Advance Indiana has just learned that Marion Superior Court Judge Kimberly Brown, who the Indiana Supreme Court suspended last month while justices consider a recommendation by the Judicial Qualifications Commission that she be removed from the bench for multiple violations of the Judicial Code, has filed to run for re-election as a Democrat in the Marion County primary election in May. You may recall that six years ago Brown won election to the bench after bypassing party slating and running against the Democratic slated candidates in the primary. Brown would still be eligible to seek election as a judge this year unless the Supreme Court decided to suspend her from the practice of law, in addition to removing her from the bench, or conditioned her ability to practice law based on an agreement that she not seek election as a judge in the future. Judge Brown is continuing to be paid while suspended pending the final decision of the Supreme Court.
UPDATE: It looks like the Democrats are going to have a choice in the May primary in the judicial races regardless of what happens at slating tomorrow. Greg Bowes and David Hennessy have both filed to run in the Democratic primary and neither are candidates at the Democrats' slating convention tomorrow. Bowes previously ran against the slated candidates unsuccessfully two years ago. No other Republicans filed except for the 8 slated candidates, which means the election is over for them; they have all secured a seat on the bench next year.
UPDATE (2-8-14): The list of candidates the Democrats slated for the eight superior court positions are as follows:
Barbara Crawford (I)
Annie Christ Garcia (I)
Angela Davis
David Dreyer (I)
Shatrese Flowers
Christina Klineman
Jim Osborn (I)
Marcel Pratt
(I)-denotes incumbent
Myla Eldridge upset Marion Co. Coroner Frank Lloyd for the circuit court clerk position being vacated by Beth White. Eldridge has been the director of elections in the clerk's office for a number of years.
11 comments:
Attorneys Greg Bowes & David Hennessy also filed.
After all the investigation, testimony, evidence, and the decision of The Masters, why is The Supreme Court not acting on this?
The people of Marion County are paying her a 6 figure salary to do nothing. That's wrong.
Anon 4:52. How can they act on it? She has a right to file to run for office until she's found guilty and removed from the bench.
The Supreme Court can remove her from the bench and suspend her law license at any time and make her ineligible to run if it so chooses.
Gary, that's true but it would seem to be premature as the Supreme Court hasn't heard her case yet. Unless there is some immediate harm to the public, I'm not in favor of people losing their licenses before the case gets heard.
Paul, consider this: The Masters issued there findings already. The delay by The Supreme Court in acting is costing taxpayers a giant salary as she figuratively vacations (that is, gets paid for no work).
A panel of three special masters has recommended to the Indiana Supreme Court she be removed after careful consideration of the facts.
The panel that heard the weeklong disciplinary case against Brown is reported to have filed 107 pages of findings of fact, conclusions of law and recommended sanctions.
The commission proved more than 80 rules violations by clear and convincing evidence on 46 of 47 counts against Brown, the panel concluded. She was cleared on Count #22.
Brown also may have violated the law for terminating a former bailiff in her court who was among those who complained to the JQC, the panel is reported to conclude.
The special masters made 281 particular findings in Brown’s case, along with conclusions that she violated numerous rules of judicial conduct.
Now, what is The Supreme Court waiting on??? -as the taxpayers pay no only her to do no work, but also the salary for the replacement in that court!
Anon, I'm sorry but as someone who has just been through the Hearing Officer process in which findings of facts and conclusions of law are reached, I know to take those findings and conclusions with a great deal of skepticism. I never thought for a second I was in any sort of judicial proceeding in which I was receiving a fair trial before an impartial magistrate. In fact things became so bad that, after the Hearing Officer announced I was guilty at a pre-trial before evidence had been admitted or the parties argued the law, I asked that he be removed utilizing the Tyson standard in which Chief Justice Shepard recused himself. I was unsuccessful. I thought the Hearing Officer might take a more evenhanded approach during my trial, but I was proved spectacularly wrong.
Now I know the Master Commissioner process is different, that actual judges made up the panel that judged Kim Brown. In attorney discipline matters, many hearing officers, such as mine, are not judges and many probably don't have the temperament and judgment to be judges.
In the disciplinary process, the hearing officer and master commissioners only make recommendation. I'm fine with waiting for the Supreme Court to make an actual ruling on a case instead of prejudging people based on what are still only at this point accusations.
She gets paid by the state, so her pay isn't borne by only Marion County taxpayers.
Gary, take a look at this.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/08/us/senator-races-to-show-ties-including-an-address-in-kansas.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Anonymous 11:14 p.m. Why should ANYONE, especially taxPAYERS, have to pay her for being suspended from her job, after Masters have issued their decision?
Why are taxPAYERS paying for a replacement to sit in her job and conduct her business?
Something is wrong with The Supreme Court that is forcing taxPAYERS to pay after the decision has been tendered to them.
Post a Comment