When our judges are paid by the police. From the victim's assistance fund.
A municipal court judge has been suspended for 30 days, for taking money from the chief of police, paid from the police department's victim's assistance fund.
The judge's sister apparently had been cashing forged checks in the judge's name for 8 years, but SLED determined that the judge was not responsible for her sister's conduct:
Respondent's sister, who was the Clerk of the Town of Varnville, was arrested and charged with embezzlement of public funds, forgery, and misconduct in office. Respondent's sister was accused of issuing checks in respondent's name, forging respondent's name to the checks, and converting the money for her personal use over an eight year period.The South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED) determined that respondent was not involved in any of the alleged misconduct in office involving her sister. There is no allegation or evidence that respondent was even aware of the alleged conduct leading to her sister's charges.
However, while SLED was investigating the checks that were forged in the judge's name, they also came across payments that were made to the judge - checks that were written to the judge from the police department's victim's assistance fund, and approved by the chief of police. Because the chief of police wanted to supplement the judge's salary.
From 2002 until 2006, respondent received 43 checks totaling $4,890.00. The checks ranged from $50.00 to $200.00. Respondent submits she was unaware it would be improper for her to receive supplemental payments from the police department who prosecuted cases before her. She submits that the checks from the police department never affected her judicial decisions, but she now realizes the payments could give the impression she was not impartial.
The tone of this opinion is that this judge simply did not understand that anything was wrong with taking the payments. From the chief of police. From the victim's assistance fund. Coincidentally, the judge's sister, who had been forging checks in the judge's name for 8 years, would cash the judge's checks written from the victim's assistance fund at the clerk's office and give the judge cash.
I don't know what to say about this - where is the outrage? SLED has apparently whitewashed the entire deal, finding no wrong doing on the judge's part, and the Supreme Court has written the most bland and apologetic opinion possible, making it clear that the judge didn't really mean to do anything wrong, and allowing the judge to continue to sit on the bench.
What would we have done if this were a Circuit Court judge who was receiving payments from the Solicitor's victim's assistance fund? How is this any different?
