Disciplinary court stops pay to Justice Joan Orie Melvin while she awaits trial |

Disciplinary court stops pay to Justice Joan Orie Melvin while she awaits trial

Suspended state Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin will stop receiving her $195,000 annual salary while she awaits trial on charges she used state employees to work on campaigns in 2003 and 2009, the state Court of Judicial Discipline ordered Thursday.

“In these circumstances, only an order of interim suspension which removes this respondent from the public payroll has any prospect of ameliorating the harm to the public’s confidence in the judicial system,” the court wrote in its 45-page decision.

President Judge Bernard L. McGinley dissented but did not issue an opinion. A footnote in the order said that if it were up to him, he would suspend Melvin with pay. Two judges recused themselves.

“The decision highlights the difficulty in making credibility decisions using a transcript rather than live witnesses,” said William “Skip” Arbuckle, Melvin’s attorney before the board. “That said, we respect the decision for what it is: an interim order and an interim order only.”

Dan Brier, one of Melvin’s criminal defense attorneys, said the charges “lack legal merit and are factually contrived.”

“Justice Orie Melvin has faith that the legal deficiencies and the factual contrivances will be exposed in court and result in her full acquittal and restoration to the important work that she was elected to do,” Brier said.

John Burkoff, a University of Pittsburgh law professor, said the order does not bode well for Melvin.

“What it indicates is their belief in not only the seriousness of these charges, but of the likelihood that she’ll be found guilty,” Burkoff said. “That may be wrong, but it’s not a good sign.” Melvin will continue to receive medical benefits.

In May, Melvin announced she was voluntarily recusing herself from any activity on the state Supreme Court, the same day fellow justices suspended her and ordered her office vacated and her files and equipment secured.

Melvin, 56, of Marshall faces seven charges, including four felonies, that she used her taxpayer-funded Superior Court staff illegally to campaign for a seat on the Supreme Court in 2003 and 2009. Melvin pleaded not guilty to all charges.

She will be tried with her sister and former staffer, Janine Orie, 58, of McCandless, who is charged with directing campaign work in Melvin’s judicial office and in the office of a third sister, former state Sen. Jane Orie. A pre-trial conference is scheduled for Sept. 14. A trial date has not been set.

The family of Republicans has called the prosecution of the Orie sisters politically motivated, a claim that District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr., a Democrat, denies. Jane Orie is serving 2 12 to 10 years in prison for her conviction on similar charges.

Adam Brandolph is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-391-0927 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.