Supreme Court Holds Firm On Barnes v. State

UPDATED
A controversial Indiana Supreme Court decision, Barnes v. State, earlier this year created a firestorm when the state's high court abrogated a long-held rule that a person had a right to reasonably resist an unlawful entry into their home by a police officer. In the wake of public outrage over the decision authored by Justice Steven David, Attorney General Greg Zoeller asked the Court to rehear the case "to allow for a more narrow ruling that would continue to recognize the individual right of reasonable resistance to unlawful entry." The Supreme Court today announced it is affirming its earlier ruling in a 4-1 decision authored by Justice David. Justice Rucker dissented. Justice Dickson, who dissented in the earlier decision, flipped to the majority this time. The General Assembly is already laying the groundwork to statutorily overturn the controversial decision. Legislation will no doubt be sent to the Governor next year in light of today's ruling. David's ruling says the Court didn't mean what its original opinion was interpreted to say:

“Our earlier opinion was not intended to, and did not, change that existing law about the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, and papers against unreasonable searches and seizures.” 

Attorney General Greg Zoeller seems satisfied by the clarification issued by the Court in today's ruling:

"The Indiana Supreme Court's ruling today means that individuals still have the common law right of reasonable resistance to an unlawful entry, though there is never justification for committing battery against a police officer. In volatile domestic violence situations, police have the right to enter a home to ensure safety of others, but today's ruling also means the individual has the right to stand against his locked door to protect his home and communicate with police outside without a physical altercation. While the Legislature considers whether to revise the existing statute, we respect the Indiana Supreme Court's ruling, which underscores that the individual's constitutional right remains in force," Zoeller said.

I'm  not sure how one can "reasonably resist" an unlawful entry into their home by a police officer without running the risk of committing battery on a law enforcement officer.

Daniels' Book Takes A Swipe At Northwest Indiana

Some Northwest Indiana leaders may not like what Gov. Mitch Daniels has to say about northwest Indiana in his new book, "Keeping the Republic." The Northwest Indiana Times' Dan Carden discusses this passage in his book and the Governor's explanation of it:

In a chapter detailing his work to overcome environmental objections to the $4 billion expansion of BP's Whiting refinery, Daniels said he was "thrilled" to bring new jobs to a region that "has been the hardest part of the state to attract jobs to."

"Culturally close to Chicago in both economics and politics, and with a reputation for governmental corruption and labor union aggression, our northwest corner is a place employers are more likely to flee than invest in," Daniels wrote in "Keeping the Republic: Saving America by Trusting Americans."

In a phone interview Monday with The Times, the Republican governor stood by his comments.

"My heart is still in the project of making something really positive happen there, but there is some responsibility," Daniels said. "If you want the kind of new jobs that we've been able to get in most of the rest of the state, it would sure help if governmental leadership was a little more pro-growth."

He said Valparaiso is on the right track compared to other cities in Northwest Indiana, but said region political and business leaders should be motivated by jobs locating elsewhere in the state to decide, "Let's shape up."

Northwest Indiana also figures prominently in Daniels' retelling of his 2006 lease of the Indiana Toll Road, which he says he became fascinated with while traveling on it repeatedly during his 2004 campaign for governor.

He says he was determined to find a way to run it better when he learned the state paid 34 cents per vehicle in staff costs to collect a 15-cent toll before cars could enter Illinois . . .

If Gov. Daniels thinks the politics of Lake County is any more corrupt than the politics down in Indianapolis, he must be living under a rock. Insider government deals have made many of his good friends quite rich down here in Indianapolis and have often short-changed the taxpayers. Northwest Indiana has benefited a lot because of Chicago and not in spite of it regardless of what he wants to believe.

The Journal-Gazette includes this passage in Daniels' book about convicted former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who will probably soon be taking up residency with another former Illinois governor at the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute:

Daniels also talks of the only time he ever met now-infamous former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich at a meeting of the nation’s governors in Philadelphia soon after President Obama’s inauguration.

He said to Blagojevich, “your phone must be ringing off the hook with the vacant Senate seat appointment coming up.” To which Blagojevich responded, “Yeah, every SOB in Illinois thinks he ought to be a United States Senator.”

Five days later, the FBI arrested Blagojevich on charges that he had sought bribes to make the appointment.

