|
Post by Shuftin on Dec 8, 2006 2:07:26 GMT -5
I was threatened once with contempt of court. What was the felony crime that I was committing against humanity? The Judge wanted all shirts to be tucked in. I was wearing a cold weather heavy sweater. The Judge deduced that it was an outer garment and therefore was to be tucked in. Talk about a power trip that had nothing to do with crime, criminals or law.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Dec 8, 2006 2:07:26 GMT -5
I was threatened once with contempt of court. What was the felony crime that I was committing against humanity? The Judge wanted all shirts to be tucked in. I was wearing a cold weather heavy sweater. The Judge deduced that it was an outer garment and therefore was to be tucked in. Talk about a power trip that had nothing to do with crime, criminals or law.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 27, 2006 23:05:17 GMT -5
Judge Dismisses Assault Charges Against Man Held In Jail For Over A Year After Gross Misconduct By Youngstown Ohio Police And Mahoning County Prosecutors Paul J. Gains, Dennis Sarisky, Michael Villani, and Marty Desmond
2006-07-22
YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO — A Mahoning County Common Pleas judge has dismissed charges against a Youngstown man who's been in jail more than a year charged with shooting a bar patron in the stomach.
In a judgment entry filed this week, Judge James C. Evans said he found the state's actions — failure to turn over evidence despite numerous requests by the defense — inexcusable. He ordered that Shawn Woodall, 27, of West Chalmers Avenue, be released from jail.
Mahoning County Prosecutor Paul J. Gains said Friday that the judge's sanction, dismissal of the charges, was too severe, and he will appeal. Gains acknowledged that a letter requesting discovery or evidence police had in the case wasn't sent to detectives until May (two months ago) but said police know to turn over evidence without being asked.
"We can't turn over what we don't have," Gains said. "We shouldn't have to request it."
The prosecutor said records show that Woodall's attorney, Lynn A. Maro, received some evidence such as police reports.
Requests
Judge Evans, in his judgment entry, pointed out that Maro requested crime scene photos, criminal records of the defendant and witnesses, list of bar employees, the bullet fragment taken from the victim and more in August 2005 and then asked for sanctions two months ago because she hadn't received it all.
The judge said a review of testimony given by Detective Sgt. Ron Rodway at a recent hearing revealed a lack of communication between the detective and the three assistant prosecutors who had taken turns being assigned to the case. The three prosecutors also didn't communicate among themselves or with Maro, the judge said.
Gains said he only recalls two assistants being assigned to the case — Dennis Sarisky and Michael Villani. Court records also list Marty Desmond as an assistant prosecutor assigned to the case at one time.
Judge Evans said he allowed prosecutors sufficient time to comply with his orders to turn over evidence, and they didn't.
Rodway said Friday that dismissal of the charges is unfortunate. "We had a decent case," he said.
Woodall was charged with felonious assault with a firearm specification. He was accused in the June 12, 2005, shooting of Robert Gonzales at Cyrak's West, a Steel Street bar.
Gonzales, of East Florida Avenue, then 25, was hit in the stomach and listed in critical condition for several days.
Still in jail
Woodall, meanwhile, was still in jail Friday afternoon.
Records show Woodall was convicted in a federal crack cocaine conspiracy case in the late 1990s and sentenced to 92 months in prison. He was released in January 2005 and placed on four years' supervised release. When arrested in June 2005, Woodall's federal probation officer placed a hold on him based on the new charges.
It wasn't immediately clear when the federal hold would be lifted.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 27, 2006 23:05:17 GMT -5
Judge Dismisses Assault Charges Against Man Held In Jail For Over A Year After Gross Misconduct By Youngstown Ohio Police And Mahoning County Prosecutors Paul J. Gains, Dennis Sarisky, Michael Villani, and Marty Desmond
2006-07-22
YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO — A Mahoning County Common Pleas judge has dismissed charges against a Youngstown man who's been in jail more than a year charged with shooting a bar patron in the stomach.
In a judgment entry filed this week, Judge James C. Evans said he found the state's actions — failure to turn over evidence despite numerous requests by the defense — inexcusable. He ordered that Shawn Woodall, 27, of West Chalmers Avenue, be released from jail.
Mahoning County Prosecutor Paul J. Gains said Friday that the judge's sanction, dismissal of the charges, was too severe, and he will appeal. Gains acknowledged that a letter requesting discovery or evidence police had in the case wasn't sent to detectives until May (two months ago) but said police know to turn over evidence without being asked.
