Luzerne County Judges

January 23, 2010

Experts offer tips at juvie hearings

Commission submits a report to state Supreme Court after three more hearings.

By Andrew M. Seder aseder@timesleader.com
Times Leader Staff Writer
Andrew M. Seder on Facebook   |   @TLAndrewSeder on Twitter

HARRISBURG – Recommendations from professionals who are involved in or follow the juvenile justice system in Pennsylvania were plenty on Friday.

All of them were aimed at making sure the scandal that rocked Luzerne County’s juvenile courts will not be repeated in the county or anywhere else again.

Some of the five people who testified Friday in front of the Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice said they believed that what happened in the courtroom of former judge Mark A. Ciavarella was isolated and not commonplace in any other county. And they all had ideas on how to prevent future abuses.

Concerns were raised that whatever recommended fixes the commission will eventually make could unnecessarily overburden juvenile justice departments statewide.

The chief juvenile probation officer for Bucks County said he thinks “that the situation in Luzerne County may be endemic to that court and is not reflective of the practices of the rest of the state.”

Robert J. Stanzione testified that, from his experience and his observations and discussions with juvenile probation officers from across the state, the scandal in Luzerne County may be an isolated incident.

“While that is not to say that what happened in Luzerne County could not happen in other counties, it is not the sense that I get from the many active members of the CHIEFS (Pennsylvania Council of Chief Juvenile Probation Officers) council who are working to implement these best-practice initiatives,” Stanzione said.

He implored the commission that although its charge is “to prevent similar events from occurring in Luzerne County and elsewhere in Pennsylvania,” it should not enact recommendations that would lead to “penalizing and overburdening the entire juvenile justice system with unneeded procedures and oversights to make up for the misdeeds of a few rogue individuals.”

Stanzione said the system “is fundamentally sound” and if the laws and safeguards already in place are followed, they “provide adequate juvenile protection.” He said what happened in Luzerne County “had a lot to do with silencing the traditional watchdogs … in this case the defense bar.”

Among the popular recommendations offered up by those who testified was the requirement for all juvenile probation departments to use a “risks assessment instrument” for youth who enter the system.

“Using an evidence-based risks, needs and strength assessment will assist in providing consistent decision-making within each county and across the Commonwealth,” said Dr. Ronald Sharp, chairman of the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency’s Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Committee (JJDPC).

“Had Luzerne County been using such an instrument, the abuse of power that occurred could have been identified more clearly, and perhaps curtailed,” he said.

The Interbranch Commission was formed in August to investigate failings within Luzerne County’s juvenile justice system. Friday’s hearing marked the seventh day of testimony the commission has taken since October.

Three additional hearings – Feb. 1 and 2 in Harrisburg and Feb. 25 in Wilkes-Barre, will be held before the commission submits a report to the state Supreme Court. That must be done by May 31.

In addition to the commission, another committee will be asked to take action.

Sharp said that besides helping future defendants and ensuring they never have happen to them what happened to hundreds of juvenile defendants in Luzerne County, the past victims need help.

“In reading stories told to this commission by the young people whose lives have been forever marred by their experience in Luzerne County, it has became apparent that the JJDPC could take immediate action to address one small part of this terrible event,” Sharp said.

“Therefore, the JJDPC will be asked, at its Feb. 11th meeting, to commit funding for the creation of a juvenile justice system victim advocate. With the approval of the JJDPC and the PCCD (Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency), it would be possible to create and fund this position and have it operational by July 1, 2010. The JJDPC will be asked to continue this commitment on an annual basis, in the hope that the Commonwealth will create such a position and provide ongoing funding.”

Sharp suggested that the advocate would initially do extensive work in Luzerne County, in coordination with the Luzerne County Victim Services Program and Carol Lavery, the state’s victim advocate. He said one element of the advocate would be helping local victim service programs in their work with young people who have testified “that they now fear life and have lost trust in fellow citizens. Implementing this one small program may help to combat the evil that existed in Luzerne County.”

Thousands of juveniles appeared before Ciavarella and many, according to investigators, were not given proper legal aid and their rights were not insured.

The state Supreme Court has since vacated the convictions of thousands of juveniles who appeared before Ciavarella from 2003 to 2008 – the time frame that federal prosecutors say Ciavarella and former Judge Michael Conahan accepted millions of dollars from the builder and co-owner of two juvenile facilities the county utilized. Both former judges are awaiting federal trials on dozens of criminal counts.

The court’s ruling was based on an investigation by a special master, who determined Ciavarella had routinely violated juveniles’ rights to a fair trial by allowing them to appear without an attorney. He also failed to conduct state-mandated questioning to ensure a juvenile who pleaded guilty understood the rights he or she was giving up by doing so.

Wendy Luckenbill, a child policy coordinator with the Mental Health Association of Pennsylvania, suggested the creation of a state juvenile justice ombudsman.

This office would be able to assist any person with a “grievance or concern about the juvenile justice system and its partners to provide general information about rights and policy to the public and to facilitate or trigger an investigation when needed.”

While Sharp testified that “I’m shocked that that happened in Luzerne County. I’m shocked as much today as I was when I learned it happened,” Luckenbill said she was not.

“The testimonies have given me pause and sometimes sickened me, but in the end they have not surprised me,” Luckenbill said. She said over the past 20 years she’s heard stories at the local, state and national level that have echoed similar themes.

“At the very heart of these stories is an audacity and complicity on part of the staff charged with serving families and their children,” she said.

Ronald Williams, a Lake Winola resident who serves on the Interbranch Commission, said testimony has indicated some of those involved in the juvenile system in Luzerne County let fear override their duty to report what was going on.

Sharp responded that he finds that “very hard to believe. There was just no impetus or motivation to do anything about it.”

It was silence that was among the highlights of testimony offered during Thursday’s hearing.

The head of a juvenile advocacy group has recommended that attorneys who witnessed the violations of juvenile’s rights allegedly committed by Ciavarella be referred to the state disciplinary board to determine if they should be sanctioned.

In his testimony before the commission on Thursday, Robert Schwartz, director of the Juvenile Law Center, said attorneys who regularly appeared before Ciavarella in juvenile court violated their professional obligations by failing to stand up and report abuses they witnessed.

“It may be hard for a defense attorney or prosecutor to spot an isolated case of judicial misconduct. Luzerne County’s involved a half decade’s worth of abuse, however,” Schwartz told the commission.

“If there was ever a situation where lawyers fell short of their professional obligations, this was it.”

Andrew M. Seder, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 570-829-7269.

Tweet	Follow @TLnews

Send Question or Remark to the Publisher