Frank Fina suspended over misconduct in Jerry Sandusky investigation
- Thread starter ChiTownLion
- Start date
Please take this opportunity to remember that jerry sandusky deserves a new trial.
Frank loses appeal (well, as if he ever had any "appeal" 
) :
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-106-2019pco.pdf?cb=1
) :http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-106-2019pco.pdf?cb=1
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. Too bad it took so long.
Perhaps @lubrano can remind us again about why the "and one day" component of the suspension is significant.
Here is something, but still hoping Anthony will enlighten us further.
https://www.padisciplinaryboard.org/for-attorneys/reinstatement
When is Shapiro going to prosecute him for the grand jury leaks? After all, no one is above the law. There’s a former AG who did jail time for the very same offense.
Last edited:
Judge Cleland decided Fina and Eshbach set a trap, therefore it couldn't have possibly been one of them.
Not a lawyer - obviously - but IIRC the suspension of less than one year results in an automatic "reinstatement" after the period is up..... but a suspension of over one year ("...and a day...") requires the person suspended to apply for reinstatement (which is not automatic).
I think that is why you often see the "and a day" rulings.
That is as best as ICR, others with more precise knowledge can - hopefully - chime in.
Here's a link to the 8-page opinion on Fina.
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-106-2019cs.pdf?cb=1
I don't believe this link was in the OP.
Also, that opinion references a much longer, 71-page opinion, for Baldwin in which she faced reprimand.
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-63-2019mo.pdf?cb=1
The PA Supreme Court did not suspend Baldwin. I think that's mainly because she's not practicing anymore. And in the last couple pages it seems as if they weren't going to reprimand her, but then they cited her utter lack of remorse:
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-106-2019cs.pdf?cb=1
I don't believe this link was in the OP.
Also, that opinion references a much longer, 71-page opinion, for Baldwin in which she faced reprimand.
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Supreme/out/J-63-2019mo.pdf?cb=1
The PA Supreme Court did not suspend Baldwin. I think that's mainly because she's not practicing anymore. And in the last couple pages it seems as if they weren't going to reprimand her, but then they cited her utter lack of remorse:
While we agree with the Disciplinary Board's acknowledgement that Respondent has never been the subject of prior disciplinary proceedings, this mitigating factor is offset by her lack of remorse for her actions. In her briefs filed with this Court, Respondent has seen fit to cast blame for her problems on everyone involved here including the Disciplinary Board, the ODC, the Superior Court, and the Individual Clients.
...
Even against this background and with confidence that the Respondent is unlikely to violate our Rules of Professional Conduct again, we find it necessary to impose discipline in the nature of a public reprimand to be administered by the Disciplinary Board. This is because we are concerned that Respondent has never contemplated, much less expressed, remorse. It is our belief that a public reprimand will reinforce our trust that the Respondent's legal career will go forward without another blemish.
We hereby impose discipline in the form of a public reprimand, to be administered by the Disciplinary Board. Respondent is ordered to pay the costs of investigation and prosecution in this matter.
...
Even against this background and with confidence that the Respondent is unlikely to violate our Rules of Professional Conduct again, we find it necessary to impose discipline in the nature of a public reprimand to be administered by the Disciplinary Board. This is because we are concerned that Respondent has never contemplated, much less expressed, remorse. It is our belief that a public reprimand will reinforce our trust that the Respondent's legal career will go forward without another blemish.
We hereby impose discipline in the form of a public reprimand, to be administered by the Disciplinary Board. Respondent is ordered to pay the costs of investigation and prosecution in this matter.
So two key attorneys in the S/C/S/S trials have been punished for their corrupt roles in the trials.
Yet S/C/S/S will have no recourse as a result
Yet S/C/S/S will have no recourse as a result
Been saying this for a long time (obviously) but how Cindy "Her Honor" Baldwin was free...… while Kathy Kane went to prison.... tells one just about all you need to know vav the PA Judiciary:
With Cindy "Her Honor" Baldwin's Disciplinary Hearing concluded.....
Might be an appropriate time to take a look back at Miss Cindy's role at PSU - from a BLOG I wrote a couple years ago:
https://barryfenchak4trustee.wordpress.com/2018/05/22/cynthia-baldwin-penn-state-general-counsel/
Just read that Fran Fina received a suspension of his law license of one year and one day. This means his reinstatement is not automatic.
So what will Frank do without his law license? Clerk at one of those truck stop porn shops along I81?
Frank Fina and Michigan both eating it at the same time. Been a good day.
Would SCOTUS really want to bother with this one??
Not a chance in hell SCOTUS would waste its time reviewing an attorney's disciplinary review.
Sounds like Cindy and Frankie went to the same (lack of) ethics class. The attorney who wrote the opinion on Fina for the disciplinary board noted in his scathing opinion that Fina not only refused to acknowledge he acted improperly but showed no remorse for his conduct. Hard for me to imagine a more deserving candidate for this punishment. His lawyer’s claim that he will appeal to the United State Supreme Court is a joke and an absolute waste of time.
This should be posted in the least stressful jobs thread! LOL!
well that would fit his expertise. his spent lots of time in his state funded job on his state funded computer studying it.
I’m hoping he loses everything and he and his wife are dumpster diving for their meals.
If the overturning of Spanier's conviction is upheld on appeal can he sue Fina for malicious prosecution?
The list of shit-eaters is long.
I struggle with lowering myself to the level of my enemies when I respond to provocations. This is an example of why I need to be better.
Elected officials have a sworn duty to uphold the law. We live in a society governed by the rule of law. Whatever unholy bullshit got kicked up by our problem, there is no excuse for taking an 'ends justify the means' approach to law, and people suffered terribly for it. We deserve better.
God damn all the bastards that had a hand in this.
Elected officials have a sworn duty to uphold the law. We live in a society governed by the rule of law. Whatever unholy bullshit got kicked up by our problem, there is no excuse for taking an 'ends justify the means' approach to law, and people suffered terribly for it. We deserve better.
God damn all the bastards that had a hand in this.
@wensilver
https://www.inquirer.com/news/frank-fina-suspended-sandusky-prosecutor-penn-state-20200219.html
This is a pretty good summary of the events:
https://www.inquirer.com/news/frank-fina-suspended-sandusky-prosecutor-penn-state-20200219.html
If Baldwin had just done her job, none of this crap would have happened. A damn shame, it is.
