tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post4825847987277637697..comments2020-04-11T03:30:02.282-05:00Gary R. Welshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-74768595734260984872011-12-19T20:27:55.928-05:002011-12-19T20:27:55.928-05:00Any first year law student could explain to you why it isn't theft, Mike, but I realize you're not an attorney. White performed his duties as Fishers Town Council member throughout the entire period in question. He attended council meetings and his votes counted just like any other member of that council. Also, keep in mind that he was elected at-large by all of the voters in Fishers even though he represented a geographic district. I personally don't think White should have returned the money. There is a council member in Carmel who moved outside his district due to marital problems with his wife but continues to serve and draw his salary as a council member. The election commission in Hamilton Co. refused to investigate a complaint against him after the council member explained why he was not currently living in his district. Maybe he and his wife will reconcile some day and he will return to living in his district, but he clearly had moved out of his home in the district. Nobody is suggesting he should be charged with theft. He is performing his duties as a councilor under color of law and his votes on the council count whether he is legally holding that office or not. This has occurred on multiple occasions in the past where a person elected to an office is discovered to have moved outside his district and forced to give up that office. In no instance were any of those officials charged with a crime, and in none of those instances were the officials forced to return the money. Patrice Abduallah claimed a vacant house in my council district for nearly 4 years before I outed him. He resigned under pressure, but he wasn't asked to return the $15,000 a year salary he had earned, or the free health insurance benefits he received. And nobody prosecuted him for theft or suggested he should be prosecuted for theft, although he clearly could have been prosecuted on multiple counts of vote fraud. The crime of theft is defined as "a person who knowingly or intentionally exerts unauthorized control over property of another person, with intent to deprive the other person of any part of its value or use." The case law is clear that the votes and actions taken by a councilor who was not legally sitting in that seat cannot be attacked. Therefore, he has not deprived the voters of his district of any representation on the council. His votes counted just like any other councilor. There had to be a theft of something of value. There was no theft of funds. The money would be paid to anyone claiming authority under color of law to hold that seat. This is insanity. It is frightening. Under the flimsy legal bases applied by this special prosecutor, you could prosecute most of the residents of this state for committing a felony. As a Libertarian, if you are true to your principles, you should be screaming the loudest, but you aren't because you are like the others who don't give a damn as long as it's not your ass that's on the line. That's the exact same attitude people had towards Hitler. By the time people realized it was time to stand up to him, millions had already been put to death. People yawned last week when Congress passed a law stripping all U.S. citizens of their right to due process when accused of any flimsy charge of aiding terrorists. What this prosecutor is doing is no different than what Mike Nifong did to those defenseless Duke Lacrosse players against whom he recklessly and illegally pursued charges of rape. Nifong lost his license to practice law as a result of his prosecutorial misconduct. In Indiana, we pat on the back an out of control prosecutor just because we don't like the guy he's abusing the law to punish.Gary R. Welshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15185079937305083438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12703782.post-31698802493189784872011-12-19T19:22:10.814-05:002011-12-19T19:22:10.814-05:00If one is accused of theft of a paycheck, and returns the paycheck, what does that say? If he kept the paycheck and said that he believed he rightfully earned it, wouldn't that say the opposite thing?Mike Kolehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17573721231319244630noreply@blogger.com