Among the SOBs Blagojevich spoke to on the phone during that meeting in Philadelphia was then President-elect Barack Obama, who called him to discuss the Senate seat appointment. Federal prosecutors kept under wraps the contents of that conversation during Blagojevich's federal corruption trial in Chicago.

Dick Cady Publishes Murder Mystery Book Based On True Story

A Pulitzer prize-winning former reporter and columnist for the Indianapolis Star, Dick Cady, has authored a new book entitled, "Scavengers: A True Story of Money, Madness and Murder." Cady tells the story of the ill-fated Jackson family fortune and how it lured 24 people into crime, brought about two murdes and led two men to the electric chair. Cady's first book-signing will take place on September 24, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. at Book Mamas at 9 South Johnson in Irvington. The book is available for purchase on Amazon.com by clicking here.

300 East Out Of Business: New Home For Small Claims Court?

The controversial restaurant/bar that former Center Township Trustee Carl Drummer and his good buddy Lacy Johnson broke virtually every imaginable rule to locate in the Julia Carson Government Center four years ago closed its doors on September 1 without fanfare. The current township trustee, Eugene Akers, now wants to relocate the Center Township Small Claims Court into the former space occupied by 300 East from its current location in the basement of the City-County Building. Akers says the move will save the township money, but the small claim's court judge, Michelle Scott Smith, is opposed to the plan. The IBJ's Scott Olson explains:

The Center Township trustee is pushing to move the township's small claims court from the downtown Indianapolis City-County Building to the Julia M. Carson Government Center in what is being promoted as a cost-saving measure.

Trustee Eugene Akers’ plan, which could be approved at a Wednesday township board meeting, is not without controversy, however. The court’s judge, Michelle Smith Scott, is adamantly opposed to the move.

“If the trustee for Center [Township] is able to do this and is allowed to interfere with the court over the objection of the judge,” she said, “I don’t think it sets a good precedent.”
The court is the city’s oldest of nine township small claims courts and is the only one located in the City-County Building, where it’s been housed since the 28-story building opened in 1962.

Scott said the court needs to be in the building because it has the highest volume of cases among Marion County courts—14,000 in 2010. The building’s security is critical, she said, given the large number of litigants coming into her courtroom . . .

According to Olson's story, the township pays the county $16,701.00 to lease the space in the City-County building and it's scheduled to increase next year by 5%. Akers says he can build out the space in the Julia Carson Government building owned by the township, which was formerly occupied by 300 East, for $459,000. Olson says the township reported a cash surplus of $8.5 million at the end of last year. It only makes sense if the township is going to own that big office building that it should house its small claims court there rather than rent basement space in the City-County Building.

As to the demise of 300 East, Olson had this comment from one of the principal owners of the business, Bill Mays:

Local businessman Bill Mays was part of a group that invested $500,000 to launch the restaurant in 2006. Mays said he and local attorney Lacy Johnson could have continued to underwrite restaurant losses, but others couldn’t.

Mays said he continued to financially support the restaurant to give African-Americans and others in the area a place to meet and conduct business.

“The neighborhood was very slow to warm to it,” he said, “and that’s too bad, because it’s their loss.”

Mays said he backs Akers’ plan to move the small claims court into the space, citing an abundance of free parking near the building.

White Files Motion To Dismiss Special Prosecutor's Case Against Him

The attorney representing Secretary of State Charlie White on Friday filed a motion to dismiss the multi-count criminal indictment two special prosecutors filed against him earlier this year. Former Marion Co. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi, who is representing White, has challenged both the validity of the grand jury proceedings conducted by the special prosecutors and the sufficiency of the multiple indictments returned by that grand jury under the direction of the special prosecutors that arose out of allegations White had committed vote fraud prior to seeking the office of Secretary of State by voting in a precinct in which he allegedly did not live and holding a seat on the Fishers Town Council district while he lived outside the district.

