"Kids for Cash" judicial corruption scandal:

Mark Ciavarella was the judge who presided over juvenile court cases, and Michael Conahan was the president judge responsible for administrative functions. Together, they conspired to send children to two private, for-profit juvenile detention centers - PA Child Care and Western PA Child Care. In exchange for sentencing children to these facilities, the judges accepted over US$2.8 million in kickbacks from the developers and owners of these detention centers from 2003 to 2008. Conahan helped facilitate the closure of a county-run detention facility and then signed contracts with the private facilities, ensuring a steady flow of juvenile offenders to fill them. Both judges are often referred to as the masterminds behind this corruption scheme due to their direct involvement in orchestrating the practices that led to the wrongful detention of thousands of minors.

In many cases, the juveniles and their families were encouraged to waive their right to legal representation, leaving them without proper defense in court. This made it easier for Judge Ciavarella to issue harsh sentences without challenge. The court proceedings were often brief, with some hearings lasting only minutes before children were sentenced and sent away to detention. Parents, who were largely unaware of the corrupt practices at play or unaware of their children's legal rights, consented to having their children appear in court without legal representation. But many parents later realized that their children had been manipulated by a corrupt system designed to send them to detention regardless of the circumstances.

While school officials, police officers and probation officers were involved in referring children to Ciavarella's court, they were not part of the direct kickback scheme between the judges and the private detention center owners. However, their reliance on court intervention to handle student discipline created a pipeline directly from the school to the juvenile detention centers. School officials should have questioned why so many children were being sent to juvenile detention for minor infractions. Police officers could have pushed for diversion programs or alternative resolutions for minor juvenile offenses instead of referring them to court. Probation officers should have recognized and reported the excessively harsh sentences.

The judicial corruption scandal began to unravel when the Juvenile Law Center, a nonprofit organization, started to notice an unusually high number of complaints from juveniles and their families regarding Ciavarella's court. Many of the children had been sentenced without representation, while others had been given overly severe sentences for very minor infractions. In 2008, a federal investigation was launched, leading to the exposure of the kickback scheme. The FBI discovered that Ciavarella and Conahan had received payments funneled through a series of shell companies and real estate investments. Both judges initially attempted to present the payments as legal "finder's fees" but it was soon clear that these were bribes designed to incentivize the judges to send more children to these private facilities.

In 2009, Ciavarella and Conahan were charged with a range of crimes, including racketeering, fraud, tax evasion and money laundering. Ciavarella remained defiant throughout the trial, maintaining that he had acted in the best interests of the children by enforcing a tough-love approach to discipline. However, the evidence clearly showed that his sentences were motivated by personal gain rather than justice. Ciavarella was convicted of 12 out of 39 charges, including racketeering, conspiracy and honest services fraud. He was sentenced to 28 years in federal prison in 2011, effectively a life sentence given his age. Conahan also pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 17.5 years in federal prison. His cooperation with investigators during the investigation led to a slightly reduced sentence.

CPO-000034-2022 bears several striking similarities to the "Kids for Cash" judicial corruption scandal - no legal aid was provided in CPO-000034-2022 and a minor quarrel was exaggerated into an allegation of "child abuse" to justify statutory intervention. This mirrors the misuse of authority seen in the "Kids for Cash" judicial corruption scandal, where many children were sentenced without representation and given overly severe sentences for very minor infractions. Despite presenting evidence (photos and videos) proving that "I have a very good relationship with my daughter" in my SECOND AFFIDAVIT dated 14 August 2023 to CPS - CPS ignored it, revealing a "corrupt intent" behind the proceedings. All in all, my evidence clearly shows that CPS is motivated by corrupt practices (unmerited/excessive referrals to SSAs by CPS and bribery arrangements between them, enabled and protected by the Family Justice Courts) rather than the welfare and best interests of the child or young person. Both CPO-000034-2022 and the "Kids for Cash" judicial corruption scandal involved fees paid by public monies.