"We can't turn over what we don't have," Gains said. "We shouldn't have to request it."
The prosecutor said records show that Woodall's attorney, Lynn A. Maro, received some evidence such as police reports.
Requests
Judge Evans, in his judgment entry, pointed out that Maro requested crime scene photos, criminal records of the defendant and witnesses, list of bar employees, the bullet fragment taken from the victim and more in August 2005 and then asked for sanctions two months ago because she hadn't received it all.
The judge said a review of testimony given by Detective Sgt. Ron Rodway at a recent hearing revealed a lack of communication between the detective and the three assistant prosecutors who had taken turns being assigned to the case. The three prosecutors also didn't communicate among themselves or with Maro, the judge said.
Gains said he only recalls two assistants being assigned to the case — Dennis Sarisky and Michael Villani. Court records also list Marty Desmond as an assistant prosecutor assigned to the case at one time.
Judge Evans said he allowed prosecutors sufficient time to comply with his orders to turn over evidence, and they didn't.
Rodway said Friday that dismissal of the charges is unfortunate. "We had a decent case," he said.
Woodall was charged with felonious assault with a firearm specification. He was accused in the June 12, 2005, shooting of Robert Gonzales at Cyrak's West, a Steel Street bar.
Gonzales, of East Florida Avenue, then 25, was hit in the stomach and listed in critical condition for several days.
Still in jail
Woodall, meanwhile, was still in jail Friday afternoon.
Records show Woodall was convicted in a federal crack cocaine conspiracy case in the late 1990s and sentenced to 92 months in prison. He was released in January 2005 and placed on four years' supervised release. When arrested in June 2005, Woodall's federal probation officer placed a hold on him based on the new charges.
It wasn't immediately clear when the federal hold would be lifted.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Nov 14, 2006 11:31:09 GMT -5
Find out why masturbation is harmful for your health and many aspects of your life and what you can do to stop it. Read the only step-by-step program available in the world today and you will succeed in ending the habit of masturbation and start enjoying your life to the fullest. check www.stopmasturbating.com/This is a eunuch, I'm sorry, a unique concept of reality. Most men are right handed. Having tennis elbow will incapacitate a man and thus affect many aspects of this person’s life. He can’t drink a beer nor write his name with his strong hand. Cum is pure protein and the loss of protein from the human body will affect a persons health greatly until he eats his next meal and replaces the lost protein. Thank you for your concern but we have it under control. We are not starving Ethiopians. Some men believe that getting their rocks off is indeed enjoying life to the fullest. What planet are you from?
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Nov 14, 2006 11:31:09 GMT -5
Find out why masturbation is harmful for your health and many aspects of your life and what you can do to stop it. Read the only step-by-step program available in the world today and you will succeed in ending the habit of masturbation and start enjoying your life to the fullest. check www.stopmasturbating.com/This is a eunuch, I'm sorry, a unique concept of reality. Most men are right handed. Having tennis elbow will incapacitate a man and thus affect many aspects of this person’s life. He can’t drink a beer nor write his name with his strong hand. Cum is pure protein and the loss of protein from the human body will affect a persons health greatly until he eats his next meal and replaces the lost protein. Thank you for your concern but we have it under control. We are not starving Ethiopians. Some men believe that getting their rocks off is indeed enjoying life to the fullest. What planet are you from?
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Oct 24, 2006 1:05:48 GMT -5
Id wank before Id climb on some bloated skank! Only problem is, most American females fit the previous profile. Lucky for me, I married a foreign lady If your wife is a fear-in-her then I have a question for her but only it she is of German decent or at least speakes German.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Oct 24, 2006 1:05:48 GMT -5
Id wank before Id climb on some bloated skank! Only problem is, most American females fit the previous profile. Lucky for me, I married a foreign lady If your wife is a fear-in-her then I have a question for her but only it she is of German decent or at least speakes German.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Aug 22, 2006 11:08:07 GMT -5
SHUFTIN, GOT YOU RED HANDED It was only a matter of time.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Aug 22, 2006 11:08:07 GMT -5
SHUFTIN, GOT YOU RED HANDED It was only a matter of time.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Aug 18, 2006 22:14:10 GMT -5
8/18/2006
BRISTOW, Okla. (AP) — A former judge convicted of exposing himself while presiding over jury trials by using a sexual device under his robe was sentenced Friday to four years in prison. Donald Thompson had spent almost 23 years on the bench and had served as a state legislator before retiring from the court in 2004. He showed no reaction when he was sentenced.
