From the inbox
PRESS RELEASE:
For additional information, contact:
Luzerne County Young Republicans
LuzerneCountyYRs@gmail.com
In light of the recent sentencing of Mark Ciavarella and Michael Conahan for their roles in the “Kids for Cash” scandal, The Luzerne County Young Republicans (LCYRs) seek answers to lingering questions surrounding Luzerne County corruption. How could this scandal have continued for years without any County Officials noticing? Would the scandal have been prevented, or at least its effect been minimized, if other County officials had done their jobs?
The Interbranch Juvenile Commission shed light on these questions. In its report, the Commission concluded that District Attorney Jackie Musto Carroll failed to perform her duties and showed no interest or concern for the juvenile court system during the “Kids for Cash scandal.”
In addition to her negligence, Musto Carroll engaged in nepotism and cronyism by hiring Mark Ciavarella’s daughter and daughter-in-law in the District Attorney’s Office. Jackie Musto Carroll’s actions reek of corruption and the LCYRs believe she owes the residents of Luzerne County an explanation for her behavior.
The LCYRs request that District Attorney Jackie Musto Carroll formally answer each of the following questions and return the same to the LCYRs.
1. Why did you fail to discover the Kids for Cash scandal?
2. By your own admission, you never set foot in a juvenile courtroom during the Kids for Cash scandal. Why did you ignore this part of your job?
3. Under your watch, the Assistant District Attorneys were not adequately trained and as a result failed to recognize and challenge the routine deprivation of juveniles’ constitutional rights by Mark Ciavarella. Why did you fail to train your Assistant District Attorneys when proper training would have prevented the scandal?
4. Despite the obvious nepotism and cronyism involved, why did you hire Mark Ciavarella’s daughter and daughter-in-law in the District Attorney’s Office?
5. Did Mark Ciaveralla ask you to hire his daughter and daughter-in-law, or contact you in any way regarding the hiring process?
6. Do you believe that nepotism or cronyism have any place in government?
7. Given the Interbranch Juvenile Commission’s finding that you “stood by and abdicated” your responsibility as a prosecutor, how can the residents of Luzerne County have any faith that you will not to continue to abdicate your responsibility since you have already set abdication of responsibility as a precedent?
8. Given the Commission’s finding that you “demonstrated no initiative, interest, or concern with what was occurring in juvenile court,” how can the residents of Luzerne County feel confident that you can effectively lead the charge of protecting our children?
9. Why did you fight to block the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania from reviewing whether the Luzerne County juveniles, who were denied legal counsel, were entitled to relief?
The LCYRs have sent the above questions to Jackie Musto Carroll. We request that she answer and return the above questions to the LCYRs by October 14, 2011.
The Interbranch Commission on Juvenile Justice Report via SOP
In testimony before the commission, current District Attorney Jackie Musto Carroll and her predecessor, David W. Lupas, who is now a county judge presiding over juvenile matters, "incredibly conceded that they had never set foot in a juvenile court throughout their entire careers," the report said. Lupas and Musto Carroll "demonstrated no initiative, interest, or concern with what was occurring in juvenile court."
From the TL:
Musto Carroll declined Friday to comment or address the questions in the release. She and Lupas have said assistant district attorneys never made them aware of concerns they had in juvenile court.
The LCYR's don't have a website but you can find them on Facebook
I guess nobody bothered to check facts about the croynistic hirings.When the facts come out there are going to alot of red faces. No pale faces. When you republish libel you have a problem. The timesleader at least tried not to publish the unverified facts and statement of corruption based on the unverified facts The actions which supposedly "reek of corruption" didn't happen. Young republicans luzerne county republican party gort 42 shoiuld probably consult with a defamation attorney for the coming storm, no pun intended. Even public figures are afforded protection from bald faced lies published with malice.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the warning or is this a threat? Luzerne County politicians have a long history of using the courts to intimidate and sometimes silence their critics. Somehow I doubt that Ms. Carroll would want to draw attention to the LCYR's or some obscure local blogger who published a press release. I think that she is too smart to do that. But I took your advice and have retained the the services of the law firm of Dewey, Cheatem & Howe to vet this and all future posts.
ReplyDeleteFact: David Lupas was sworn in as judge on December 19, 2007.
ReplyDeleteFact: Jackie Musto Carroll was, prior to December 19, 2007, the First Assistant District Attorney as well as District Attorney in waiting. Once Lupas was sworn in, Musto Carroll took over the responsibilities of the DA's office.
Fact: County records show that Mark Ciavarella's daughter was hired on January 4, 2008 in the DA's office as Assistant District Attorney.
Fact: County records show that Mark Ciavarella's daughter-in-law to be, was hired in 2009 in the District Attorney's office as Trial Assistant.
Fact: Powerful political insiders often try to threaten people with legal action to silence them.
If Musto Carroll disagrees with the press release, maybe she should answer the 9 questions put forth by the young republicans.
