Federal Judge Samuel Kent - Case Study Example

Federal Judge Samuel Kent Some Perspectives on the Compulsions behind the Convict’s Action In September 2002, Cathy McBroom accepted a position as case manager to Samuel Kent, the Federal Court Judge in Galveston Court (McBroom, 2009). In September 2003, she says, “I encountered my first incident of sexual assault by Judge Kent after he returned from a long lunch, obviously intoxicated.” His legal secretary Donna Wilkerson also came out with her allegations that Judge Kent had sexually abused her. Because of Cathy McBroom’s formal complaint the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recommended that Judge Kent be impeached. The criminal proceedings initiated against him resulted in Judge Kent being sentenced to 33 months in prison. This paper is an attempt to understand the reasons for the Judge Kent’s seemingly brazen attitude to the consequences of his actions and the reasons for his deviant behavior. The paper will deal with the trial, sentencing and subsequent events related to the case. Lastly, it will attempt to understand Kent’s behavior as a sexual offender and a convict. Samuel Kent as a Person and a Judge 59-year-old Samuel Barstow Kent was the most powerful person in Galveston, a figure of such magisterial authority that citizens called him King Kent (Hollandsworth 1). He was “literally larger than life” (McBroom ). He is six feet four inches and used to take his superiority over fellow men for granted. In fact he often boasted “I am the Government”; “I’m the Lion King—it’s good to be king”, “I’m the Emperor of Galveston”, and “the man wearing the horned hat, guiding the ship.” (Wilkerson 1). He was known to be an eccentric judge who often used to behave insultingly towards others. Some 82 cases were removed from his file because they were being handled by a close friend of his. A Psychological Profile of Judge Kent Judge Kent was a domineering personality and his power over his employees stemmed from his manipulative behavior which made his employees afraid of him. Donna Wilkerson says, “Sam Kent has spent his life manipulating people and abusing his relationships with people, abusing people not just sexually and not just women” (Wilkerson 6). One factor in his behavior is his admitted alcohol abuse (Kent 1). In his letter to the task force to consider his possible impeachment, Judge Kent also cites on of the reasons for his behavior to be the tragedies in his life, including the death of his wife by cancer. In her Statement McBroom says that Judge Kent “was trying to pit us against each other so that he could continue to manipulate and control both of us” (McBroom 2). Often the incidents reported occurred when Judge Kent was in a highly intoxicated condition. Kent used his power over his subordinates and particularly as against McBroom and Wilkerson as both of them were financially in need of their job. Their being victims was also a result of Kent’s lies of reforming himself. Trial, Sentencing and Subsequent Events After about two years of McBroom’s complaint, the Judicial Council of Fifth Circuit reprimanded Judge Kent. He was let off with a reprimand because of the other actions taken against him, including his suspension for a period of 4 months and reallocation of Halveston/ Houston docket. On August 28, 2008, a federal grand jury indicted him on three criminal charges. During his arraignment proceedings, Judge Kent said, I plead absolutely, unequivocally not guilty and will very much look forward to a trial on the merits . . . of what I consider to be flagrant, scurrilous charges. However, he made a plea bargain, and pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of justice. In return, five other charges against him were dropped, including those for sexual assault and aggravated sexual assault. On May 11, 2009, Judge Kent was sentenced to 33 months in prison. The legal position regarding his plea bargain is a controversial issue. However, he was definitely helped in his defence by the fact that the victim i.e. McBroom did not press charges. The allegations of the other victim Wilkerson did not matter because they resulted only in Kent’s sentence for obstruction of justice; he had lied to the Enquiry Committee that he did not have sexual contact with her. Classification of Kent as a Sexual Offender Lanning has classified sexual offenders according to their propensity for sexual offences. He classifies Preferential Sexual Offender as a person having a higher economic status and more intelligence. He considers his needs for having sex (the justification of sexual assaults by Judge Kent) and is compulsive (his relapse in to the assaults even after promises to the contrary). A paper by the National Center for Women & Policing describes a Power Rapist. According to the paper, a Power Rapist does not want to hurt the victim but achieve sexual submission and to own her physically. He is also likely to run away or desist if the victim fights back or screams for help. This type of offender uses the minimum possible force to serve his purpose. Relative Risk of Kent as a Sexual Offender The risk of Kent as sexual offender is that of recidivism. Underlying psychopathy may result in higher risk of recidivism (Center for Sex Offender Management). It has also a factor of his imminent release form jail. Because the charges relating to sexual assault were dropped as part of the plea bargaining deal Kent will not have to register as a sex offender. However his post as a judge and the notoriety that he has gained because of his impeachment proceedings will in some way act mitigate the risk. The victims of Kent were persons who were subordinate to him, and there is no history of his sexually assaulting strangers. In the circumstances, Kent’s numeric risk level is moderate i.e. level two, thereby indicating that he may continue to engage in criminal sexual conduct (Texas Department of Public Safety). Conclusion The Kent episode is a sad reflection on the judicial system of the U. S. A powerful judge misuses his position to sexually exploit his subordinates. Accused of aggravated sexual assaults over a period of years, he gets away with a relatively light sentence. His victims suffer broken marriages and he complains about the conditions in prison (Memorandum). Kent’s trial and sentencing begs further research. Was it proper for the charge of aggravated sexual assault to be dropped as a part of the plea bargain? Was Kent sentenced adequately? Should he have received a longer sentence because he was a judge? The application of typologies of sexual offenders will also prove beneficial for the understanding of this episode in judicial history. References Center for Sexual Offender Management “Common Characteristics of Sex Offenders” http://www.csom.org/train/etiology/3/3_1.htm Hollandsworth, Skip Perversion of Justice Article In Texas Monthly December 2009 http://www.texasmonthly.com/2009-12-01/feature4.php Kent, Samuel. Statement of Judge Samuel Kent to the United States House of Representatives Judiciary Committee http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/Kent090603.pdf McBroom Cathy. Statement before the Congress http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/McBroom090603.pdf Memorandum in Support of Kent’s 2255 Motion to Vacate and Correct Sentence http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/tx/Kent_memo.pdf National Center for Women & Policing “Suspect Typology; Profiling the Sex Offender" http://www.hawaii.edu/hivandaids/Suspect%20Typology%20%20%20Profiling%20the% 20Sex%20Offender.pdf Wilkerson, Donna Statement before Congress, 2009 http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/pdf/Wilkerson090603.pdf Read More