At his trial this summer, his former court reporter, Lisa Foster, testified that she saw Thompson expose himself at least 15 times during trial between 2001 and 2003. Prosecutors said he also used a device known as a penis pump during at least four trials in the same period.
Thompson, 59, was convicted last month of four felony courts of indecent exposure for incidents that took place in his Creek County courtroom.
Thompson, a married father of three grown children, testified that the penis pump was given to him as a joke by a longtime hunting and fishing buddy.
"It wasn't something I was hiding," he said.
He said he may have absentmindedly squeezed the pump's handle during court cases but never used it to masturbate.
Foster told authorities that she saw Thompson use the device almost daily during the August 2003 murder trial of a man accused of shaking a toddler to death. A whooshing sound could be heard on Foster's audiotape of the trial. When jurors asked the judge about the sound, Thompson said he hadn't heard it but would listen for it.
Police built a case against the judge after a police officer testifying in a 2003 murder trial saw a piece of plastic tubing disappear under Thompson's robe. During a lunch break, officers took photographs of the pump under the desk.
Investigators later checked the carpet, Thompson's robes and the chair behind the bench and found semen, according to court records.
Carmelia Brossett, a senior probation officer for the state Department of Corrections, said in a presentencing report that Thompson refused to undergo psychosexual testing.
"Thompson's denial of the offense would likely present difficulty, if not inability for treatment providers to provide meaningful and beneficial sex-offender treatment," she said.
The jury recommended a sentence of one year in prison and a $10,000 fine on each count. The jury foreman has said it was the jury's intent that Thompson serve the full sentence.
Judge C. Allen McCall denied a defense motion asking that Thompson be allowed to remain free pending an appeal. Thompson was also ordered to pay a $40,000 fine.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Aug 18, 2006 22:14:10 GMT -5
8/18/2006
BRISTOW, Okla. (AP) — A former judge convicted of exposing himself while presiding over jury trials by using a sexual device under his robe was sentenced Friday to four years in prison. Donald Thompson had spent almost 23 years on the bench and had served as a state legislator before retiring from the court in 2004. He showed no reaction when he was sentenced.
At his trial this summer, his former court reporter, Lisa Foster, testified that she saw Thompson expose himself at least 15 times during trial between 2001 and 2003. Prosecutors said he also used a device known as a penis pump during at least four trials in the same period.
Thompson, 59, was convicted last month of four felony courts of indecent exposure for incidents that took place in his Creek County courtroom.
Thompson, a married father of three grown children, testified that the penis pump was given to him as a joke by a longtime hunting and fishing buddy.
"It wasn't something I was hiding," he said.
He said he may have absentmindedly squeezed the pump's handle during court cases but never used it to masturbate.
Foster told authorities that she saw Thompson use the device almost daily during the August 2003 murder trial of a man accused of shaking a toddler to death. A whooshing sound could be heard on Foster's audiotape of the trial. When jurors asked the judge about the sound, Thompson said he hadn't heard it but would listen for it.
Police built a case against the judge after a police officer testifying in a 2003 murder trial saw a piece of plastic tubing disappear under Thompson's robe. During a lunch break, officers took photographs of the pump under the desk.
Investigators later checked the carpet, Thompson's robes and the chair behind the bench and found semen, according to court records.
Carmelia Brossett, a senior probation officer for the state Department of Corrections, said in a presentencing report that Thompson refused to undergo psychosexual testing.
"Thompson's denial of the offense would likely present difficulty, if not inability for treatment providers to provide meaningful and beneficial sex-offender treatment," she said.
The jury recommended a sentence of one year in prison and a $10,000 fine on each count. The jury foreman has said it was the jury's intent that Thompson serve the full sentence.
Judge C. Allen McCall denied a defense motion asking that Thompson be allowed to remain free pending an appeal. Thompson was also ordered to pay a $40,000 fine.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Aug 18, 2006 22:12:47 GMT -5
Stop Masturbating Find out why masturbation is harmful for your health and many aspects of your life and what you can do to stop it. Read the only step-by-step program available in the world today and you will succeed in ending the habit of masturbation and start enjoying your life to the fullest. check www.taketheaction.com/Judge Donald Thompson has four years to read your book. OOPS, I’m sorry, were you talking about me? Or the other 5 hundred million Americans who masturbate?
