MCHENRY COUNTY: HOLDING PROSECUTORS TO A HIGHER STANDARD
Facts of this one are simple. A young McHenry County prosecutor was arrested a couple of nights ago for a DUI. The State's Attorney, his boss, talked to him about it then fired him.
There are those who will argue the S/A should have waited for due process to run its course--maybe he would have been acquited. There are those who say anyone can make a mistake and that this is too harsh. I think they are are all wrong.
This State's Attorney showed the world that people in his office are not only charged with the responsibility of obeying the law they enforce. They are also charged with the responsibility of being above suspicion regarding the laws they enforce. In the surrounding publicity the S/A took pains to compliment the young man's legal abilities. That will help him land on his feet. That's a nice touch. One can uphold the standards of an office and still be humane.
I'm sorry for the young Assistant State's Attorney but I agree with the S/A's prompt and decisive handling of the situation. The public deserves to know it's chief prosecutor requires more just baseline good citizenship among the staff of lawyers representing the people.
Remember, this Assistant was charged with a serious driving offense, not simply having a drinking problem.
Labels: Ethics
posted by UMRBlog @ 08:03
5 comments
5 Comments:
I agree, let the kid do divorces or probate from now on.
HBO did a documentary around 15 years ago, they had a hangin DWI Judge, I think he was named Emmitt A'ferral (sp?) from New Canton, Ohio. He gave 2 weeks jail time for all first offenders, he talked also about he knew it was a crime judges also commited, etc. I wonder if A'Ferral is still on the bench, over there. That was one place you didn't want to drink and drive!
My big point here is not the exact right punishment for a given DUI. My point is that prosecutors exercise a high level of discretion. They should demonstrate the judgment to justify the use of that discretion as long as they hold that public trust.
I hope the young man bounces back. If I were the State's Attorney, I'd even welcome his application after, say, a couple of years. One just can't use that kind of judgment while prosecuting those who engage in similar conduct.
Or hell, let the guy keep working as an ASA, long as he pays the fines, does the classes, goes W/O his DL for 90 days, pays high insurance for next 5 years, puts the breath analyzer on his ignition, etc, just like everyone else!
No, I see what your saying about the credibilty gap. Key here is that that guy was young. I remember when a very old man told me (in my 20's) "Be careful, you have a lot of temptation available to you at your age", told him nah, I can handle it!
The old man turned out to be right, of course!
Ah, Thank you! The holder of a public trust is not "like everyone else."
I've got some moments from about ages 16-28 I'd like to have back. The old man was, indeed, right.
TYFCB
Well, that second paragraph didn't come out exactly like I meant. I made some decisions in the 16-28 years that I would have liked to have made differently.
And, yes, the statute of limitations has run on all of them.
Post a Comment
<< Home