Brizzi argues in his filing with the court that incoming Hamilton Co. Prosecutor Lee Buckingham had an affirmative duty to consent to the appointment of the special prosecutors appointed by his predecessor, Sonia Leerkamp, upon entering office in January. Buckingham neglected to do this until July of this year after the issue was raised by White following his indictment on seven felonies by the grand jury directed by the special prosecutors. Brizzi argues that Buckingham was attempting to correct a fundamental error he had made in failiing to re-affirm the need for a special prosecutor to handle the case following his swearing in as the new prosecutor. The notice Buckingham filed with the court in July in response to White raising the issue claimed the special prosecutor statute "required no action" on his part. Brizzi argues that Buckingham's failure to act should nullify the grand jury proceedings and indictments those proceeding produced against White.

Following his appointment as one of the two special prosecutors, Dan Sigler, Sr., made his son, Dan Sigler, Jr., a third member of the special prosecution team simply by filing a notice with the court of his appointment as a deputy special prosecutor. The notice did not seek the court's review or approval of his appointment. Brizzi contends his appointment could have only been made under the special prosecution statute by the court. Brizzi contends that Sigler, Jr. played an active role in interrogating witnesses brought before the grand jury. His "unlawful presence" Brizzi contends violated White's Fifth Amendment right to be judged by a fair and impartial jury. Brizzi further argues that the grand jury proceedings were improper because the special prosecutors only allowed members of the grand jury to question three of the eight witnesses that appeared before it. Some of the witnesses, according to Brizzi, were excused and then later recalled to testify further. Brizzi also contends that the special prosecutors failed to present the complete applicable law and excluded exculpatory evidence from them in order to reach a desired outcome. In particular, Brizzi contends grand jurors were not explained fully the standards for determining residency under Indiana law.

Brizzi's motion lays out several deficiencies he found in the indictments returned by the grand jury. The charge of perjury against White as related to his marriage application is based on an immaterial matter in violation of Indiana law Brizzi argues. The indictment on a charge of theft for receiving a salary as a Fishers Town Council member cannot be proven as a matter of law because each of the elements, including that he exercised "unauthorized control" over his pay, cannot be proven on the facts presented according to Brizzi's argument. Several counts of the indictment Brizzi argues constitute double jeopardy under the Indiana Constitution because they are essentially charging White with multiple crimes for the same offense. Brizzi's motion also cites a provision of the Indiana Election Code that prohibits the commencement of a criminal prosecution against a candidate during a pending election as an interference with "free and equal elections." Brizzi acknowledges there is no case law interpreting this particular statute, but the plain meaning of the words in the statute suggest that commencement of a criminal proceeding against a candidate is likely to distract voters, disrupt elections and campaigns and unlawfully influence voters and candidates.

White's trial is scheduled to take place in January of next year after the trial date has twice been delayed. Brizzi only recently took over White's defense from Dennis Zahn. The filing of a motion to dismiss at least some of the charges the grand jury returned against White would have seemed logical, but for whatever reason, Zahn never filed any dismissal motion while he was handling the case. The date for filing a motion to dismiss under the court's previously adopted omnibus schedule had actually already passed when Brizzi took over the case. Brizzi will have to obtain leave of the court to consider dispositive pre-trial motions at this point.

Carmel City Council Moving Forward With Plan To Give Part-Time Councilors Health Insurance Benefits

This is exactly the reason that so many of us within the Republican Party are disgusted by the people within are own party. When it comes down to it, many of our elected Republicans are no better than the Democrats when it comes to using public service as an excuse for self-enrichment. Carmel city councilors are already paid $16,000 a year for their part-time jobs, but that's not good enough. They think they are entitled to gold-plated health insurance benefits like a full-time employee would receive. They conveniently waited until after the May primary election, which is the general election in Carmel for all practical purposes since the entire council is made up of Republicans. The self-dealing councilors are moving forward with the plan despite opposition from the local Republican leader. The Star's Dan McFeely reports:

But Alan Potasnik, a former city councilman and current chairman of the local Republican Party, thinks this is a mistake and said there is a bigger issue at hand.

"My wife and I both (she has also served on the council) feel that if you sign up for one of these positions, for public service, then that is the name of the game," said Potasnik, who has rallied local taxpayers to speak out against the proposal.

"We believe you do not do this expecting to be paid big salaries and benefits. Spending thousands of extra dollars is not what conservative taxpayers would expect."

The council president uses the excuse of other council members in other cities receiving health insurance benefits as an excuse for Carmel's councilors receiving the same benefit:

Council President Eric Seidensticker sees both sides of the issue.

