruled upon at a later date.