[SIZE="3"]FINALLY!
Those that may have read my plight last year on a contempt violation of a PFA order during a trial this judge found my abuser not guilty and apoligised to him! She found that I was out of order in being agressive to defend myself. HE was previously found guilty in court of abuse and threatening my life, he admitted to previous violations!

The police and magistrate said he admited to being in the area...I said he pulled behind my car blocking me in against my home. Besides a NO CONTACT is THAT! He could not be "in the area"....She tore me apart for going to the D.A.'s office!

My life was made a living he!! giving this abuser more power to hurt me!

DianneSIZE]

Wilkes Barre Citizens Voice
11/28/2006
Judge’s conduct questioned
BY JAMES CONMY
STAFF WRITER

A scathing 24-page document charges Luzerne County Judge Ann H. Lokuta with a myriad of inappropriate conduct and could result in the judge being removed from the bench.

Now the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board must prove its allegations against Lokuta, which include ordering a county staff member to scrub floors at her home, regularly berating attorneys and court personnel, and causing cases to be delayed by sleeping through scheduled proceedings.

The eight-member Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline will determine if six counts of violating the Pennsylvania Constitution and Codes of Judicial Conduct against the 14-year jurist are justified.

Lokuta did not return a message left at her chambers Monday afternoon.

Her attorney, Samuel Stretton, said Lokuta will “vigorously defend” herself against the allegations, most of which he labeled as “untrue.” Others are “worrisome” because they question Lokuta’s demeanor, Stretton said.

“There isn’t a judge in the world that hasn’t raised their voice at times, that hasn’t been tough on lawyers on times, perhaps yelled at lawyers or yelled at staff,” Stretton said. “It happens regularly because judges are under a lot of pressure.”

If Lokuta is found guilty of any of six counts, she faces penalties ranging from reprimand to unpaid suspension to removal from the bench, said Daniel Reimer, assistant counsel for the conduct board. Lokuta is first entitled to defend herself against the allegations with legal motions. If those motions do not convince the court of judicial discipline to dismiss the case, a hearing will be scheduled at a later date.

At a hearing, three members of the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline, comprised of attorneys, judges and lay people from across the Commonwealth, will be presented with evidence and listen to testimony from witnesses. Lokuta will have an opportunity to present evidence and cross examine witnesses, Reimer said.

The three members take their findings to the entire eight-member court, which then renders a decision. If Lokuta is found guilty, sanctions are determined at a separate hearing.

Stretton was adamant Lokuta’s decisions are rarely reversed by a higher court, she efficiently handles a hefty case load and has “done the right thing over the years.”

But the conduct board’s document outlining charges against Lokuta cites almost 50 examples of alleged misconduct, including making an employee bubble wrap antiques, put Christmas ornaments in storage containers, shovel snow from her sidewalks, wash her car and perform yard work for days and weeks at a time.

The report also lists numerous examples of Lokuta’s alleged inappropriate conduct in the courtroom.

“Since taking the bench in 1992, (Lokuta) routinely engages in a pattern of behavior toward attorneys appearing before her characterized as discourteous, rude, impatient, undignified, abusive, unprofessional, shabby, sarcastic, demeaning, unreasonably critical and condescending,” the conduct board’s document outlining charges against Lokuta said. “(Lokuta) unnecessarily and unreasonably makes it difficult for attorneys to perform their professional duties and services and humiliates and embarrasses attorneys in front of clients, witnesses and jurors, and even directs, or admonishes their physical movements.”

Lokuta’s handling of people in her courtroom for proceedings is questioned as well.

“Since taking the bench in 1992, (Lokuta) routinely engages in questioning witnesses to determine their level of education and, once she discovers they are lesser educated, uses vocabulary, phraseology or terminology that is archaic or beyond their comprehension. (Lokuta) has been observed purposely talking to witnesses ‘way above their head’ and has even been observed using foreign language phrases rather than speaking plainly in an understandable format,” the conduct board’s document outlining charges against Lokuta said.In addition, the report says Lokuta’s personal relationship with Maureen Gushanas, her executive secretary and former tip staff, has resulted in disruption to the normal operation of Lokuta’s office and “crude outbursts of inappropriate language and commentary in the judicial chambers.”

Gushanas could not be reached for comment.

The security of Lokuta’s courtroom also is questioned because of her treatment of Luzerne County deputy sheriffs and their protocol for transporting prisoners.

“Unlike all other judges in Luzerne County, (Lokuta) will not permit defendants to be shackled in the courtroom with other defendants, but requires they be removed immediately, creating a situation where three deputy sheriffs must exit the courtroom with the prisoner to shackle them in an unsecured public corridor,” the report said.

