Another county arrest

By Terrie Morgan-Besecker tmorgan@timesleader.comLaw & Order Reporter

WILKES-BARRE – Longtime Luzerne County Probation Department official Sandra Brulo was charged Friday with altering a juvenile’s record in an attempt to lessen her potential culpability in a class action lawsuit that was filed against her and numerous others.

Brulo admitted to an FBI agent on Friday that she altered a document of a juvenile, who was not identified Friday, to show that she had recommended the youth be given probation, when in fact she had recommended detention, according to an affidavit filed in support of the criminal complaint. She did so to insulate herself from a class action lawsuit that was filed that named her as a defendant, the court papers state.

The alteration was discovered by a supervisor in the Probation Department who, unbeknownst to Brulo, had made a copy of part of the juvenile’s file, the affidavit says. That supervisor apparently became suspicious after Brulo called over to Juvenile Probation to request the file.

The affidavit identifies the supervisor only by title – deputy chief of administration for juvenile probation. That position is held by John Johnson. Johnson could not be reached for comment Friday to confirm if he is the person who brought the case to the attention of authorities.

Brulo, probation deputy director of forensic programs, was arrested inside her office in the Penn Place building Friday morning.

Her arrest comes on the heels of court administrator William Sharkey’s guilty plea on Tuesday to stealing more than $70,000 from the county, and the guilty pleas entered last week by judges Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan on charges of accepting more than $2.6 million in kickbacks.

Still wearing her tan winter coat, a distraught-looking Brulo, 56, was arraigned before U.S. District Magistrate Judge Malachy Mannion in Wilkes-Barre at around 1:50 p.m. on a single count of tampering or altering a court document – a felony that carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. She was released on her own recognizance.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Amy Phillips did not object to Brulo’s release. Phillips did raise concerns about Brulo’s mental state, telling Mannion Brulo had made comments she might try to harm herself.

Mannion released Brulo after gaining assurances from her attorney, Joseph Sklarosky Sr., that she was mentally fit. Mannion ordered Brulo to turn over firearms in her possession.

Sklarosky and Brulo declined to comment as they left the courthouse.

Brulo, who earned $78,160, was immediately suspended without pay by President Judge Chester Muroski. Muroski deferred all comment on the case to federal authorities.

Michael Vecchio, acting director of probation services, said he could not comment on specifics of the case due to the ongoing federal investigation.

“It’s unfortunate these events reflect negatively on the department. I do believe when all the facts become public, it will be evident this office and the courts have taken measures to ensure those employed here perform their duties with honor and integrity,” Vecchio said.

According to the federal affidavit, Brulo called a secretary in the Juvenile Probation Department to request the file of a juvenile who was terminated from probation.

The call was made on Feb. 13, the same day Attorney Barry Dyller of Wilkes-Barre filed a class action lawsuit against Brulo and others in connection with the kickback scheme that ensnared Ciavarella and Conahan.

That suit, which lists 23 plaintiffs, alleges in part that Brulo succumbed to pressure from Ciavarella to ensure juveniles were placed at two juvenile detention centers that were owned by Robert Powell and Gregory Zappala.

Powell, who sold his interest to Zappala last year, is one of two people who allegedly paid kickbacks to the judges. Zappala has not been implicated in the scheme.

Contacted Friday evening, Dyller said it “appears obvious” that the charges against Brulo relate to his case because it is the only class action suit that names her as a defendant.

“I’m very curious of what document she was trying to destroy that she knew revealed her culpability,” Dyller said. “It makes me wonder what other documents there might be.”

According to the criminal affidavit:

After Brulo called the Probation secretary, the secretary contacted her supervisor, who told her not to give Brulo the file until he had a chance to review it.

The supervisor reviewed the file and removed two documents – a “juvenile court report” prepared by Brulo on Sept. 18, 2007 and a handwritten document captioned with the name of the juvenile, the affidavit says. The supervisor then told the secretary to photocopy the two documents and put them in the file in place of the originals. The original documents were then placed in a locked drawer.

On Tuesday, Brulo approached the supervisor and asked to review the file. He told Brulo that President Judge Chester Muroski would likely be reviewing the file since it related to a juvenile who was a potential plaintiff in a lawsuit. Brulo inspected the file and mentioned that she could not find her recommendation sheet. She then returned the document to him.

On Wednesday, Brulo returned to the supervisor’s office and told him she had “found” the recommendation that was not in the file. She then handed him two pieces of paper and asked him to place them in the file.

One of those documents was the recommendation sheet. The deputy noticed the recommendation Brulo gave him on Wednesday, which was dated Sept. 18, 2007, purported to contain a recommendation of probation, which differed from the original sheet he still had in his possession.

An FBI agent reviewing the documents also noticed that the font size of the heading on the document Brulo provided on Wednesday is larger than on the original document that was removed by the supervisor. There was also a difference how the date was referenced. One document spelled “September” out completely, while the other abbreviated it as “Sept.”

Brulo was interviewed by an agent on Friday. She admitted that on Wednesday she created a fabricated report on her computer at work which changed her recommendation from detention to probation. She told the agent she did so to avoid potential liability in the pending class action suit in which she was named a defendant.

The charges against Brulo were brought through a criminal complaint. Prosecutors must now either present the case to a grand jury, which would determine whether there is enough evidence to indict Brulo. They could also opt to take the case before Mannion for that determination.

Mannion scheduled that hearing for March 20. The hearing would be cancelled, however, if an indictment is filed.

Terrie Morgan-Besecker, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 570-829-7179.