Hoboy: Serial-Killer-Lovin' Obama Nominee Gets Even Worse

Instapundit is always pushing a theory (a pretty good one) that abstract codes about ethics wind up obscuring genuine bad behavior, as people wind up complying with the ethical code but violate common decency. An easy example is the media, whose ethics code requires them to (giggle) refuse to state their politics and political affiliation. Having done that, they are supposedly "clean" of bias. Which then enables them to do all sorts of biased reporting.

As true as that might be, it's a terrific thing when a rotten-hearted bastard who has violated the moral code, for which he cannot be made to answer, winds up also violating the ethical code, for which he can be.

Robert Chatingy, you'll recall, believes that "sexual sadism" as found in 99% of serial killers ought to be a mitigating factor at sentencing, and perhaps an exonerating one. A vicious admitted serial killer came before him and no longer wished to fight his well-deserved death penalty; acting as judge, Chatigny threatened to have the serial killer's lawyer's bar licence yanked unless he violated his client's wishes and fought the sentence.

And none of that apparently was enough to disqualify him in the eyes of Obama.

Well maybe this might.

President Barack Obama’s nominee to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, Robert N. Chatigny, did legal work as a private defense attorney in 1992 for convicted serial killer Michael Ross and then, in 2005, as a federal district judge, led a proceeding that resulted in a delay in Ross’ execution. Chatigny says he forgot about the earlier work and should have recused himself from the matter.

“Had I recalled it, I would have recused myself,” Chatigny wrote in a questionnaire last month for the Senate Judiciary Committee.

In 1992, Chatigny reviewed motions filed on behalf of Ross and exchanged a letter with Ross, work that did not involve direct representation of the killer.

...

In a written response to questions from Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chatigny wrote, “I recalled my prior involvement only after one of the complainants amended his initial complaint to include a claim based on my prior involvement. Until then, I had no recollection of it.”

Ross had been convicted in 1987 and sentenced to death for the killing of four teenage girls; he boasted of raping and killing four other women.

I usually remember the bulk of my personal correspondence with serial rapist-killers who boast of having killed eight women. That sort of thing tends to stick in my mind. But that's just me.

An ethics violation was already filed back in 2005 and the sitting judge, shocker of shockers, was cleared of all wrongdoing.

And what was the then-defense-attorney's suggestion to the serial killer? Was it to lodge his own pet defense of "sexual sadism"?

posted by Ace at 11:50 AM

| Access Comments