New meaning to the phrase 'court jesters'

Clarification: Prominent attorney Richard A. Sprague expressed concern that by the editorial below referring to him as a member of the "old boys' network," readers may have inferred he was part of the "network" in which offensive emails were exchanged and that he sent or received emails similar to those that have been identified as part of the "Porngate" scandal. For the record and for clarification, no such inference was intended by Philly.com.

JUSTICE IS supposed to be blind, but here in Pennsylvania, why does it have to be deaf and dumb, too?

The state's court system as a whole has produced some whopping embarrassments of late, including the felony conviction of Supreme Court Justice Joan Orie Melvin, so many felony convictions of judges in Traffic Court that the court was abolished, a felony conviction for Judge Joseph Waters, the resignation of Seamus McCaffery over Porngate . . . have we left anyone out?

Yes: Supreme Court judge Michael Eakin is now suspended for a cache of offensive, racist and misogynistic emails that he sent and received on state servers.

Earlier this month, the Court of Judicial Discipline announced it appointed Philadelphia lawyer Richard Sprague as a mediator in proceedings against suspended Eakin next month.

Sprague's appointment is a tone-deaf action by a court that is supposed to ensure ethics and impose discipline on the judicial branch. For one thing, longtime legal fixture Sprague must be one of the oldest boys in the old boys' network that Kane believes is trying to take her down. For another, Sprague briefly represented Kane in a potential defamation suit against the Inquirer last year, at the start of her legal troubles.

The court's appointment is baffling. Why was a mediator even thought necessary? The court isn't saying, continuing a disturbing lack of any accountability. This court, established by the people, seems to think it answers to no one. You would think someone would make the connection between this attitude and the court system's underlying rot.

The appointment of a mediator suggests that the discipline court is open to a deal. Although Sprague has since said the court imposed terms that would make such a deal unlikely, the suggestion that a deal might be possible does nothing to instill confidence that Eakin's case will get a full hearing in public. That curdles the public's view of the court system even further.

It's clear that the porn participants think their behavior is normal, because they're not the ones being demeaned or insulted by the images. If there must be a mediator, a female or minority lawyer would have been a much better choice; there are far too few voices in this affair that are decrying pornography shared by top officials as wrong. Case in point: Eakin continues to insist the porn doesn't warrant his removal from the court. That he could be restored to the court would be a slap in the face to women and minorities - and judges of any race or gender who believe their behavior should be held to a higher standard.

All this adds another ring to the Kathleen Kane circus. Last week, the Senate failed to remove her from office, and the next likely step is impeachment proceedings. It's unclear whether her announcement Tuesday that she will not run for re-election takes that option off the table; the circus could still be running for the rest of the year. The longer this circus runs, it seems the more tripped up her detractors and enemies get.

Maybe there's a lesson here: Before you try to burn a witch at the stake, first make sure she's not full of propane.