Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

warrprayer

(4,734 posts)
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 05:34 PM Apr 2013

Madoff's Attorney Appointed as Head of Ethics Panel

Ex-Madoff attorney named chair of N.Y. ethics panel
4/22/2013


By Joseph Ax

NEW YORK (Reuters) -" Daniel Horwitz, a partner at the boutique law firm Lankler Carragher & Horwitz in Manhattan and one of Bernard Madoff's defense lawyers, was appointed chairman of the state's political ethics watchdog on Monday by Governor Andrew Cuomo."

"The commission, known as JCOPE, was created in 2011 as part of a sweeping ethics-reform package signed into law by Cuomo. It regulates government ethics and lobbying for state legislators, legislative and executive branch employees, and political candidates, as well as lobbyists and certain party officials."

"Horwitz donated $4,250 in campaign funds to Cuomo from 2006 to 2010, according to state records."

Is it just me, or is it all one big good ol' boys club?



33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Madoff's Attorney Appointed as Head of Ethics Panel (Original Post) warrprayer Apr 2013 OP
Par for the course anotherone Apr 2013 #1
Welcome! warrprayer Apr 2013 #2
I don't love Madoff''s Attorney! In_The_Wind Apr 2013 #15
As we all know Summer Hathaway Apr 2013 #3
Such a position warrprayer Apr 2013 #4
This message was self-deleted by its author Summer Hathaway Apr 2013 #5
Even scumbags deserve lawyers Recursion Apr 2013 #6
I get your point warrprayer Apr 2013 #7
No. Summer Hathaway Apr 2013 #8
If I have to explain.... warrprayer Apr 2013 #9
It would help if you do RudynJack Apr 2013 #12
Well, given as you can't respond Summer Hathaway Apr 2013 #13
the words I was looking for warrprayer Apr 2013 #18
... tammywammy Apr 2013 #21
Hi Tammy! warrprayer Apr 2013 #22
I agree Madoff oozes, as does anyone actually involved in the Ponzi scheme. tammywammy Apr 2013 #23
true warrprayer Apr 2013 #24
So in other words ... Summer Hathaway Apr 2013 #29
There is no conflict here marybourg Apr 2013 #30
Has Horwitz ever been accused of being unethical? tammywammy Apr 2013 #10
seems to me warrprayer Apr 2013 #11
No, unless you're very dense. marybourg Apr 2013 #33
This is the absolute worst choice that could have been made. In_The_Wind Apr 2013 #14
I totally understand warrprayer Apr 2013 #17
It's a good thing they didn't nominate Madoff to the ethics panel then. n/t tammywammy Apr 2013 #19
It would have been a rather difficult panel to be part of from inside a jail cell. In_The_Wind Apr 2013 #25
.... tammywammy Apr 2013 #26
... In_The_Wind Apr 2013 #28
Not sure that attorneys should be judged by who their clients are. (nt) Nye Bevan Apr 2013 #16
again warrprayer Apr 2013 #20
You mis - understand the term, There is no conflict here. marybourg Apr 2013 #31
nothing to see warrprayer Apr 2013 #32
After raising huge amounts of money for FDR's campaign Leslie Valley Apr 2013 #27
 

anotherone

(8 posts)
1. Par for the course
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 05:40 PM
Apr 2013

The ol' boys' club indeed! Self described Democrats love them; just like they love Michael Taylor or Eric Holder.

Summer Hathaway

(2,770 posts)
3. As we all know
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 06:09 PM
Apr 2013

defense lawyers are as guilty as the parties they represent.

We also know that a whopping $4,250 in campaign donations over a six-year period is suspicious in the extreme.






warrprayer

(4,734 posts)
4. Such a position
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 06:16 PM
Apr 2013

... is a lot more potentially valuable than a palty $4,250, I agree.

(sarcasm duly noted)

Response to warrprayer (Original post)

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
6. Even scumbags deserve lawyers
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 06:44 PM
Apr 2013

I've never seen any indication that Horwitz was involved in Madoff's shenanigans.

warrprayer

(4,734 posts)
7. I get your point
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 06:47 PM
Apr 2013

However, I do feel someone who defended Madoff would be the last person I would want in charge of any ethics commision. You do understand why I might feel that way, don't you?

RudynJack

(1,044 posts)
12. It would help if you do
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 07:10 PM
Apr 2013

because your position doesn't make sense to me. Are defense lawyers inherently unethical?