"If the people have permitted the (Hamilton) County Council and County Commissioners to have this benefit, and since they are elected to a similar position as the City Council (most still have full-time jobs as well), the benefits extended to each should be the same," he said. "I also understand that public service was not intended to provide the same luxuries as full-time employment."

The Indiana Association of Cities and Towns said its survey this year of 227 cities and towns showed that only 26 offered health benefits. Among those 26 are major cities such as Indianapolis, Anderson, Bloomington, Fort Wayne and South Bend. In Central Indiana, smaller locales such as Mooresville and Whitestown provide benefits, while the rest do not.

Plainfield council members can opt in to that city's plan but only if they pay the premiums themselves.

This is what disgusts me so much about the Republican Party. It constantly preaches fiscal conservatism and smaller government, but the only people getting ahead in the party these days are self-dealing pigs who want to squeeze as much out of their public service as possible. True fiscal conservatives are driven out of the party because they are principled people.

UPDATE: The proposal passed by a vote of 5-2. Only the two retiring council members voted against the proposal.

Is There More To Come From The Lincoln Plowman Saga?

Lincoln Plowman

Generally speaking, public corruption trials in the Southern District of Indiana have been few and far between. Some observers think the FBI sting operation conducted against Lincoln Plowman was simply an obligatory muscle flexing by the local FBI office to address perceived increasing public restlessness that little was being done to curtail public corruption in the Southern District compared to a number of high profile cases prosecuted in the Northern District of Indiana. That may be the case, and it's hard not to argue that Lincoln Plowman was pretty low hanging fruit. There have been some hints, however, that there may be a wider ongoing investigation of public corruption in Indianapolis that may claim a number of high-profile public officials before it comes to a conclusion.

Something that got little notice at the time was the fact that the investigation into former Perry Township Constable Roy Houchin's badge-selling scheme was being spear-headed by the Public Integrity Section of the Justice Department and not the local U.S. Attorney's office. That was also the case with Lincoln Plowman. The government's lead prosecutor was Richard Pilger, a senior attorney in the criminal division of the Public Integrity Section in Washington. Plowman's conviction included this statement from the Assistant Attorney General in Washington, Lanny Breuer:

“Former Councilman Plowman betrayed the public’s trust by attempting to use his public office for personal gain. He attempted to trade official actions for cash and campaign contributions, but he was caught,” said Assistant Attorney General Breuer. “Corruption at any level of government flies in the face of the ideals upon which our democracy is built. We will simply not allow self-dealing by elected officials to go unpunished.”

It would seem rather odd that the Public Integrity Section in Washington would have time to devote on small fish like Houchins and Plowman unless they had bigger fish to fry. Houchins died unexpectedly the week before he had been scheduled to go on trial in federal court. There were rumors he was about to cut a deal with federal investigators when he was found dead in a parking lot on the city's south side. He supposedly fell and hit his head after passing out and died from a head injury inflicted by his fall. He had been accused of selling badges out of his township constable office. The buyers of his badges reportedly included a who's who of Indianapolis political and business figures.

During the trial of Plowman, the government played hours of recorded conversations between an undercover FBI agent, Mark Aysta, and Plowman, which the government used to prove that Plowman was willing to take money from the undercover agent to grease the wheels for the zoning approval that would be needed to open up a new strip club in Indianapolis. There were some fascinating details that got little notice in the media that emerged during his trial.

While it was widely reported that Plowman had been on the payroll of PT's Showclub in Lawrence since 2005 and had used his position as a City-County Councilor to help influence public debate on the smoking ban debated by the City-County Council over a several year period, there was little mention of who was behind Plowman's hiring. PT's is owned VCG Holdings, a publicly-traded company based in Denver, Colorado that owns about 20 strip clubs around the country. Plowman reported directly to the company's president, Michael Ocello, who is based in the St. Louis area.