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Aug 18, 2006 22:12:47 GMT -5
Stop Masturbating Find out why masturbation is harmful for your health and many aspects of your life and what you can do to stop it. Read the only step-by-step program available in the world today and you will succeed in ending the habit of masturbation and start enjoying your life to the fullest. check www.taketheaction.com/Judge Donald Thompson has four years to read your book. OOPS, I’m sorry, were you talking about me? Or the other 5 hundred million Americans who masturbate?
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 25, 2006 1:30:01 GMT -5
Judge Donald Thompson Judge Donald Thompson Sunday, April 09, 2006 The Oklahoma judge who was forced from the bench in 2004 for using a penis pump in court was charged on January 21, 2005, with indecent exposure for his judicial indiscretions. Donald Thompson, 58, entered a not guilty plea yesterday to three felony counts during an appearance in Creek County District Court, where he worked until resigning last August. According to the probable cause affidavit, Thompson exposed himself during three separate 2003 cases (two of which were murder trials). For example, on May 13, while he was presiding over State v. Kurt Arnold Vomberg (who was accused of killing his girlfriend's 21-month-old daughter), Thompson loudly pumped himself up. Two court employees told investigators that they saw Thompson (pictured in the mug shot at right) attach the suction device to his penis, while five jurors reported hearing whooshing sounds, which they thought were coming from either a bicycle pump, blood pressure cuff, or an air cushion on the judge's chair. After a January 7 search of Thompson's former courtroom and chambers yielded items that tested positive for seminal fluid, investigators secured a search warrant to obtain a DNA sample from the ex-jurist. During testimony last year before the Council on Judicial Complaints, Thompson denied masturbating on the bench, using the penis pump, or depositing urine or semen into a wastebasket under his bench. Thompson's demise was triggered by a complaint filed against him in June of 2004 by the Oklahoma Attorney General, who sought to oust the jurist for a variety of illicit behavior, which the AG detailed in a removal petition. Along with using the penis pump, Thompson also allegedly shaved and oiled his private parts, according to accounts given to state investigators by a clerk, trial witnesses, and a court reporter. If convicted of the indecent exposure counts, Thompson could face a maximum of 10 years in prison on each charge. Since the charges being filed, the prosecutors have amended the complaint. It appears that Thompson will stand trial this month. Although there is a din over this incident, it sounds like this fellow is simply crazy. But, once again, there were attorneys and other judges who were aware that he was misbehaving yet did nothing to stop him. His misbehavior was likely not limited to improper sex conduct in court. Why didn't someone complain about him before?
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 25, 2006 1:30:01 GMT -5
Judge Donald Thompson Judge Donald Thompson Sunday, April 09, 2006 The Oklahoma judge who was forced from the bench in 2004 for using a penis pump in court was charged on January 21, 2005, with indecent exposure for his judicial indiscretions. Donald Thompson, 58, entered a not guilty plea yesterday to three felony counts during an appearance in Creek County District Court, where he worked until resigning last August. According to the probable cause affidavit, Thompson exposed himself during three separate 2003 cases (two of which were murder trials). For example, on May 13, while he was presiding over State v. Kurt Arnold Vomberg (who was accused of killing his girlfriend's 21-month-old daughter), Thompson loudly pumped himself up. Two court employees told investigators that they saw Thompson (pictured in the mug shot at right) attach the suction device to his penis, while five jurors reported hearing whooshing sounds, which they thought were coming from either a bicycle pump, blood pressure cuff, or an air cushion on the judge's chair. After a January 7 search of Thompson's former courtroom and chambers yielded items that tested positive for seminal fluid, investigators secured a search warrant to obtain a DNA sample from the ex-jurist. During testimony last year before the Council on Judicial Complaints, Thompson denied masturbating on the bench, using the penis pump, or depositing urine or semen into a wastebasket under his bench. Thompson's demise was triggered by a complaint filed against him in June of 2004 by the Oklahoma Attorney General, who sought to oust the jurist for a variety of illicit behavior, which the AG detailed in a removal petition. Along with using the penis pump, Thompson also allegedly shaved and oiled his private parts, according to accounts given to state investigators by a clerk, trial witnesses, and a court reporter. If convicted of the indecent exposure counts, Thompson could face a maximum of 10 years in prison on each charge. Since the charges being filed, the prosecutors have amended the complaint. It appears that Thompson will stand trial this month. Although there is a din over this incident, it sounds like this fellow is simply crazy. But, once again, there were attorneys and other judges who were aware that he was misbehaving yet did nothing to stop him. His misbehavior was likely not limited to improper sex conduct in court. Why didn't someone complain about him before?
