Stupid Prosecutor Loses License To Practice Law

Mingo County, West Virginia has a position open for a county prosecutor now that Michael Sparks the law license of Michael Sparks, former Mingo County prosecutor, has been revoked. It seems that Michael Sparks was either acutely aware, or vaguely aware, of the practice employed by a West Virginia judge, the former Judge Thornsbury, of planting evidence and falsely accusing innocent people of crimes, and attempting to initiate prosecution against his victims! It appears that in addition to taking a dim view of false litigation, the Supreme Court in West Virginia takes an equally dim view of looking the other way when elected officials in law enforcement and the court have engaged in corrupt, unlawful behaviors that erode the trust of the general public. What a concept! The Supreme Court also has a problem with prosecutors and judges who try to silence federal witnesses. An element of that also played a role here. In fact, Both Sparks and Thornsbury did something that is often done in Marshall County, Kansas, where a prosecutor named Laura McNish is constitutionally incapable (pun somewhat intended) of winning a jury trial by herself, and intimidates and threatens defendants who hire lawyers, invoke their rights, and insist upon jury trials: they attempted to deprive a defendant of adequate legal counsel in exchange for a lighter sentence. A quote from WOWKTV states this:

"Sparks is accused in a scheme to protect former Sheriff Eugene Crum from revelations he'd bought drugs from a campaign sign-maker.
Prosecutors allege Sparks, a former county commissioner and former Circuit Judge Michael Thornsbury offered a lighter sentence if the dealer fired his lawyer and hired one they preferred."

So interfering with a defendant's counsel is also criminally unethical? Who'd have thought?!

On a related note, the Kansas Department of Education is still looking for a way to ensure cooperation of prosecutors in the area of mandatory reporting of all teachers who commit crimes. When teachers who exhibit criminal behavior, such as criminal restraint and kidnapping are prosecuted and reported to the Department of Education AS THE LAW REQUIRES, it is much easier to identify them and deny the renewals of teachers' licenses. Perhaps if Marshall County Kansas had a prosecutor with competence, instead of Laura McNish, court in Marshall County would begin to administer justice and Frankfort High School would be safe enough to get insurance.

 

Duties Of Schools Boards And County Attorneys

Oh yes! The Kansas State Board of Education is now in the process of revoking six teaching licenses of teachers who, the Board discovered, had felony criminal records. The crimes in question have mostly been abuses of children, but at least one was a violation of a prohibition law. According to Cheryl Whelan, the attorney who represents the Kansas State Department of Education, the State Board of Education has a responsibility to make sure that no teacher renews a license after conviction of certain crimes, and that no new license is granted to a felon. An interesting additional comment she made is this: “There doesn't have to be a conviction,” she said. “It can be any act that endangers or injures the health or welfare of a minor through physical or sexual abuse or exploitation. The perception that a conviction triggers a duty to report is incorrect.” That means that if a teacher has committed a crime that has not been reported or prosecuted, which often happens in these parts because of corruption and judicial favoritism, and if criminal acts on the part of a teacher have been admitted, or can be proven to the satisfaction of the Board, the license in question should not be renewed, if the Board is following the law to the letter. That certainly is intriguing, considering that in 2009, a guidance counselor deliberately dropped my daughter off on a stretch of highway and never contacted law enforcement or yours truly. Luckily, she was found several hours later. Because of the danger this type of action on the part of a teacher presents, I reported it, yet no one wanted to do anything about the creepy guidance counselor's criminal act toward my daughter. This brings me to the other point made by Cheryl Whelan about the ability and responsibility of the Kansas Board of Education about revocation of teaching licenses when teachers prove unworthy. The misdeeds get swept under the rug, so to speak, in much the same way district and county attorneys manipulate testimony and evidence for cases here in Kansas. Oddly enough, Whelan has the notion that the Board of Education's agency for hearing these cases, the Professional Practices Commission, does not get the cooperation it needs in order to serve the schools and children properly. She complains that the "agency has often had trouble enforcing those laws because school districts and local prosecutors often failed to report cases to state licensing officials." Imagine that! In the state of Kansas!

What's most amusing is that Whelan calls the situation "the new normal". New?