It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sam Kent believes he was prosecuted because he ruled against Halliburton

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 03:41 AM
link   

Sam Kent believes he was prosecuted because he ruled against Halliburton


__._

I had lunch yesterday in Houston with former-Federal Judge Sam Kent (the
first Federal Judge found guilty of serious crimes in the US) and he told
me why he thinks he was prosecuted.

For those who haven't followed this, he was found guilty on perjury &
sexual misconduct. Yes, he slept with those two women, but it was
consensual. Actually, they were old affairs and long over.

What Sam said was that "isn't is strange that the Justice Department
begins sniffing around for dirt to throw at me just weeks after I ruled a
heavy case against Halliburton.
(visit the link for the full news article)


What Sam said was that "isn't is strange that the Justice Department
begins sniffing around for dirt to throw at me just weeks after I ruled a
heavy case against Halliburton. Then a small set of affairs turn into an
untrue situation and then spun up into an unprecedented case against a
Federal Judge."

Of course, I told him he was nuts to rule anything against Halliburton.
I also told him that this sounds like a John Grisham plotline.



Related News Links:
www.chron.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
WikiLeaks begins publishing 5 million emails from STRATFOR
edit on 27-2-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-2-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 03:41 AM
link   
Thread covering the release of Stratfor emails:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

From the recent wikileaks of Stratfor emails, Lauren Goodrich -Director of Analysis, had a meeting with former US Judge Sam Kent. Sam Kent explained to Lauren that he believes the only reason he was prosecuted was because of a ruling he made against Halliburton.

en.wikipedia.org...


On May 11, 2009, Judge Kent was sentenced to 33 months in prison in a sex abuse case for lying to investigators about sexually abusing two female employees. Dick DeGuerin, Kent's attorney, said the judge was retiring from the bench because of a disability—which would allow him to keep receiving his $169,300-a-year salary.


From the original news coverage:


U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of justice Monday, avoiding a potentially humiliating trial on that charge and five others accusing him of sexually abusing two female employees.


__._
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 27-2-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 05:07 AM
link   
There are some indications around that this is the culture of power that has developed. I do not condone workplace harassment, but if everyone who had sex was locked up then there would not be too much happening except for over populated jails.

Without going over all the details of the case it is impossible to form a considered assessment of the situation, but Sam has been through it and might be right.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 05:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by kwakakev
There are some indications around that this is the culture of power that has developed. I do not condone workplace harassment, but if everyone who had sex was locked up then there would not be too much happening except for over populated jails.

Without going over all the details of the case it is impossible to form a considered assessment of the situation, but Sam has been through it and might be right.


I think it's ironic, given that Assange is currently being held on similar charges. Not only that, but just recently Strauss Khan has been hit the same way.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Very interesting, thank you.

I wish I knew when the Halliburton case was. The articles linked indicate that the harassment of the two women started in 2003 and continued through 2007. His first problem was with his own superiors on the bench who gave him a four month "Leave of Absence" in 2007. Also according to the articles, he admitted to the sexual misconduct and lying to a judicial investigation board.

Besides, If Halliburton was really mad at him, wouldn't he have had an "accident?"



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 05:44 AM
link   
Isnt it common practice to blackmail judges in america?Why wouldnt Halliberton just tell the judge to rule for them or be exposed?
Why wit for the bad ruling then retaliate?It makes little sense......



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
well.. lets bust him out.


better yet, lets all start sniffing around the justice department. whos investigating the corrupted?



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 



If Halliburton was really mad at him, wouldn't he have had an "accident?"


They stopped doing accidents a few years ago - now they're using "heart attacks" and genetically-tailored cancers. Maybe Kent's 'infection' didn't "take." More likely though, it's most efficacious to strip his credibility - make him an "example" and go for the trickle-down effect.




posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by stirling
Isnt it common practice to blackmail judges in america?Why wouldnt Halliberton just tell the judge to rule for them or be exposed?
Why wit for the bad ruling then retaliate?It makes little sense......


Perhaps they tried and he stood up to them - and this is the result.

I don't know exactly what happened, but that would make sense.

Thanks OP, I reckon this is one of, if not the most interesting development to come out of Wikileaks. And I'm sure there will be more to come out of the Stratfor emails.



new topics




 
7

log in

join