Julia Reed | 01/16/2009 11:25 am

Julia Reed: What's With This Madoff Judge?

In response to: In 1986, Seema Boesky didn't know. Could Ruth Madoff not know?

By now I have learned that no one ever knows what goes on between the two people in a marriage, so it is useless to conjecture as to whether she did or didn’t know. I am far more interested in what in the hell is wrong with the judge who continues to allow the craven Madoff to live in Park Avenue splendor with said wife. They’re mailing the jewels and spending buckets of money on security, while every day in the Times, et al, a new story emerges about the losses of various investors — he even suckered in former classmates at his high school reunion.

This sends the worst possible message to the ever-expanding legions of little folks out there when even the biggest con artist in history can get a break. It’s not about whether or not he’s a flight risk. This scumbag does not deserve preferential treatment and we should be spared the spectacle of his wife spending tons of money to protect his sorry hide. Wake up, judge, and put this guy at the bottom of the jail.

Read more about: Bernie Madoff, Business, Law, Ponzi Scheme, Ruth Madoff

19 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

WOW! I agree with Julia… What about Martha Stewart, she went to Jail for a questionable 34,000… but After I get those thoughts out of the way, I think possible that they really do not want to jail him at this point in time, in Hopes of getting cooperation from him. I have the feeling their are some very big fish yet to enter this boiling pot! Where is The Money? Belize???

By Jennifer Dooley on 01/16/2009 12:01 pm

e-mail alert

Unfortunately, both judges got it right and the first judge cited statistics to indicate that bail is not unusual in similar cases. Remember, too, that Madoff has not been tried and, to date, is only under arrest because of his own statements. Moreover, the Feds have not yet completed their case against him. As a victim of the Madoff scam, I am disgusted that he remains in his apartment and I wonder how many valuables “disappeared” from his other homes since he was arrested. However, the law is on his side - so far. He is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

By Sam Mirando on 01/16/2009 12:36 pm

e-mail alert

While I agree it is maddening that he is living in his plush abode while others are suffering because of him…the Feds have him so wired and observed that they are putting together a stronger case. As when he sent off the money and jewels…that undoubtedly connected more dots for them. He’s going to fry soon enough.

By %$#@* !@&*^!! on 01/16/2009 12:48 pm

e-mail alert

Who’s Seema Boesky? And how do we know she didn’t know? There’s a disparagement clause in one of my divorces, so I can’t tell you what I didn’t know, but I didn’t know. I should’ve known, but I didn’t. And even after I “knew”, it took me a long time to believe it. So I suppose Mr. and Mrs. Madoff should both be presumed innocent until one or both are proven guilty…even if they’re both already guilty as charged.

By Ms. Dee on 01/16/2009 1:22 pm

e-mail alert

Ms. Dee, EVERYONE should be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law - even Madoff, who has confessed but not been tried, and the guys in Guantanamo, whose confessions have been tortured out of them! Our legal system is (or should be and, in the case of Guantanamo definitely isn’t) what separates us from a totalitarian regime. Sometimes, the “innocent until proven guilty” seems to slow the wheels of justice but better slow wheels than no wheels.

By Sam Mirando on 01/16/2009 2:22 pm

e-mail alert

I agree with all the legal statements in your above posts. I most especially agree about Guantanamo. Let me ask you this. Do you think that Madoff is ever going to be in anything other than solitary for his own protection. 50 Billion can buy the hate for a lot of hit men. I really would be surprised if he doesn’t spend the rest of him miserable life hiding from his shadow. The sad thing is there is nothing that can even begin to give many of those people their lives back. In many of the stories that I have heard of his victims, killing them would have been less of a tragedy. My husband is 66, and I know he would never recover if someone stole the material proof of his success. I know everyone is thinking it is only money, but for my husband and many people if you take away their ability to enjoy life and his rewards he would just as soon be dead.

By Lou Hoover on 01/16/2009 10:03 pm

e-mail alert

Well stated, Sam. If Madoff pleads guilty to all counts against him, no trial will be necessary is my understanding. A move which is supposed to facilitate victim’s opportunities to sue. I am so sorry that you have personally been affected by this scandal, Sam. And all others as well. Peace and grace

By beth willis on 01/16/2009 3:50 pm

e-mail alert

Hello Beth, . Ditto on your well said post….and save the expensive of a High Profile Trial.

By Jennifer Dooley on 01/16/2009 4:12 pm

e-mail alert

I too am incensed that Madoff is allowed to be in his luxurious penthouse, eating well, drinking expensive wine, gazng at his priceless art, etc.,etc.,…..perhaps some of those jewels fell into the lap of the judges…..did i just say that ?????????

By M. Starr on 01/16/2009 10:43 pm

e-mail alert

Julia, you don’t seem to be aware of Luxembourg Offshore Banks, and Europe’s largest private banking country. Luxembourg is regarded as one of the most stable and secure offshore havens! That is the center of the mystery , not the judge!

By sibelle daubigne on 01/16/2009 10:45 pm

e-mail alert

Amen, SIbelle.

By Jeannot Kensinger on 01/18/2009 4:41 pm

e-mail alert

Jeannot, yes, knowing this part of the world, i would think you also know the “Financial History”, and the “Plat Pays” ! :)

By sibelle daubigne on 01/18/2009 5:55 pm

e-mail alert

I’m still waiting for the headline… Madoff, found in pair of designer cement shoes at the bottom of the Hudson. Truly a fitting ending for such a devoid soul.

By Catherine Kaiman on 01/17/2009 1:26 am

e-mail alert

If one of the former employees of one of the companies or businesses that have been put out of work in the last 8 years went into a convenience market and stole a gallon of milk, a loaf of bread and pound of bologna to feed his hungry children he’d be sitting in jail by now.

By Sherrie Crews on 01/17/2009 8:17 am

e-mail alert

Sherrie, if the employee told the Feds that he had stolen the milk, bread and bologna and the Feds had still not brought an indictment against him, the employee would also be out on bail.

By Sam Mirando on 01/17/2009 11:05 am