WV Supreme Court Justice charged with ethics violations.

I am still awaiting an ethics opinion on whether I can profess an opinion on this. until then, all I can say that if he is criminally charged for one bad act, he may be facing up to 15 or 20 charges which may expose him to a life sentence…because of his own opinions. Blockburger…

So, it seems he spent a lot of the court budget on fancy trappings for his office, and his home. Also he took some antique furniture from the court to keep at his house, on the quiet. I think you can have an opinion about this.

I love this:


And he’s been charged in a 22 count federal indictment.

I read the whole thing and don’t get me wrong, if he did these things he should lose his seat on the Supreme Court, but padding mileage expenses is a federal crime? It would seem like a large segment of the population would be guilty of federal felonies.

Duh; they are. That’s the game. So many laws on the books, everyone is prolly guilty of something. That way they can lean on people when they need to; nearly anything can be justified (or at least made to happen).

ETA: Haven’t you ever heard a cop talk about following a car? They can always find a reason to pull someone over.

I just want to be sure I understand. I run a small business. When my employees use their personal car for business reasons, they are reimbursed mileage. They enter the data on my company program which is located in the cloud.

Suppose one of them fudges the numbers a bit and pads their expenses. Is it really now a federal matter since they used an instrument of interstate commerce to defraud me? Even if it is $1? I’ll bring this up at the next meeting. :slight_smile:

Yes, so the FBI should get right on arresting everyone for this crime. Because ALL laws should be enforced all the time, right?

No (and I know where you are going with this), if there is a law whose application shocks the conscience of the people, then that application of the law should be repealed and not allowed to sit idle except as a trap for the unwary or just because you don’t like the person.

I think that most people would agree that minor expense padding is accepted most of the time, and that if you go too far with it you might lose your job or be required to pay back the expense. However, I don’t know anyone that believes it should be a federal felony.

That’s too bad. If you don’t want it as a federal felony, then you should repeal the law. In the meantime, start advocating for the arrest of all those who pad expenses. Can’t have laws that aren’t 100% enforced all the time, now can we?

Would you mind taking this thought over to the immigration thread? Further, I never said that all laws should be enforced 100% of the time.

What I object to is a unique application of a law that only applies to an individual you don’t like. In other words, tens of thousands of people all across the country pad their mileage expenses and/or use company vehicles for personal reasons. Nobody is ever charged with that except for Allen Loughry.

In my opinion, it is unfair to apply the law in this fashion, and the law should be modified that if we as a society do not choose to prosecute people for padding mileage, we can’t have that law sitting back to spring on someone that we don’t like.

I have no opinion on when this conduct crosses the line and should be prosecuted, but I do object to the idea that “minor expense padding is accepted most of the time.”

In my view, it is totally unacceptable. Period. Sure, a mistake might be made now and then, but asking to be reimbursed for 50 miles when you know you actually drove 40? You do that at my office and you’ll be terminated immediately if I find out. If you want more money, ask for it. Don’t lie to me.

That’s my point. At most you will be terminated immediately; not prosecuted. And I share your view that expense padding is stealing; however, it is one of those socially acceptable forms of stealing like eating grapes at the grocery store or taking an extra cookie home with you from the all you can eat buffet.

I agree that it should not be viewed as acceptable, but for the large part it is. That was my point.

Nothing to do with immigration, but there might be a difference in law between a private company expense report and a government expense report.

Yeah, but this Justice guy lied to the FBI about it too. I don’t know anything about him (except he seems light on qualifications for the job) but if you hold yourself out as a crusader against government corruption, it’s going to look bad if you’re doing what he did.

I’ve been arrested for eating small amounts of food at a grocery store when I was homeless and starving. It’s only “socially acceptable” when middle to upper-class white people do it. Much like committing fraud, apparently.

Serious questions: Should he be treated differently because he wrote that book? Should he be treated differently because he is a State Supreme Court Justice instead of Al, the lawnmower repair guy who padded his mileage expenses?

And by “treated differently” I mean both being criminally charged and the length of his sentence if convicted.

Further, these lies to the FBI are thin lies at best. Did I use company vehicles for personal use? I say no because when I took the company vehicle to the beach with the kids, I did think about business while drinking on the beach.

Now, you may disagree with my assessment of what is business and what is personal, but I did not “lie” if I believed my own definition of business.

So let me get this straight: Your argument is “Well, OK, he was stealing, and that’s illegal, but everyone steals all the time, so he really shouldn’t be prosecuted for his stealing, and it’s bad when the government goes after thieves for breaking the law”?

Of course, that’s not at all what I said. I don’t particularly like the guy and most other people don’t either. And that’s probably the reason he is being prosecuted.

There is stealing and then there is stealing. If you took a bar of soap from your hotel room, would you expect to be charged with petit larceny? I’m sure that you or someone will point out that doing so is technically stealing and should be punished, but I am concerned with how person A would be treated and how Allen Loughry, because we don’t like him, is being treated.

If it was just social condemnation, then great, I’m all for it. But why do we use the federal justice system to prosecute something that admittedly occurs tens of thousands of time with social approval?

Too bad life isn’t fair. And I’m fine with treating someone who is supposed to uphold the law differently when they break the law.

I think that is in response to one of my earlier questions. Imagine two people:

  1. Allen H. Loughry, West Virginia Supreme Court Justice


  1. Al Loughry, lawnmower repairman for Acme Small Engine Repair who drives a company car.

If either guy uses a company car for personal use, you are saying that #1 should be charged criminally and/or get a longer jail sentence that #2?