Was judge extreme or justified?

HARRISBURG – Attorney Virginia Murtha-Cowley just wrapped up a case in front of Judge and took a seat.

She shouldn’t have.

“Why are you sitting down?” the judge asked, according to Murtha-Cowley. “You sit down when this jurist tells you to sit down!”

So, Murtha-Cowley testified Thursday, she kept standing – even after the next case was called.

She shouldn’t have done that, either.

“Why are you standing?” Lokuta boomed, according to Murtha-Cowley. “Now you’re just being ridiculous.”

That type of humiliating, contradicting demand unfolded in front of others inside Lokuta’s courtroom, Murtha-Cowley testified.

But it really wasn’t that humiliating for Murtha-Cowley, Lokuta’s attorney, Louis Sinatra, argued.

It was Murtha-Cowley who purposely engaged in the “childish” act, in an attempt to give Lokuta a “comical” payback, Sinatra argued in his intense cross-examination of the attorney.

“That was a flippant gesture, wasn’t it?” Sinatra asked her.

“No,” Murtha-Cowley responded.

Murtha-Cowley, like so many others, was often disrespectful to Lokuta, Sinatra argued.

But those who were respectful, such as former prosecutor Ingrid Cronin, never had a problem with Lokuta, Sinatra argued in the fourth day of Lokuta’s trial on misconduct charges.

Sinatra has been making his defense clearer in the case, arguing that only people who were disrespectful to Lokuta, or unable to adequately perform their jobs, were the ones who complained about Lokuta’s behavior.

Lokuta, he’s argued, has the important job of deciding law in court cases.

She needs to hear every word.

She needs to have adequate and accurate copies of documents.

She needs to be in an appropriate courtroom setting.

It’s Lokuta’s job, he argued, to make sure that all happens, constantly.

If she has to, she will address those who are preventing it from happening, he’s argued. And there are no court transcripts to prove Lokuta truly dished out rude tongue lashings in addressing those people, including Murtha-Cowley, he’s argued.

Crossing the line?

But the state Judicial Conduct Board says Lokuta’s behavior crossed that line, claiming she violated judicial code and the state constitution in her behavior and handling of cases.

The conduct board’s deputy chief counsel, Francis J. Puskas II, called Murtha-Cowley to the stand before the Court of Judicial Discipline on Thursday.

On one occasion, Murtha-Cowley was in Lokuta’s courtroom and had to turn around to check a file.

Lokuta, the attorney said, leaned forward in her seat and pointed at Murtha-Cowley.

“Don’t turn your back on this jurist,” Lokuta exclaimed, according to Murtha-Cowley.

But in Cronin’s courtroom experience, she’s seen other judges acting worse, she has said.

The former assistant district attorney conceded Lokuta often made her court sessions “long and drawn out.” She would regularly start late, about 30 minutes, and take a lot of breaks.

But Cronin said she never had a problem dealing with Lokuta.

Others have.

Cronin has seen Lokuta castigate a probation officer unfairly.

She’s seen Lokuta experience wild, unpredictable mood swings.

And she’s seen Lokuta get mad over someone clicking a pen.

That behavior created a noticeable tension in the courtroom, Cronin said. And it made several prosecutors want to stay clear of Lokuta’s courtroom, she said.

Clerks were troubled, too.

Prothonotary Jill Moran saw her clerks come back from Lokuta’s courtroom “visibly shaken.”

Clerk Donna Miscavage always worried if she would be the next to catch a Lokuta lashing over something little.

“A witness, a noise, something someone said,” Miscavage testified. “She would just explode.”

Prothonotary clerk Maura Cusick always worried whether she was going to be with “the good judge or the wicked judge.” She relayed some stories about her time with the “wicked judge.”

Like the time Lokuta “chastised” Cusick because her chair was squeaking – and then demanded an apology from her.

And the time Lokuta ordered her to remove a cough drop from her mouth when she was sick – then later accused Cusick of giving her a cold.

But Sinatra, as he has argued, continues to point out that noises can be a distraction to the judge. A distraction she can’t afford when she handles important court cases.

And he probed Cusick about whether she had received poor work reviews in the past.

Cusick’s boss caught some heat, too.

Sinatra grilled Moran about her office procedures, noting that Lokuta has often pointed out deficiencies with several procedures in Moran’s office.

That, Sinatra argued, made Moran biased against Lokuta.

And he didn’t let Moran slide on the notorious “John Doe” debacle.

He asked Moran whether she “altered” a tax lien filed against her law partner, Robert Powell, in the prothonotary’s office. She denied altering the records, but conceded the lien would only show up under the name “John Doe” in the office’s computer system.

Sinatra still used it in his argument.

“You’re still filing records under phony names and you’re still altering records,” he boomed.

Puskas is expected to finish his case today. But Sinatra most likely won’t start his case today. The court is expected today to propose additional dates to finish the trial.

If the court finds Lokuta violated code or the constitution, she could face reprimand, suspension or removal from her $152,000 position and a loss of her pension.

David Weiss, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7397.