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 26, 2006 12:01:14 GMT -5
Judge Kevin A. Ross of the Los Angeles County Superior Court was ordered removed from office by the Commission for willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute. . The Commission’s action concluded formal proceedings, during which there was a hearing before special masters and an appearance before the Commission.
The Commission first determined that the judge engaged in misconduct in connection with four criminal cases.
In one matter, a defendant who had two traffic citations submitted a declaration asserting that she was not the person cited. Judge Ross told her that he thought she was lying, added a misdemeanor charge of knowingly providing false insurance information in each traffic case, set bail at $2,500 in each case, summarily remanded the defendant to custody, and set her next court date 30 days in the future; the defendant testified that the judge said she was going to custody for 30 days. The judge also entered a “not guilty” plea for the defendant, but did not arraign her and did not notify the prosecutor or the public defender that he had added the misdemeanor charge. The defendant remained in custody for two and a half days; she was then released after posting bail. In Commission proceedings, Judge Ross made a number of unconvincing excuses and false statements in an effort to mislead the special masters and the Commission.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross engaged in willful misconduct. The judge’s actions toward the defendant were in bad faith because he acted out of pique, irritation or impatience; alternatively or additionally, the judge acted beyond his lawful authority, either with knowledge that his actions were beyond his authority or with conscious disregard for the limits of his authority. In addition, the Commission found that the judge’s knowing disregard of fundamental rights and abuse of authority were part of a pattern that rendered the judge unfit for the bench.
In another matter, Judge Ross telephoned a defendant charged with misdemeanor drug offenses and had an ex parte conversation with her. The Commission found that this was improper action. The Commission rejected the judge’s claim that his call was justified by an emergency, and found that his claim that he promptly notified counsel of the call was false. The Commission found that Judge Ross made notes on a computer-generated printout of court minutes in an attempt to buttress his defense, and then used that altered document, first, to attempt to mislead his supervising judges and then to assert a false defense in Commission proceedings.
In a third matter, Judge Ross presided over the case of a defendant who had been placed on diversion on misdemeanor charges of violating zoning and other municipal ordinances in connection with holding religious services in his home. The prosecutor said that the defendant had not complied with the diversion agreement and that he wished to proceed with criminal charges. He also asked the judge to immediately enter an order prohibiting the defendant from holding religious services. Judge Ross informed the defendant of his right to legal representation, and the defendant said that he would need to seek legal representation. Despite this unambiguous request for counsel, Judge Ross asked the defendant a series of questions bearing on the requested order and the criminal charges, and accused the defendant of lying to him. The judge eventually obtained incriminating admissions from the defendant, after which he entered a not-guilty plea for the defendant and told him that he needed to get a lawyer.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross engaged in willful misconduct. The Commission determined that the judge intentionally violated the defendant’s constitutional rights, and displayed manifest embroilment and lack of impartiality.
In a fourth case, Judge Ross refused to conduct a probation violation hearing, stating that he already had found the defendant in violation of probation and would proceed to sentencing. After the defendant’s public defender had a heated exchange with the judge and was removed from the courtroom, the judge continued with the sentencing proceedings. Another public defender who was in the courtroom stated his appearance, but the Commission determined that neither he nor the judge understood him to have replaced the public defender who had been representing the defendant or to have been in a position to provide effective representation of the defendant. The judge addressed the defendant directly, and accused him of being a pathological liar. The matter was continued to the afternoon. The next day, after being told that the public defender’s office intended to boycott his courtroom, Judge Ross set a formal probation violation hearing in the case.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross committed willful misconduct. The judge presumptively knew, through his experience as a prosecutor, that a defendant in a probation violation case has a right to a hearing, and the defendant’s lawyer insisted on that right. Therefore, the Commission concluded, Judge Ross intentionally disregarded the defendant’s fundamental rights or knowingly acted beyond his judicial power or with a conscious disregard for the limits of his authority. Alternatively or additionally, the Commission determined that the judge displayed embroilment evidencing anger, pique, revenge or other improper purpose.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross violated canon 3B(9) and engaged in prejudicial misconduct when he revealed confidential information about a juvenile case while appearing on a local public television program, and when he discussed a pending appellate case during another appearance on the same show.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross engaged in willful misconduct and violated canons 1, 2A, 2B(2), 4A(2), 4D(1)(a), and 4D(2) when he acted as a private arbitrator during filming of a pilot television program for a possible new series to be called Mobile Court. The Commission concluded that the judge committed willful misconduct when he served as an arbitrator because he was acting in a judicial capacity. The Commission rejected the judge’s claim that he did not know he was acting as an arbitrator, noting that he had signed two documents entitled “Arbitrator’s Award” after filming was complete. The Commission noted that the judge’s patent attempts at avoidance of responsibility and his act of providing a false story that he had signed the arbitration awards before the filming demonstrated a serious lack of candor and accountability.
