Lindell's story included another tidbit, though, that I hadn't caught from the court's earlier decision: "The motion also asked the court to rescind its decision to let Keller recoup her legal costs from the state, noting that Texas law explicitly bans the practice when judges are investigated for potential wrongdoing." I didn't realize they'd said the state should pay her legal bills and indeed was under the impression they could not do so. Indeed, according to the motion:
Section 33.031 of the Texas Government Code ... expressly prohibits the award of costs or attorneys’ fees in this proceeding. See TEX. GOV’T CODE Section 33.031, “No Award of Costs” (“Court costs or attorney’s fees may not be awarded in a proceeding under this chapter.”)So to recap. First the fact finding judge made sanction recommendations beyond his purview, then the SCJC gave Keller what she called "lawless" leniency by not punishing her more harshly, then the three-judge appellate panel apparently issued its own "lawless" ruling telling the state to pay for Keller's high-priced lawyer.
This whole affair has frequently been called a "circus" and increasingly it's clear that's an apt description: Every step of the process has been governed by clowns.
.jpg)
19 comments:
I think this dead horse has been beaten long enough.
Perhaps, but taxpayers shouldn't foot her legal bill.
Kind of like David Dow and those anti-death penalty clowns who caused this whole contrived farce to begin with, right, Grits?
Perhaps so, 7:34, but the SCJC proceedings were about Keller's conduct, not Dow's.
Prison Doc said...
I think this dead horse has been beaten long enough.
10/26/2010 07:22:00 PM
------------------------------------
Of course you do.
If the Government Code expressly prohibits an award of attorney's fees against the State in a CJC proceeding, the Legislature has pronounced its judgment that sovereign immunity is left intact and that trumps a judicial ruling to the contrary. The only way Judge Killer can translate the order awarding her fees into cash is to get a legislative consent to sue resolution and an appropriation of the funds. This should also entail an explanation why her fees are reasonable and necessary. At the very least, those of us who've enjoyed seeing her writhe under the scrutiny of the public limelight can enjoy it some more.
Wasn't this what the supreme court said would happen when they ruled that electing judges was legal (but a ridiculous idea)?
How many more times can the law be ignored for elected officials but ordinary folks not even get a fair hearing or fair and reasonable sentence? I voted yesterday but sometimes I wonder why bother?
This does not need to go away, it needs to be revisited over and over again until the public finally realizes the "good ole boy- and now girl- system of justice" is just flat wrong.
I'm tired of MY taxpayer money being misused in TEXAS. Forget trying to make a difference in Washington.
If this were an average citizen in question, the horse would be beaten, beaten some more, and then stalked, sexually harassed, slandered, and beaten again. Then, after being financially ruined, beaten again for good measure.
Us regular folks just want to see a little fairness, that's all.
The courts have a good reason for all of this, however; they make sure they foster a healthy contempt of court in the hearts of the average citizen, which remains the easiest way to lock them up when real charges don't exist, and, of course, beat them again.
Ditto, Jackie
I heard about a guy who got 40 years for sending a judge a card that when opened shot the finger. He will be living in our lovely TDCJ system probably for the rest of his life.
I think this dead horse has been beaten long enough.
Even though his crime was horrific we were able to postpone his execution for 21 years. He had one hell of a rap sheet, didn't he?
When I think about how he committed his slaughter it seems that this may be the biggest nightmare of someone living isolated like that.
12:04, Richards has already been executed so this isn't really about him. As mentioned above, the issues here relate to Keller's conduct, not the defendant's.
Texas Maverick said...
How many more times can the law be ignored for elected officials but ordinary folks not even get a fair hearing or fair and reasonable sentence? I voted yesterday but sometimes I wonder why bother?
This does not need to go away, it needs to be revisited over and over again until the public finally realizes the "good ole boy- and now girl- system of justice" is just flat wrong.
I'm tired of MY taxpayer money being misused in TEXAS. Forget trying to make a difference in Washington.
10/27/2010 09:22:00 AM
-----------------------------------
I could not have said it better myself!
