Thursday, October 25, 2012

WE CAN DO BETTER – Part 18


WE CAN DO BETTER – Part 18

By Alan Miller, Candidate for Judge Superior Court II
 

Judicial Independence
 

One of the more serious problems with our current system is the lack of independence between the different participants. The public perception is that the relationships between everyone involved---from judges to prosecutors to defense attorneys and beyond---are just too cozy. The mere appearance of such closeness is enough to create distrust in the system itself. There are several things I will change when elected. 

Neutrality  

Picture this: Your child has just lost a tough, closely contested soccer game. Unfortunately, the outcome came down to a referee’s call near the end of the game. Afterwards, you see the referee and the other team’s coach laughing, then getting into a car together and driving off. How would this make you feel? Would you feel that the final outcome and the call were correct or because of the referee’s relationship with the coach?

Now picture this: You are getting a divorce, suing someone because of some dispute, or you have been arrested for a crime and now must appear before the judge. When the attorney for the opposing side enters the room, you recognize him or her as someone who has contributed financially to the judge’s campaign. Maybe this attorney also walked in a parade supporting the judge or you have seen them eating in a restaurant with the judge---the same judge before which you are about to argue something that is key to your livelihood, something that may affect your children or even your freedom. How would this make you feel? Would you feel that, if the final outcome went against you, it was legally correct or because of the judge’s personal relationship with the attorney?

Neutrality is one of the most, if not the most important trait, that a judge must have. Any party that appears before the court needs to know that their case will be heard fairly, without bias, and that the judge will give them a fair shake, regardless of how they look, where they are from or which attorney they’ve hired. They also need to know that a judge will be able to maintain an appropriate judicial temperament and hear the case without letting their own personal feelings and emotions get in the way.

It has been asserted by the current judge that her neutrality is without question and above reproach. I respectfully disagree. A sitting judge who respects neutrality does not allow a party who appears before her on a daily basis to publicly support her or contribute financially to her campaign. In this election, some of my opponent’s most visible supporters have been the elected prosecuting attorney and members of his staff. You have also probably seen---or heard in radio ads---prominent members of the law enforcement community, individuals whose agencies’ searches and arrests are occasionally the subjects of scrutiny by the court, offering their public support as well. If there was ever an illustration of what is wrong with our system locally, this is it. To allow this to continue does not look good. It is not right. It does not convey a sense of fairness. To allow such appearances of impropriety to continue is unacceptable and simply will not happen when I am elected.
 

Social relationships
 

A judge must not have close social relationships with prosecutors, defense attorneys, or any other attorney who may appear before him or her. A judge has no business making social visits or going to lunch with individuals who work in other offices within the courthouse. A member of a judge’s immediate family must not work in other offices within the courthouse.

I have a sister currently practicing law in Dearborn County. However, one of the first acts I will perform as judge will be to draft and implement a new local rule prohibiting her from appearing before me.

When elected, close social relationships with prosecutors or attorneys appearing before the court cannot and will not continue. You will not see me making social visits or going to lunch with courthouse employees who do not work in my office. You will not see members of my immediate family working in the courthouse.
 

This is the eighteenth part of my platform statement; a detailed proposal for how to improve our current justice system. It will be released over the next several months through facebook.com/makeitmiller2012 and makeitmiller2012.com. PLEASE feel free to forward this to your friends and family.
Thanks for your continued support
!

Alan Miller

 

13 comments:

HK said...

If ever there was reason to change judges, this is it.
If parties like sheriff's dept, probation dept, jail dept, and prosecutor's employees wanting to get convictions back the judge, and she accepts their support and money, her neutrality in their cases has to be suspect.
Alan is right.
We can do better.

Anonymous said...

You are so right Mr. Miller. The "closeness" among your opponent and others in the system is beyond unethical. It is disgusting. You seen to be a good and honest man. Good luck to you.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Miller there is a rule under the Indiana Judicial Cannons, specifically Rule 2.11, Disqualification that would prohibit your sister from appearing before you. Be honest with people! You know that there is no need for a separate local rule.

rules work both ways said...

so you are objecting to Miller clarifying his stance on this?
Judicial "Cannons" - are they weapons?
The Judicial Canons also have rules on campaigns, by the way.




