Jump to content
Paulding.com

Paulding Prosecutors Fight Judge Even After He Leaves


Recommended Posts

I had no idea that Osborne had a tenuous relationship with the DA's office. It explains a lot about how his shenanigans were being exposed. I'm still wondering how supervising Chief Judge Good Ole Boy escapes any scrutiny since Osborne's conduct was on his watch? If you're Teflon Tonny, nothing sticks?

 

BTW, dmn funny to hear prosecutors say the system doesn't work. Are they just bitter because the didn't get their way? :rofl:

 

 

In the case decided by the Court of Appeals last week, the DA's office in May 2014 asked Osborne to recuse even before defendant Corey Osborne (no apparent relationship to the judge) had been arraigned on drug charges.

Osborne denied the motion, saying it "utterly failed" to set out a basis for recusal and was "legally insufficient on its face." The DA's office appealed, complaining that Osborne hadn't referred the recusal motion to a different judge. The state's rules generally say a Superior Court judge faced with a recusal motion should send the motion to another judge.

In its appeal brief, the state implicitly acknowledged that it hadn't met the usual statutory requirement for the state appealing the denial of a recusal motion in the middle of the case. Instead, the DA's office argued that it should be allowed to appeal under the "collateral order doctrine" because "in this case it would be impossible for the state to procure a certificate of immediate review" because of the troubled relationship between the judge and the prosecutors.

It might be different, argued prosecutors, if the recusal motion had been denied by a judge other than the judge whose participation in the case is being challenged.

After the DA filed its appeal brief in that case, Osborne agreed to step down on Oct. 1 instead of serving till the end of December, thereby ending a second ethics investigation by the JQC.

http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/85469890/0/dailyreport-recentnews~Paulding-Prosecutors-Fight-Judge-Even-After-He-Leaves

 

Edited by Domestic Violence by Proxy
Link to post
Share on other sites

He was definitely an unethical SOB!

 

So, it's no wonder that he didn't want to be investigated.

 

Could he have possibly fell on his sword to protect others as well as himself? Do you think the supervising Chief Judge wanted an investigation? I don't.

Edited by Domestic Violence by Proxy
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Could he have possibly fell on his sword to protect others as well as himself? Do you think the supervising Chief Judge wanted an investigation? I don't.

 

 

I don't think the governing body of Paulding county, as a whole, wants any kind of investigations in their county, other than against the civilian population, or individuals not associated with that governing body.

Edited by The Postman
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't think the governing body of Paulding county, as a whole, wants any kind of investigations in their county, other than against the civilian population, or individuals not associated with that governing body.

 

LOL, good point.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I don't think the governing body of Paulding county, as a whole, wants any kind of investigations in their county, other than against the civilian population, or individuals not associated with that governing body.

 

I still can't get over Paulding prosecutors saying the justice system doesn't work. When a parent says the system doesn't work and is clearly failing children and then provides supporting documentation in the form of cases where there is a clear abuse of discretion, that is just a bitter parent who didn't get their way. Can we say the prosecutors are just bitter because they didn't get their way?

Edited by Domestic Violence by Proxy
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...