Luzerne County President Judge Michael Conahan oversees the nine county court of common pleas judges and court administration. He could not be reached for comment Monday night.

jconmy@citizensvoice.com


11/29/2006
Judge eager to answer ‘egregious allegations’
BY JAMES CONMY
STAFF WRITER

WILKES-BARRE –– Phrases like “good luck” and “thank you” were commonplace Tuesday morning in Luzerne County Judge Ann H. Lokuta’s courtroom.

The judge explained proceedings in protection from abuse cases to plaintiffs and defendants, never raising her voice.

Lokuta’s demeanor was polite and professional — the opposite of her abusive, crude and rude attitude outlined in a 24-page complaint filed Monday by the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board.

Removal is possible

The conduct board is responsible for overseeing county judges and magistrates. It has charged the 15-year jurist with violating the state constitution and code of conduct. Lokuta could be removed from the bench, should the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline find the charges have been proven.

Lokuta said Tuesday night she has been laboring for the last two years through “complaint after complaint” and welcomes the opportunity to defend herself in discipline court.

The jurist believes she will publicly prove she has done nothing wrong. The process also allows her to question the motivation of the anonymous individuals filing the complaints, Lokuta said.

“I hope this once and for all will put to an end a very torturous time period and stop these egregious allegations.” Lokuta said. “I’m a coal miner’s daughter. I was the first woman elected (as a judge) in the county. I believe in this challenge I will prevail as well.”

Case specifics not discussed

Joseph Massa Jr., chief counsel for the Pennsylvania Judicial Conduct Board, acknowledged the Lokuta investigation was sparked by a complaint. He declined to say who lodged the complaint.

There is a normally a four-year statute of limitations for accusations against judges, Massa said. That time period could be extended if the board determines there is a pattern of repeated inappropriate conduct, he said.

Massa declined to discuss specifics about the severity of the case, yet pointed out the conduct board receives between 500 to 550 complaints a year. Despite the high number of annual complaints, only about five result in charges being filed, he said.

“The numbers speak for themselves,” Massa said.

Charges alone prove nothing

Lokuta’s attorney Samuel Stretton, who she is paying for out of her own pocket, questions why it took the conduct board three years to investigate Lokuta. He also disputes the fact charges alone prove anything. Most of the time the conduct board charges a judge, they are cleared, Stretton said.

“I think they’re wrong in bringing this and I’m not quite sure why they did,” Stretton said.

Stretton hopes to learn the identity of the complainant or complainants in discovery, although he believes it is irrelevant to Lokuta’s defense. Stretton filed motions Tuesday requesting depositions, evidence and statements gathered in the case. He plans to file a motion next week asking the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline to dismiss the charges.

Court schedule undisturbed

In the interim, Lokuta is “innocent until proven guilty” and can maintain a normal court schedule, Massa said. Lokuta presided over all the matters on her Tuesday morning schedule.

Lokuta plans to be back on the bench this morning. She insisted her decisions are rarely overturned and criminals she has sentenced do not typically commit additional crimes.

“I’m known for strict sentences,” the jurist said.

Pension could be lost

Should Lokuta be vindicated, Stretton can petition the Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts to have her legal fees reimbursed. But if Lokuta is removed from the bench, she could be stripped of any pension she has earned to date, Stretton said.

In addition, Lokuta could appeal the Pennsylvania Court of Judicial Discipline’s ruling to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Any challenges, however, must be based on interpretations of the law, rather than facts in the case, Stretton said.

jconmy@citizensvoice.com

Amen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dianne,
Would you be able to file an appeal or are you finished with the whole lot?
Unbelievable what she did...awful!
bizi

wow di.

like bizi said...can you get your case re-opened? heck call the media or the reporter of the article. get them behind you.

(((hugs)))

I am not sure, I have been added to the ethics complaint though. To go through a new hearing in the abuse case I think would take so much energy from me. In one way, if my abuser feels he has won, and spares my life, maybe it is worth the loss....He is gloating, he is on a high, he feels like the big man...what if I take that away?

It is concerning that the ethics committe today told me, she is not charged on her decisons no matter how gross, but on her conduct, the demeaning, rediculing, the appearance, how she operated her courtroom, treated the staff and witnesses etc...not the lack of ability to decide a case properly on merit? How crazy is that?

maybe being part of the ethics charge will give me a win! If she is removed she will never do this to another abused woman. How they could have put her in PFA court is beyond me?

Di