In deciding discipline, the Commission noted that Judge Ross had engaged in repeated wrongdoing, that he had displayed a pervasive lack of candor and accountability and that he previously had been disciplined for similar misconduct. The Commission pointed out that honesty is a “minimum qualification” expected of every judge, and that Judge Ross had fabricated stories and attempted to mislead the Commission. The Commission also noted that the judge’s behavior suggested a strong likelihood of future violations, and that his conduct besmirched the reputation of the judiciary. The Commission concluded that the appropriate discipline was removal from office.
Commission members Mr. Marshall B. Grossman, Judge Frederick P. Horn, Mr. Michael A. Kahn, Mrs. Crystal Lui, Justice Judith D. McConnell, Mr. Jose C. Miramontes, Mrs. Penny Perez, Judge Risë Jones Pichon, and Ms. Barbara Schraeger voted in favor of all the findings and conclusions and the order of removal of Judge Ross. Commission member Ms. Patricia Miller was recused, and Commission member Mr. Lawrence Simi did not participate.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 26, 2006 12:01:14 GMT -5
Judge Kevin A. Ross of the Los Angeles County Superior Court was ordered removed from office by the Commission for willful misconduct in office and conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brings the judicial office into disrepute. . The Commission’s action concluded formal proceedings, during which there was a hearing before special masters and an appearance before the Commission.
The Commission first determined that the judge engaged in misconduct in connection with four criminal cases.
In one matter, a defendant who had two traffic citations submitted a declaration asserting that she was not the person cited. Judge Ross told her that he thought she was lying, added a misdemeanor charge of knowingly providing false insurance information in each traffic case, set bail at $2,500 in each case, summarily remanded the defendant to custody, and set her next court date 30 days in the future; the defendant testified that the judge said she was going to custody for 30 days. The judge also entered a “not guilty” plea for the defendant, but did not arraign her and did not notify the prosecutor or the public defender that he had added the misdemeanor charge. The defendant remained in custody for two and a half days; she was then released after posting bail. In Commission proceedings, Judge Ross made a number of unconvincing excuses and false statements in an effort to mislead the special masters and the Commission.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross engaged in willful misconduct. The judge’s actions toward the defendant were in bad faith because he acted out of pique, irritation or impatience; alternatively or additionally, the judge acted beyond his lawful authority, either with knowledge that his actions were beyond his authority or with conscious disregard for the limits of his authority. In addition, the Commission found that the judge’s knowing disregard of fundamental rights and abuse of authority were part of a pattern that rendered the judge unfit for the bench.
In another matter, Judge Ross telephoned a defendant charged with misdemeanor drug offenses and had an ex parte conversation with her. The Commission found that this was improper action. The Commission rejected the judge’s claim that his call was justified by an emergency, and found that his claim that he promptly notified counsel of the call was false. The Commission found that Judge Ross made notes on a computer-generated printout of court minutes in an attempt to buttress his defense, and then used that altered document, first, to attempt to mislead his supervising judges and then to assert a false defense in Commission proceedings.
In a third matter, Judge Ross presided over the case of a defendant who had been placed on diversion on misdemeanor charges of violating zoning and other municipal ordinances in connection with holding religious services in his home. The prosecutor said that the defendant had not complied with the diversion agreement and that he wished to proceed with criminal charges. He also asked the judge to immediately enter an order prohibiting the defendant from holding religious services. Judge Ross informed the defendant of his right to legal representation, and the defendant said that he would need to seek legal representation. Despite this unambiguous request for counsel, Judge Ross asked the defendant a series of questions bearing on the requested order and the criminal charges, and accused the defendant of lying to him. The judge eventually obtained incriminating admissions from the defendant, after which he entered a not-guilty plea for the defendant and told him that he needed to get a lawyer.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross engaged in willful misconduct. The Commission determined that the judge intentionally violated the defendant’s constitutional rights, and displayed manifest embroilment and lack of impartiality.