Observer said...

CANON 4

A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall Not Engage in Political or Campaign Activity That is Inconsistent with the Independence, Integrity, or Impartiality of the Judiciary

RULE 4.1: Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General

(A) Except as permitted by law,* or by Rules 4.1(B), 4.1(C), 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4, a judge or a judicial candidate* shall not:

(1) act as a leader in or hold an office in a political organization;*

(2) make speeches on behalf of a political organization;

(3) publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for any public office;

(4) solicit funds for, pay an assessment to, or make a contribution* to a political organization or a candidate for public office;

(5) attend or purchase tickets for dinners or other events sponsored by a political organization or a candidate for public office;

(6) publicly identify himself or herself as a member or candidate of a political organization;

(7) seek, accept, or use endorsements from a political organization;

(8) personally solicit* or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee authorized by Rule 4.4;

(9) use or permit the use of campaign contributions for the private benefit of the judge, the candidate, or others;

(10) use court staff, facilities, or other court resources in a campaign for judicial office or for any political purpose;

(11) knowingly,* or with reckless disregard for the truth, make any false or misleading statement;

(12) make any statement that would reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter pending* or impending* in any court; or

(13) in connection with cases, controversies, or issues that are likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial* performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office.

(B) A judge or judicial candidate shall take reasonable measures to ensure that other persons do not undertake, on behalf of the judge or judicial candidate, any activities prohibited under paragraph (A).

(C) A judge in an office filled by partisan election, a judicial candidate seeking that office, and a judicial officer serving for a judge in office filled by partisan election may at any time:

(1) identify himself or herself as a member of a political party;

(2) voluntarily contribute to and attend meetings of political organizations; and

(3) attend dinners and other events sponsored by political organizations and may purchase a ticket for such an event and a ticket for a guest.

(D) A judge in an office filled by nonpartisan election other than a retention election, a judicial candidate seeking that office, and a judicial officer serving for a judge in an office filled by nonpartisan election may at any time attend dinners and other events sponsored by political organizations and may purchase a ticket for such an event and a ticket for a guest.

more at http://www.in.gov/judiciary/rules/jud_conduct/index.html#_Toc281379875

Anonymous said...

"I have a sister currently practicing law in Dearborn County."

"TWO" siblings that flunked math!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

"Now picture this: You are getting a divorce, suing someone because of some dispute, or you have been arrested for a crime and now must appear before the judge. When the attorney for the opposing side enters the room, you recognize him or her as someone who has contributed financially to the judge’s campaign. Maybe this attorney also walked in a parade supporting the judge or you have seen them eating in a restaurant with the judge---the same judge before which you are about to argue something that is key to your livelihood, something that may affect your children or even your freedom. How would this make you feel? Would you feel that, if the final outcome went against you, it was legally correct or because of the judge’s personal relationship with the attorney?"

You need a hobby.

Anonymous said...

No, really!

"A hobby!"

You are wearing everyone out.

Anonymous said...

If there was a "Chicken Dance" once a week the local "respectable" lawyers and constabulary would show up in freshly dried and dyed cleaned feathers.

Just be thankful we do not have our local "Winkler" family as does Hamilton County!

Anonymous said...

Does Mr. Miller's moratorium also include business relationships? He received a campaign contribution from Mr. Garner. Personally, I don't have a problem with that...in fact I would have found it odd if none of Mr. Miller's associates hadn't made a contribution.
I'm just wondering whether Mr. Miller will not allow his business associates to appear in his court. Or is there some sort of rule or canon about that already? I'm sure somebody here will know.

Anonymous said...

Indiana Code of Judicial Conduct can be found at:
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/rules/jud_conduct/index.html
Or just google Indiana Judicial Canon and it will come up.

researcher said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Indiana Judicial Code of Conduct in Dearborn County??? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! They have their own "Code of Conduct" in Dearborn County!!