Summer Hathaway

(2,770 posts)
13. Well, given as you can't respond
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 07:11 PM
Apr 2013

without over-dosing on smilies, I guess you really have nothing to say.

warrprayer

(4,734 posts)
18. the words I was looking for
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 06:03 PM
Apr 2013

Last edited Wed Apr 24, 2013, 06:40 PM - Edit history (1)

are "CONFLICT OF INTEREST". Just like surrounding yourself with Wall Street bankers after they crashed the economy and ripped off massive bailout fuinds and gave themswelves bonuses with it. Conflict of interest - I'm supposed to expect someone who was a lawyer for thhe biggest Wall Street croook in history to look out for ethics? Puhleeze.

tammywammy

(26,582 posts)
21. ...
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 06:06 PM
Apr 2013

He's also defended killers, so then we really shouldn't trust him! From what you're saying the lawyer must be unethical since his client is...that means he's a potential killer at any minute!




If he was truly a bad choice, you'd have more to point to than just that he was Madoff's lawyer.

warrprayer

(4,734 posts)
22. Hi Tammy!
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 06:27 PM
Apr 2013
I am considering your points, sometimes it takes a while for stuff to sink in my thick head. I am thinking along the terms of, for instance, when a judge might recluse himself from a case if he has ties to anyone involved. I am not trying to criticize just because this involves Democrats. It's just that any connection to Madoff seems to ooze slime.

tammywammy

(26,582 posts)
23. I agree Madoff oozes, as does anyone actually involved in the Ponzi scheme.
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 06:46 PM
Apr 2013

I just don't think that trickles down to the lawyer. Everyone deserves a good defense lawyer. Defending someone that's unethical doesn't mean the lawyer is unethical.

Summer Hathaway

(2,770 posts)
29. So in other words ...
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 07:26 PM
Apr 2013

A lawyer who represents drug dealers couldn't contribute his time/skills to a drug rehab center because he's as guilty as his clients.

A lawyer who represents clients charged with spousal abuse couldn't serve on on a committee devoted to spousal abuse prevention, because he's as guilty as his clients.

A lawyer who represents clients charged with rape couldn't serve as counsel to a rape crisis center, because he's as guilty as his clients.

Okay, gotcha.

What you don't know about how the legal system works is a lot.

When you are charged with offenses as serious as Madoff was, you retain the best lawyer you can afford. That doesn't make your lawyer complicit in your crimes. It doesn't even make your lawyer sympathetic to your plight. He is paid to provide the best defense he can; that's his job. And doing that job is not reflective of a lawyer's personal feelings, nor demonstrative of an inability to see things from varying perspectives.

According to your 'reasoning' - or complete lack thereof - any lawyer who defends anyone of any crime is to be seen as forever being "on the side" of those who commit those crimes, as well as being complicit in the crimes themselves.

You might want to educate yourself about the legal system beyond watching a couple of episodes of L&O. You might actually learn something.

marybourg

(12,631 posts)
30. There is no conflict here
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 07:51 PM
Apr 2013

because the lawyer is not implicated in the client's behavior. The lawyer's interest in the defense is in furthering the interests of justice by insuring that the charged person has adequate representation. There is absolutely no conflict between this and serving on an ethics panel. Your logic error is in confounding the client's actions with the lawyer's.

tammywammy

(26,582 posts)
10. Has Horwitz ever been accused of being unethical?
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 07:04 PM
Apr 2013

If he hasn't then why shouldn't he be on an ethics board? Is it just the fact that he was Madoff's defense lawyer? Everyone deserves a good defense lawyer. The lawyer isn't guilty of the crimes their clients commit.

warrprayer

(4,734 posts)
11. seems to me
Tue Apr 23, 2013, 07:07 PM
Apr 2013

and it's just an opinion, that the accusers and accused all seem to move in the same circles. That's all.

In_The_Wind

(72,300 posts)
25. It would have been a rather difficult panel to be part of from inside a jail cell.
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 07:02 PM
Apr 2013

He's in for life or 150 years.

In_The_Wind

(72,300 posts)
28. ...
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 07:18 PM
Apr 2013

[img][/img] Our old house has been replaced for a small fraction of the cost of the one we owned (along with the bank). It is 1/3 the size but so are the heating bills. I lived for 50 years before I heard the name Madoff. We have survived the ponzie without getting any of the money back. I'm seriously planning to white my autobiography. Heaven help those who have deliberately hurt me in my life.
I intend to tell the truth, all of it.
One heck of a whammy, tammy!

 

Leslie Valley

(310 posts)
27. After raising huge amounts of money for FDR's campaign
Wed Apr 24, 2013, 07:14 PM
Apr 2013

Franklin brought Joseph Kennedy to Washington D.C. to run the new SEC and clean up the securities industry.

Some asked FDR why he had tapped such a crook.

"Takes one to catch one," replied Roosevelt

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Madoff's Attorney Appoint...