In a fourth case, Judge Ross refused to conduct a probation violation hearing, stating that he already had found the defendant in violation of probation and would proceed to sentencing. After the defendant’s public defender had a heated exchange with the judge and was removed from the courtroom, the judge continued with the sentencing proceedings. Another public defender who was in the courtroom stated his appearance, but the Commission determined that neither he nor the judge understood him to have replaced the public defender who had been representing the defendant or to have been in a position to provide effective representation of the defendant. The judge addressed the defendant directly, and accused him of being a pathological liar. The matter was continued to the afternoon. The next day, after being told that the public defender’s office intended to boycott his courtroom, Judge Ross set a formal probation violation hearing in the case.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross committed willful misconduct. The judge presumptively knew, through his experience as a prosecutor, that a defendant in a probation violation case has a right to a hearing, and the defendant’s lawyer insisted on that right. Therefore, the Commission concluded, Judge Ross intentionally disregarded the defendant’s fundamental rights or knowingly acted beyond his judicial power or with a conscious disregard for the limits of his authority. Alternatively or additionally, the Commission determined that the judge displayed embroilment evidencing anger, pique, revenge or other improper purpose.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross violated canon 3B(9) and engaged in prejudicial misconduct when he revealed confidential information about a juvenile case while appearing on a local public television program, and when he discussed a pending appellate case during another appearance on the same show.
The Commission concluded that Judge Ross engaged in willful misconduct and violated canons 1, 2A, 2B(2), 4A(2), 4D(1)(a), and 4D(2) when he acted as a private arbitrator during filming of a pilot television program for a possible new series to be called Mobile Court. The Commission concluded that the judge committed willful misconduct when he served as an arbitrator because he was acting in a judicial capacity. The Commission rejected the judge’s claim that he did not know he was acting as an arbitrator, noting that he had signed two documents entitled “Arbitrator’s Award” after filming was complete. The Commission noted that the judge’s patent attempts at avoidance of responsibility and his act of providing a false story that he had signed the arbitration awards before the filming demonstrated a serious lack of candor and accountability.
In deciding discipline, the Commission noted that Judge Ross had engaged in repeated wrongdoing, that he had displayed a pervasive lack of candor and accountability and that he previously had been disciplined for similar misconduct. The Commission pointed out that honesty is a “minimum qualification” expected of every judge, and that Judge Ross had fabricated stories and attempted to mislead the Commission. The Commission also noted that the judge’s behavior suggested a strong likelihood of future violations, and that his conduct besmirched the reputation of the judiciary. The Commission concluded that the appropriate discipline was removal from office.
Commission members Mr. Marshall B. Grossman, Judge Frederick P. Horn, Mr. Michael A. Kahn, Mrs. Crystal Lui, Justice Judith D. McConnell, Mr. Jose C. Miramontes, Mrs. Penny Perez, Judge Risë Jones Pichon, and Ms. Barbara Schraeger voted in favor of all the findings and conclusions and the order of removal of Judge Ross. Commission member Ms. Patricia Miller was recused, and Commission member Mr. Lawrence Simi did not participate.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 24, 2006 23:47:11 GMT -5
(Editor's Note: Bruce McClure, a former friend of King County Sheriff's Deputy James Patrick Covey who is quoted in this story, is not the same Bruce McClure who is a King County sheriff's deputy.) Heard the one about the cop convicted of murder who's now serving life in prison? Court Documents here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/conductunbecoming/pensions/docs/states/5_Bachmeiermurdered.pdfHe draws a $3,100 tax-free pension check every month -- and will for the rest of his life. How about the deputy who, while waiting to learn if he'd be fired for allegedly beating his girlfriend, took advantage of extra work offered by his department to double his salary? [Deputy Pat Covey, 51, is yet another example in a group of sheriff's deputies who have managed to complete their careers -- his spanned 26 years -- despite criminal behavior and other misconduct described in police parlance as "conduct unbecoming."] Full Story here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/253807_covey29.aspHis overtime-bloated pay now entitles him to a $63,000-a-year pension. Then there's the officer-turned-molester who sexually abused his stepdaughter. Story here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/253978_svinth30.aspAnd the drinking-while-on-duty deputy