REINAKER MUST GO!Posted on October 3rd, 2012 6 comments
A CROOKED JUDGE!
A Lancaster County prosecutor, citing “bias,” asked a judge Tuesday to withdraw from a case in which a man convicted of more than 20 burglaries faced sentencing.
Judge Dennis Reinaker refused and subsequently sentenced Justin Richard Jenkins to the time he had already severed in prison, about 10 months.
…Jenkins faced a maximum sentence of more than 900 years in prison for the 70 criminal charges he admitted.
From today’s article, “DA says judge too easy on teenage burglar,” (click here).
Simply unbelievable! Get this judge off the bench!
Please check back later today.
6 responses to “REINAKER MUST GO!”
barryinwinnipeg October 3rd, 2012 at 13:32
One has to be very careful about calling a sitting judge “crooked.” There is such a thing as contempt of court. Where the line between freedom of the press and “contempt” is, I don’t know. What I do find interesting is that in the United States county judges are elected and also have to be re-elected.I guess this fact makes them politicians, and as such, open to public comments such as yours. In Canada justices are appointed in consultation with the legal community.I wonder how this is going to evolve, especially since the DA went public with his criticism of a judge… something that a prosecutor very seldom does if he is going to face the same judge again and again in his career. Interesting…
Barry, I considered the word carefully before I used it. The opening sentence to this article is: A Lancaster County prosecutor, citing “bias,” asked a judge Tuesday to withdraw from a case in which a man convicted of more than 20 burglaries faced sentencing. The prosecutor said “bias;” the Judge refused. I believe “crooked” is appropriate. I do not use that word lightly at all!
Reinaker, who did not immediately return a phone call for comment Monday, got his fourth “not qualified” rating from the Bar since 1990.
In his previous runs for judge, the Bar Association rated him “less-than-qualified” in 1990, “not qualified” in 1991, “qualified” in 1992, “not qualified” in 1997 and “not qualified” in 2004.
Barry, I guess I’m touchy today because of an email I received – but again, I am aware of the strength of the word and feel it’s appropriate Posted under the article on WGAL:
I want to meet this guys lawyer. He did a heck of a job. Wonder what it cost him for such a stellar verdict.
From the current Lancaster Online article – italics are mine – (if I went to the previous one I could get a ton of them):
Not right. He is worth saving, but should have gotten time for 70 different counts(1-5 YEARS) I got 9-23months for felony burglary wher nothing was stolen or robbed. I continued to have a arguement wt an ex inside her house where i use to live and the commowealth cld charge me wth burglary bc i commited the crime therein of misdemeanor terroristic threat simple assualt. I hope this opens up lawsuits and appeals by convicted people sentenced by this judge. Bias all the way or he was drunk when he sentenced tjhis young lad!
barryinwinnipeg October 4th, 2012 at 12:43
Well, Becky, you have courage! I used to have a reputation for being very assertive when it came to blowing the whistle on public activity that was just plain wrong. As one friend observed, “Barry, you not only call a spade a spade, you call it an effing shovel!” Keep on fighting the good fight!
Preate's boy October 4th, 2012 at 14:05
So what did Reinaker actually do for Preate? There was money being shuttled from mobsters to the Preate campaign, I think. Reinaker must have had to testify to the Grand Jury. Did he tell the truth under oath?