So the brew-ha-ha today is that Judge Raymond Dougan of the Boston Municipal Court received free legal representation from a top notch law firm that successfully defended him against cry-baby allegations from Search and Avoid D.A. Dan Conley.
An important rule of law was revisited and immediately affirmed thanks to the Dougan’s legal team.
You see, there is an ethics rule that a judge cannot receive personal benefit from attorneys or their firm that regularly practice before them. In this case Foley Hoag.
First off, Foley Hoag lawyers are in the BMC once every ten years. Easy recusal if they happen to draw Judge Dougan that day. Autiomatic recusal. In fact if Dougan paid them it would still be a recusal.
Now lets compare this to the SJC and the pro-bono work done by Paul Ware and his huge white shoes law firm. That firm gave the SJC a gift wrapped and with a bow when it was asked to look into probation and bring back a report that kisses the justices asses.
They did the same with the Cinquigrana Report.
But the Ware report and many aspects of it show ethics violations by many judges and former judges.
In fact I filed a written complaint with the Judicial Conduct Commission last year. (Anonymous complaint allowed per the rules- signed Ernie Boch, III, no relation)
The quotes in the Globe by Judge Mulligan and the blatant conflicts, including Judge Mulligan promoting JUdge Botsford’s nephew the day before she cast the deciding vote in his re-appointment as CJAM are far more egregious than Dougan getting help with this bullshit. In fact the judges should have paid for it out of their funds. The Dougan case was about each and every one of them.
But because the Globe is a Dan Conley Toady too it goes after Dougan,
JUdge Dougan’s ethics regarding legal representation cannot be separated from the real and concrete ethics violations committed by the SJC and some big law firms.
P.S. Dougan being represented personally and the SJC being represented as a body is a red herring.