Michael Ocello

Ocello is an interesting character. The 50-year-old Ocello got his start in the adult entertainment business working as a male stripper before owning his own strip club and hooking up with Troy Lowerie, the CEO of VCG Holdings, to build the largest strip club empire in the country. Lowerie had his own run-in with the law when he was busted for soliciting a prostitute in Denver recently. Ocello serves as President of the Association of Club Executives, a trade organization for adult nightclubs. He first gained national prominence in 2004 when he launched a national campaign on behalf of the adult entertainment business to defeat the re-election of President George W. Bush. ''We must do everything within our power to help ensure that Bush and his ultra-conservative administration are removed from the White House,'' Ocello wrote in a letter to the adult entertainment industry. Ocello, a Democrat, has also been very politically active in Missouri at both the state and local level on issues of importance to the adult entertainment industry. He gained notoriety when he ran a "Buns For Guns" campaign at his strip clubs, which offered free lap dances to patrons in exchange for their handguns. He reportedly had no takers. Ocello even served a couple of terms on his local school board in Mehlville, Missouri, a suburb of St. Louis.

Ocello seems like an unlikely character for a high-ranking law enforcement officer in the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department and City-County Councilor representing the city's most conservative district to become involved. According to testimony provided during Plowman's trial by Michael Webb, PT's club manager in Lawrence, Plowman had actually sought the job from Ocello of becoming the Indiana Nighclub Association's State House lobbyist, a position held by veteran lobbyist Bill Powers. Ocello, instead, set up a deal for Plowman to work on the industry's behalf in a role that would not require him to register and report as a lobbyist. It seemed Plowman's primary value to the club's $1,000 a month contract with him was to fight a smoking ban ordinance before the City-County Council. Webb testified that VCG helped spread money around on a public advertising campaign that included buying ads on two local radio stations, printing up t-shirts opposing the ban and preparing fliers to distribute in Indianapolis' bars and nightclubs. The company also kicked in $5,000 to the Marion Co. Republicans to help fight the smoking ban, although the issue has never been a partisan issue.

While the Plowman jury heard hours of recorded conversations between Plowman and the undercover agent, there were also noticeable redactions in some of the recorded conversations that the jurors were not allowed to hear. The government's lead attorney, Richard Pilger, disclosed during a short hearing before Judge Larry McKinney following the announcement of the jury's guilty verdict on both counts against Plowman for bribery and attempted extortion, the substance of the redacted conversations. Pilger said Plowman discussed frequent trips he had made to Costa Rica and the fact that he had ties there that made him a flight risk. The government was also concerned that Plowman's training as an undercover officer and the fact that he was found to possess a large number of high-powered weapons and ammunition heightened their concern of flight risk. Judge McKinney ultimately decided to allow Plowman to remain on home detention until his sentencing hearing, which has not yet been scheduled, because he had surrendered his passport and all of his guns and ammunition to federal authorities.

Tim Durham

The fact that Plowman had made frequest trips to Costa Rica raised some eyebrows. Although it is a popular tourist destination in Central America, it is also reknowned for its role as a center for international money laundering activities. A source claims Plowman accompanied indicted Ponzi scheme operator Tim Durham on several occasions aboard a private jet Durham formerly owned. Plowman mentioned during his testimony that he had provided security services for the homes of some Indianapolis business executives, but he did not disclose who those business executives were. Durham was known for hiring off-duty police officers to work at lavish parties he threw at his Geist mansion before his high-flying world came crashing down in November, 2009 when federal agents raided his offices as part of its investigation of the Ponzi scheme he allegedly operated to bilk Ohio investors out of more than $200 million through Fair Finance Company. Durham once hosted a caucus meeting of the Republican councilors in his offices atop the Chase Tower in downtown Indianapolis at which Plowman was elected as the caucus' Majority Leader--the very offices raided by FBI agents in 2009.

A federal bankruptcy trustee for Fair Finance Company has managed to recover only a few million dollars to date, most of which has gone to pay for legal expenses and other professional expenses incurred in its efforts to recover as many assets for the defrauded creditors as possible. Federal authorities are no doubt exploring as many avenues as possible to determine where all of the dollars that flowed out of Fair Finance wound up. Whether any of the money wound up in accounts or investments outside the country is anybody's guess at this point. The bankruptcy trustee this past week reached an agreement with the Marion Co. Republicans and the campaign committee of Lawrence Mayor Paul Ricketts to return about $60,000 Durham had contributed to their campaign committees. PT's Showclub where Plowman supposedly provided security services is located in Ricketts' community of Lawrence.

