Drew Broach at the Times Picayune has the details:
Five days after his brother quit as chief attorney for Jefferson Parish government, amid a federal criminal investigation of Parish President Aaron Broussard’s administration, U.S. Magistrate Judge Jay Wilkinson disqualified himself from presiding over all criminal cases in federal court, according to court records released today.
In his March 8 order, Wilkinson cited a federal law requiring that a judge step aside from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
We covered Magistrate Wilkinson in Frught, a case where he sanctioned State Farm for lying in discovery. Until the Jefferson Parish political corruption scandal broke we had heard only very good things about Magistrate Wilkinson. Since that time such has been a different matter and what we are hearing is mirrored in the comments to Drew Broach’s story linked above, our readers either highly respect the man or think he is a crook with seemingly no middle ground.
I do know this, I certainly would not want my character judged by the conduct of a brother (and I feel certain my siblings feel likewise) and rightfully so as one can only control one’s own actions, not those of a sibling. For instance we’re universally told Jay is the far more reserved and thoughtful sibling while his bro is both loud and usually profane.
From the stories I’ve heard from very well placed sources, Tom Wilkinson’s conduct is a target rich environment. I think the bottom line here is that the district court in NOLA thinks that business there is fixing to pick up. And for the local news cycle there may be no dog days this summer as events unfold.
sop
The distinction for me is that Jay Wilkinson did not voluntarily remove himself from his criminal cases as did Karen Wells Roby.
Casting no aspersions on the man because of his brother I do question Jay’s reasoning for not stepping aside , as Magistrate Roby did, the moment there was the slightest inkling that his brother may be headed his way.
I also question both the Wilkinson brothers’ reasoning which allowed Jay to refer his former law partner and friend, Mr. Mole , to Tom when Mole was looking for a ‘stooge’ attorney(Tom referred Mole to Don Gardner who was a close friend of Judge Porteous who is now removed or being removed from the federal bench thanks in part to this case) to help with the Liljeberg-St.Jude case before Porteous. Tom Wilkinson allegedly received $30,000 of the $100,000.00 fee paid to Gardner and for which Gardner has sent a demand letter for the return of the bulk on the basis Tom Wilkinson did not do the work for which he claimed payment.
If you are not confused please accept my congratulations.
So Jay refers brother Tom to help friend Mole find a stooge to help ‘level the playing field’ before Porteous.
Oh yeah: in a case where Jay had handled the preliminary motions.
Criminal? Don’t know.
Unethical? I think so.
Only time they ever played that game? Hmmm.
If so it must feel like getting pregnant the first time you have sex.
Tom Wilkinson deserves everything he gets for his unethical, immoral and illegal acts.
Jay Wilkinson showed at least twice that he is ethically challenged: once when he referred his friend to his brother in the Liljeberg-StJude-Porteous matter and again by not immediately voluntarily relinquishing his criminal cases when his brother received his first Grand Jury subpoena for the Jefferson Parish scandals.
No I am certain my brother does not want to be judged by my actions, nor I by his. But by our own ? that we cannot escape.
Time will tell if Jay Wilkinson is dirty. It already has told on his brother Tom.
What a shame. Magistrate Wilkinson has been one that I’ve always felt was fair – not that he always ruled as I’d like but he clearly considered both sides in what I’ve read.
Unslabbed wrote: “I also question both the Wilkinson brothers
Also Unslabbed, in your haste to paint Jay Wilkinson with the Tom Wilkinson brush, you must have missed the part of the article where it says: “U.S. Magistrate Judge Jay Wilkinson disqualified himself from presiding over all criminal cases in federal court, according to court records released today.” This is in direct conflict with your initial statement: “The distinction for me is that Jay Wilkinson did not voluntarily remove himself from his criminal cases as did Karen Wells Roby.”
I agree with lots of what you have to say, but in this instance you do not seem to be connecting the dots. You must have some firsthand information the rest of us are lacking regarding Magistrate Wilkinson. As I have done before, I invite anyone who has such information (not to be confused with innuendo) of wrongdoing or unethical behavior to share it.
I have had many cases in front of Magistrate Jay Wilkinson – class act and above reproach. Cannot say the same about his brother. Must be tough for Jay to see this debacle unfold. Evidence of his ethics, though, is his recusal.
