A judge in Marysville, Kansas, has a case on her docket. The two parties involved in the case, the defendant and the witness for the prosecution, have been ordered to leave each other alone and keep their amounts of personal contact to a minimum. But the witness for the prosecution still perceives reasons to hound the defendant, asking him for personal information for purposes involving her own affairs. Instead of waiting for defendant to contact his attorney and go through the proper channels for all contact and information necessary to the existing situations in the lives of all involved, the witness for the prosecution decided to call the courthouse and complain that the defendant was keeping his distance from her, as ordered. So what happened? A secretary transferred the prosecution witness's phone call straight to the chambers of the judge scheduled to try this case. The judge proceeded to converse with the witness, behind the backs of the defendant and his attorney. This kind of behavior of the part of a judge is highly inappropriate. In fact, according to the Judicial Code Of Conduct for judges in the state of Kansas, an ex parte communication is extremely unethical. How can a judge remain unbiased when her secretary transfers phone calls directly to her from witnesses for the prosecution? There really is no way, and this never should have happened. The Supreme Court in Kansas will certainly hear about this, and the next time Judge Hecke runs for the bench, the incident will be common knowledge in Marshall County, Kansas.
No comments:
Post a Comment