December 19, 2007???? Now I know you have no idea of what you are talking about! No one elected in November is sworn-in in December. It is always after the first of the next year. Everyone in the court house knows Dave Lupas hired the judge's daughter. It's on line. Check it out. The son's girlfriend bumped into the DA's Office through layoffs. Boy, doesn't anyone know how to use the internet????
ReplyDeleteGort remember Peter Paul got $1MILLION from wilk & Fred Willams let the young republicans do ther own work!
ReplyDeleteHow about some questions for Salavantis like 1)What are you freakin kidding me? 2)If there is a homicide after midnight will your parents let you go? 3)Do you have a permit or a senior license?4)Will you release your report cards? 5)Did you get a new lunch pail for your first day in office? 6)Will you use flash cards with words like "I object"? 7)Did you see the last Harry Potter movie?8)Do you know what the letters DA stand for? 9)Will you take a school bus to work?
ReplyDeleteOne more question please 10) Does she have a GPS to find the Court House?
ReplyDeleteThis young girl has no one to do research for her, I heard her campaign manager quit on her. Smartest thing he ever did.
ReplyDeleteBoy with allies like these who needs opposition? Stick a fork in the gop candidate, shes in politics.
ReplyDeleteEveryone was also calling Tarah Toohil a "young girl" who had to "get her parents permission" to do stuff? She smiled, ignored it, and laughed...all the way to Harrisburg. You want Salavantis not to win? Pick a different strategy--the "young girl" one backfires...it turns off women (calling a woman a girl), & turns off the youth vote suggesting younger people are incapable. Keep up that strategy and you all will accidentally hand the seat to Salavantis. Hope the D's will think smarter and learn from past mistakes.
ReplyDeleteThe DA's office is the highest paid in the county and Musto Carroll pulls in close to $200K. She was quoted in the newspaper saying "I'm worth it"...how do you think that arrogant quote will play in Luzerne County with a jobless rate over 9% and so many people making less than $30K/year?
ReplyDelete12:37, you want to compare Salavantis with Toohill? Lets try contrast Salavantis with Toohill! Watch Toohill's youtube link below...that is LEADERSHIP! Salavantis cant talk her way out of a wet paper bag. Jackie Musto-Carroll will eat Salavantis lunch in a debate! I dont hear Salavantis putting out a challenge to debate Jackie...you know why, because she cant! The stratgey only backfires if the canidate has the "guts" to challege a debate and defend herself from attacks like Toohill did...still waiting, real quite from the Salavantis camp. yes 12:31 she is a "young girl" untill she decides to step out of her daddy and mommy shadow and grow some..ummm "guts", lets just leave it at that.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfPprChg1Xw
12:52, do your homework. People in Luzerne County make more than $30K/year than not. Depends what sources you look at, I like using the U.S. Census Bureau...seems more credible to me than any other source. The median household income in Luzerne County is $39,984.So, you are incorrect, "so many people" are NOT making less than 30K/year. So many people are making MORE than 30K/year to drive the median above 30K/year...$39,984 to be exact.
ReplyDelete12:52 IF DA CARROLL IS PAYED $160 AND YOU DON'T THINK SHE IS WORTH IT , HOW MUSH LESS IS SALAVANTS WORTH $7.45 PER HR. GOOD THING THE COUNTY IS PUTING IN TIME CLOCKS ! I WANT MY DA TO THINK SHES WORTH IT AND SHE IS WORTH IT AND A LOT MORE !!!!!
ReplyDeleteToohil wa bound to win, Lex Luthor always loses in the end.
ReplyDeleteThere can not be a "debate" in a DA race, genius--the law/Constitution is not "debatable"...there can be a forum, like what the judges had in the last election, but it's dull as dishwater to watch. And maybe the DA (maybe) would beat Salavantis in a debate (which again can't occur--only a forum can), but the damage Salavantis could do in her open/closing statements would be ENORMOUS.
ReplyDeleteIf there's a debate, will the DA send one of her ADA's to do it for her? She sends them to do everything else--then throws them under the bus when things go wrong.
ReplyDelete12:36 To show you my genius, I will link below two debates one a DA race in New york the other a DA race in San Fransico...So DA's CAN have a debate from sea to shining sea and everywhere in between. The debate is not about the law/Constitution, the debate is about each stances and views on laws and each others record and history. Salavantis couldnt open or close a door...Please save you RA RA RA.
ReplyDeletehttp://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/district-attorney-candidates-clash-in-debate/
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/06/first-san-francisco-district-attorney-debate-kicks
Why can't the canadets have a debate for the office of DA. On the radio (WILK) Ms. Salsvents stated she wants to creat a panel to decide who will and who will not face the death penalty ! She also suggested that she will fire all the ADAs and clean house , lets not even bring up the teamsters union its nuts to make that statement!!! Once and for all this girl and all her supporters are NUTS !!!!
ReplyDelete