who vandalized a van. And the cop who left his gun out, enabling his enraged lover to kill a man. Story here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/conductunbecoming/zana/All of them either now receive -- or one day will -- handsome retirement benefits. And most of these ex-officers' pensions were made even bigger, thanks to their former employer -- the King County Sheriff's Office. An abuse of public trust is occurring time and again at the expense of taxpayers: Bad cops have -- and will continue to -- cost King County and Washington millions of dollars, as publicly bankrolled salaries and taxpayer-subsidized pensions reap lucrative rewards for officers who've tainted the badge. A Seattle P-I examination of state pension and payroll records of eight King County sheriff's deputies shows example after example of how such problem officers continued drawing salaries and earning service credits for years. This fattened retirements for these men, six of whom engaged in acts of misconduct so serious they could have been fired years earlier. Had they been fired, millions would have been saved in salaries and past, present and future retirement payments, according to calculations conducted separately and at the P-I's request by a state fiscal analyst and an actuary in private practice. While it's not easy to fire deputies -- termination cases require meeting a standard of proof that's "clear and convincing" -- the sheriff's rulebook also says the kind of misconduct committed by officers cited in this story can or will result in dismissal. Still, six of the deputies were allowed to stay on the job and continued misbehaving for years. Along with millions in work and retirement pay, taxpayers have paid hundreds of thousands more in settlements of legal claims brought by alleged victims of four of the deputies. These deputies are able to harvest publicly afforded spoils despite questionable, even criminal, employment records.
|
|
|
Post by Shuftin on Jul 24, 2006 23:47:11 GMT -5
(Editor's Note: Bruce McClure, a former friend of King County Sheriff's Deputy James Patrick Covey who is quoted in this story, is not the same Bruce McClure who is a King County sheriff's deputy.) Heard the one about the cop convicted of murder who's now serving life in prison? Court Documents here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/conductunbecoming/pensions/docs/states/5_Bachmeiermurdered.pdfHe draws a $3,100 tax-free pension check every month -- and will for the rest of his life. How about the deputy who, while waiting to learn if he'd be fired for allegedly beating his girlfriend, took advantage of extra work offered by his department to double his salary? [Deputy Pat Covey, 51, is yet another example in a group of sheriff's deputies who have managed to complete their careers -- his spanned 26 years -- despite criminal behavior and other misconduct described in police parlance as "conduct unbecoming."] Full Story here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/253807_covey29.aspHis overtime-bloated pay now entitles him to a $63,000-a-year pension. Then there's the officer-turned-molester who sexually abused his stepdaughter. Story here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/253978_svinth30.aspAnd the drinking-while-on-duty deputy who vandalized a van. And the cop who left his gun out, enabling his enraged lover to kill a man. Story here: seattlepi.nwsource.com/conductunbecoming/zana/All of them either now receive -- or one day will -- handsome retirement benefits. And most of these ex-officers' pensions were made even bigger, thanks to their former employer -- the King County Sheriff's Office. An abuse of public trust is occurring time and again at the expense of taxpayers: Bad cops have -- and will continue to -- cost King County and Washington millions of dollars, as publicly bankrolled salaries and taxpayer-subsidized pensions reap lucrative rewards for officers who've tainted the badge. A Seattle P-I examination of state pension and payroll records of eight King County sheriff's deputies shows example after example of how such problem officers continued drawing salaries and earning service credits for years. This fattened retirements for these men, six of whom engaged in acts of misconduct so serious they could have been fired years earlier. Had they been fired, millions would have been saved in salaries and past, present and future retirement payments, according to calculations conducted separately and at the P-I's request by a state fiscal analyst and an actuary in private practice. While it's not easy to fire deputies -- termination cases require meeting a standard of proof that's "clear and convincing" -- the sheriff's rulebook also says the kind of misconduct committed by officers cited in this story can or will result in dismissal. Still, six of the deputies were allowed to stay on the job and continued misbehaving for years. Along with millions in work and retirement pay, taxpayers have paid hundreds of thousands more in settlements of legal claims brought by alleged victims of four of the deputies. These deputies are able to harvest publicly afforded spoils despite questionable, even criminal, employment records.
|
|