Jay Wilkinon is a superstar when compared to the other magistrates on Camp St.
He can be curt and dismissive, but above all else he typically decides matters based on the law. Unlike, hmm……. Shushan.
To all who took umbrage at my comment:
I have known Jay Wilkinson since law school and would have defended him as one of the good guys up until the debacle with his brother Tom and the intimate involvement with people we have both known for many years.
I should have been more precise and written that it was his delay in removing himself not the involuntary manner …he should have removed himself the very first time his brother visited the Grand Jury in 2009. Not March of 2010.
I read Mole’s testimony at the impeachment hearings in the Congressional Record. It appeared to me that he testified that he spoke with his friend and former partner about finding an attorney to level the playing field. If I hallucinated while reading that most intriguing and mystifying transcript please let me be the first to apologize.
Trust me I am well acquainted with both brothers and they personify the theory that sometimes it is not environment but simple DNA that creates the personality.
However, given Jay’s delay in recognizing the need to step away from the Criminal bar and the increased discomfort in the legal circles with his brother’s continued involvement post-recusal and pre-resignation/removal I stand by my opinion that Jay waited a bit too long to do the ethically proper thang.
Offices being what they are and people being what they are, the concern that ‘leaks’ were happening on Poydras were rolling around in many minds. Again no aspersion on Jay but rather on ANY co-conspirators getting inside info because of any connections.
I am gratified that Jay has defenders and as one previously I do not feel so duped or disappointed.
Again, anyone who has read the Congressional Record transcript please let me know if I dreamed that testimony by Mole.
Unslabbed, I don’t know either brother by anything other than reputation – the Magistrate’s reputation far better than that of his brother.
Meaning, I read the transcript “just looking” for anything that would even suggest a “family event” and found nothing.
It’s been a while but, as I recall, Mole mentioned his former relationship with Jay but I read his remark at an attempt to provide context on how he knew Tom – and assume he did so to put himself in the “best light” possible for an attorney who would improperly influence a judge, as opposed to being seen as one who would make a cold call.
While on the subject, I’ll also add that I see nothing unusual about the delay in recusal. Judging by the comments here, I suspect the judges he works with are so confident of his integrity that he finally had to recuse himself or it would not have been done.
It’s unfortunate, but, a few judges have cast all in a bad light – and even more unfortunate that there is no news value in an honest judge doing his job well unless there is a big case that calls attention to one like Rakoff (hope I spelled his name correctly).
Louisiana lawyers have a ” Rules of Professional Conduct” so as not to stray from the righteous path of not doing something wrong while making some money.
Article 8, Maintaining The Integrity Of The Profession, sets forth rules to abide by:
Rule 8.4 (e) says a lawyer should not state or imply an ability to influence improperly a judge…or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law…
Rule 8.4 (f) warns a lawyer not to knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of Judicial Conduct or other law…
Mr. Platzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzmier where are you ? You know about the Liljeberg fiasco don’t you ? The case I am thinking about doing an Legal Ethics PHD on, or should I say, the total lack of ethics of any kind, any where, by everyone ! That’s it, the title, “Pondering Porteous” (or maybe “Pandering Porteous”).
Hey Chuck, you know Porteous is the Judge being impeached don’t ya? And then there is the infamous victim, Mr. Mole; then Mr. “I have no recollection, one way or the other” Cline; Mr.”bestest of friends” Levenson; Mr. “Cameo” Gardner, and of course Mr. “let’s go hunting” Chopin, and his buddy Mr.” T. Patrick Baynham” ! But the standout goes to Mr. “where’s my money” Tom Wilkinson, the facilitator of all things unethical, if not in fact illegal.
Researching legal ethics in Louisiana can have it’s moments.
Can anyone recommend a family attorney who would enjoy opposing council Don C Gardner???????
I need help….
24jdc c
659-261
Uncle Don eh LOL? A reader sent this in Chris.
Alan Tusa 985-893-9980.
I have a cell number if you have a hard time getting through his office line.
Don’t know the man and I do not know how good of a family lawyer he is but I am told reliably he loves going against Don.
Good luck.
sop