Former state Superior Court Judge Michael T. Joyce was proud of his reputation for handing down long prison sentences to those unfortunate enough to find their way into his courtroom. Criminal defendants often argued unsuccessfully for probation instead of a prison stay.
In an ironic turn of events, “Maximum Mike” is now asking for leniency in his own sentencing, after being found guilty of felony charges in November for defrauding two insurance companies of $440,000 and laundering the money in 2002.
The irony isn’t lost on Assistant U.S. Attorney Christian Trabold. He wrote in his filing that “in the end it is quite ironic that a man who so thoroughly enjoyed the moniker ‘Maximum Mike’ now seeks mercy from this court.”
Senior U.S. District Judge Maurice B. Cohill Jr. will be charged with the duty to impose sentencing on Joyce after hearing arguments from both sides.
Here’s the gist of that argument without any of that legal mumbo jumbo:
The prosecution claims that Joyce should receive sentencing in accordance with government-imposed guidelines (ranging from 4-5 years and some change). They contend that Joyce betrayed the respect his position afforded, ignored the numerous opportunities to put an end to the fraud, and is himself to blame for the humiliation he now faces.
Joyce’s defense team, led by lawyer Philip Friedman, claims that Joyce has been punished enough as a result of intense media coverage, public humiliation, loss of career and income and standing in the community after Joyce was indicted in August 2007. Sending him to prison now would serve no purpose.
Something I find particularly troubling is that Friedman’s argument refers to the “potential” loss of Joyce’s pension and law license. I simply can’t believe that Joyce could actually walk away from this conviction without losing both.
Anyone who has kept up with this case since Joyce’s indictment is undoubtedly aware of Joyce’s arrogance, so we shouldn’t be surprised at this latest argument. Friedman’s concern is that Joyce stands to lose everything he has – career, reputation, standing in the community – but I have to ask why Joyce so willingly put his life’s work in jeopardy.
As so often happens in the defense system, we’re asked to be sympathetic to the losses incurred by a convicted criminal. We’re expected to feel sympathy for the individual because of what they stand to lose for being ‘caught’, while turning a blind eye to their role in getting into that situation. That makes about as much sense as asking for sympathy to kids who murder their parents because they’re now orphans.
Additionally, Joyce is now claiming that his position in the community – the very position that afforded him considerable privilege – was a ‘handicap’ once he was indicted and suffered public humiliation. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t take advantage of everything to be gained by those in the public eye, then blame the public when that notoriety no longer serves as a benefit.
It’s just this simple: Joyce had everything, threw it all away, and now wants the justice system to have sympathy (the same sympathy he never showed as a sentencing judge) for everything he lost. I just hope Judge Cohill disagrees.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=106c2f97-dd89-42ae-a125-2ae1a84da495)
I think he should get the maximum allowed since as a judge his standard to be proper was higher.
I don't think he is any better class of person than anyone else – you break the law – you pay the price and as a judge, ho knew the price better than he.
Send him to the slammer.
Oops – shoudl has been “who knew”
I keep making this worse – Should –
Maybe I need some new hands to type with or maybe a dragon system – lol
Your emotional comment makes little sense. He's held to the same standard as anyone else. He may have to face consequences from legal organizations, etc, as he voluntarily entered such engagements but his sentence is based on what he did, not who he is.
I think that the people who enforce the law should know that they should show a higher standard than the rest of us.
I don't think that criminals should be sentenced by a judge who is in his own actions allowed to be a criminal. That sends the message that depending on who you are, different rules apply.
Besides, he knew what he did was wrong as a judge and he sentenced people to maximum terms for crimes similar to his, so he knew it was wrong twice over so he should definitely get the maximum. If not more.
The arguement that he's “suffered enough” is a bunch of B.S. – I'd ask Maximum Mike if he'd take that seriously from someone who did the same crime, and was standing in front of his bench. Bonus: Mike must do this while hooked up to a lie detector.
I think it would be hysterical to see him put in a cell with some bubba who he slammed with the max sentence – Watch him try to talk his way out of that. Except they will probably put him is some cushy isolation cell where he doesn't have to mix with those he put in.
Holding law enforcement to a higher standard is indeed applying different rules to different people.
I don't think you've thought through your position fully…
Joyce was not a Federal judge so there is zero chance he will be incarcerated with those he sentenced.
I suspect a judge will look at the detriment Joyce has caused to the courts — an institution integral to the order of society — and instead of adding years to a sentence (which he can't do), he might just be persuaded to order the maximum allowed under the law.
I think 4-5 years is very appropriate in this circumstance since a message needs to be sent to judges that they are not above the law.
Maybe Inked has a point but something like that will require the legislature to pass a law adding additional penalties for lawyers, judges, and law enforcement.
Maybe if he would have kept it in his pants he would not have needed to be so greedy. If anyone should know the law it has to be a judge. We ALL need to abide be the rules. I don't suspect he would have been lenient on this case if he were the one presiding over it. (Maximum Mike, karma can be a bitch)
I was one of the “Maximum Mike” sentencees back in 1988. At first I was kind of glad to see that he got into trouble, but then I realized or wondered if he had used fraudulent means to impose longer sentences than were allowed by law. Has anyone had their sentences by Michael Joyce overturned under this pretense?