In a few weeks my husband will commemorate his 20th year of incarceration. After spending two years in county jail awaiting trial, he was convicted of murder in 1992 under the law of parties and has been eligible for parole since 1998. The Innocence Project of New York ordered DNA tests, primarily due to his co-defendant being on death row and although the crime scene DNA did not match either of them the appeals courts did not care. The co-defendant was put to death two years ago. When my husband’s writ was filed in the CCA it was dismissed without comment. What does this have to do with the State paying for Sharon Keller’s legal fees? How about reimbursing us $10,000 that we spent on legal fees to research, prepare the writ and hire investigators when it appears that the CCA did not even open his trial transcript and fully investigate the points in the writ? We would also like a refund of $12,000 spent on parole attorneys when there is not a snowball chance in hell that he will be released before his mandatory release date. Sure, it was our choice to spend our money this way and we will do anything legal to prove his innocence until the day we both are dead. As for parole, tens of thousands of family members each year pay an attorney to assist in gaining parole when the Parole Board knows they will not be released. Frustrated? Yes, but we never give up hope, knowing that justice will prevail in the end. A portion of this justice is Sharon Keller receiving what she has so liberally given to others.
If Kino Flores was prosecuted for failing to report income on his Texas Ethics Commission reports, then Sharon Keller should also be prosecuted for her failure to report income and property on her forms. Kino was convicted on some of the counts even though the jury found no intent to harm or defraud, which is probably the same argument Keller would make if she were charged.
If Rosemary Lehmberg's quote is accurate, then she should also hold Sharon Keller to the highest ethical standards. Lehmberg said: “That accurate and full public disclosure is an important part of public service and that the public will not accept excuses like ‘I was too busy’ or ‘I just didn’t know.’”
Keller failed to report beneficial interests in property valued at $2.9 million in 2007 and $2.4 million the year before.
Keller failed to report ownership of between 100 and 499 shares of stock, money market accounts and certificates of deposit in 2007 and 2008.
Failed to disclose nine sources of income totaling at least $121,500 in 2008 and at least $61,500 the year before.
Keller failed to disclose at least four executive or board of directors positions in 2007-08, as well as expenses covered by honoraria in those years.
From the Statesman:
A Travis County jury today found South Texas lawmaker Kino Flores guilty of multiple counts of tampering with a governmental record and perjury in connection with omissions Flores made on financial disclosure forms required to be filed by state elected officials.
Flores, a 14-year state representative, was convicted of five counts of misdemeanor tampering with a governmental record, four counts of felony tampering with a governmental record and two counts of misdemeanor perjury.
He faces up to two years in a state jail and a $10,000 fine on each of the felony counts. Any state jail time assessed for each count must run concurrently with other counts under state law.
“This verdict represents the public saying to public officials that they expect elected officials to maintain the highest ethical standards,” Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg said. “That accurate and full public disclosure is an important part of public service and that the public will not accept excuses like ‘I was too busy’ or ‘I just didn’t know.’”
Flores was found guilty of two counts of tampering with government records with the intent to harm or defraud the state for failing to report on the forms income that he was accused of receiving from a list of businesses in 2002 and 2003. He was also found guilty of the felony tampering for failing to report his son’s job with the Capitol lobby firm HillCo Partners.
The jury found that he did not intend to harm or defraud by failing to report a list of properties he owned on financial disclosure firms, including a Guadalupe Street condominium.
Because of that lack of intent, the jury found the tampering with a governmental record counts related to those charges are misdemeanors.
Flores’ lawyers argued that he did not intend to omit the properties on the forms and dismissed some of the omissions as clerical errors.
Scott, I've been told (off the record) by someone at the County Attorney's office not to expect Keller to be indicted for the Ethics disclosure violations. The reason given FWIW is that Keller's father controls the assets of all his children, not just SK, and they believe her claim that her father bought and sold assets without her knowledge. Personally I don't understand how she could sit on 5 separate corporate boards without her knowledge, but that's what I was told. To me it smacks of special treatment - after all, Kino Flores doesn't sit on an appellate court with jurisdiction over the County Attorney's cases.
She also failed to report income, not just property.
It doesn't look good that they would charge Kino Flores and not Sharon Keller, especially when Rosemary Lehmberg says the responsibility is to the officeholder and that "I just didn't know" is not an excuse.
“That accurate and full public disclosure is an important part of public service and that the public will not accept excuses like ‘I was too busy’ or ‘I just didn’t know.’”
I had thought that it was up to David Escamilla, but it looks like Lehmberg's office handled the Flores case, I suppose because he was charged with felony tampering with a government record, although the jury lowered it to a misdemeanor since they found no intent.
Escamilla's office and Lehmberg's both agree on the decision not to prosecute Keller, from what I was told. Wish it weren't all off the record or I'd give more detail.
A lawyer will always figure out a way to get some of that government tit. What you now have to ask yourself is what political connections and whispers occured to make all this happen. In Texas it's not what you know...
Post a Comment