Officially, U.S. Attorney Joe Hogsett is saying that he will neither confirm nor deny whether there are ongoing investigations arising out of the activities of Lincoln Plowman or other public officials. It is also possible that he doesn't have an answer to that question because authorities in Washington are being very tight-lipped about any ongoing investigations. One thing that is clear, however, is that the investigations to date have been Washington-driven, not locally-driven. Whether there is a role for Plowman to offer testimony in exchange for a lenient sentence remains to be seen. As a witness, he would be of limited value because he is on record as twice saying that he knew of no corruption--the first time during an interview with two FBI agents following his brief detention after accepting $5,000 cash from an undercover FBI agent. He reiterated that position on the witness stand during his own trial. Nonetheless, he could still possibly provide valuable information to federal investigators if he chooses to cooperate.

Why Lincoln Plowman Honestly Believes He Is Innocent

A somber Lincoln Plowman could be heard murmuring to himself that he was innocent as the jury's verdict was read in U.S. District Court Judge Larry McKinney's courtroom finding him guilty of bribery and attempted extortion charges. I find no joy in knowing that Plowman is likely to spend the next few years sitting in the federal penitentiary in Terre Haute. If it's any consolation, he may have the company of two former governors of Illinois to pass away the long days ahead of him.

When Lincoln professes his innocence, I truly think he believes that. After all, he's not new to the rodeo called Marion County politics. As a young military veteran seeking a career in law enforcement, he landed the job he wanted as a deputy in the Marion Co. Sheriff's Department. Growing up in a small town in Illinois, it never occurred to me that anyone would aspire to work as a deputy in Sheriff's Department as a path to political power. Aspiring politicians in Indiana knew otherwise. At one time, the Marion County Sheriff was the highest paid elected official in the entire United States. Yes, he actually earned more than the President of the United States, and that was still true when Plowman joined the office as a new deputy back in the late 1980s.

Under the tutelage of powerful sheriffs like Joe McAtee and Jack Cottey, Plowman learned there were a lot of perks that came with working in the Sheriff's Department. All around him were law enforcement officials making big money off their part-time jobs and businesses, while driving their well-equipped Crown Vics available to them for their personal and private business use. There were also all the added perks of not having to pay admission to nightclubs, getting free drinks and food in many local restaurants and bars and free passes to watch the latest flicks at the local theater. So when Plowman worked his own side deal with a local strip club that provided him $1,000 a month in what he told jurors was "just gravy", he was doing what he had seen so many of his law enforcement buddies do over the years: get their cut.

When Plowman was selected over far-more qualified persons to enjoy the added bonus of serving as a City-County Councilor with a top leadership position and powerful committee chairmanship with control over the city's zoning boards that provided him an additional $18,000 a year, he saw nothing wrong with using that position to get more of "his cut." And why not? Others around him were getting their cut without any legal consequences.

Ryan Vaughn sold his seat on the council to the City's most powerful law firm in consideration for a high-paying job with the firm and shamelessly uses his powerful position every day to benefit his law firm and its clients--even voting on measures that specifically benefit them. Former City-County Council President Monroe Gray got a high-paid no work, no show job with the Indianapolis Fire Department and contracts for his concrete company courtesy of former Mayor Bart Peterson. Jackie Nytes gets multi-million dollar government grants for her "nonprofit" employer and city contracts for her husband's business. A large company puts 50 police officers on its payroll in part-time jobs and uses them as cover for receiving stolen property and to eliminate its competition using their law enforcement powers and walks after cutting a $200,000 deal with Marion Co. Prosecutor Terry Curry, who promised to removed the "for sale" sign from the prosecutor's office. Curry's predecessor, Carl Brizzi, got cut in on real estate deals and got to own a piece of a downtown restaurant/bar despite a specific state law barring him from owning an interest in an establishment with a liquor license. All around Lincoln, people were getting their cut without consequences. Why shouldn't he?

And can we fault Plowman, who is not an attorney, for not knowing that he had to disclose his part-time work as a consultant on his statement of economic interest form he signed under penalties of perjury where it asked if he had any self-employment income? After all, the City-County Council President Ryan Vaughn is an attorney who authored the city's ethics ordinance and yet he filed a statement of economic interest claiming that he does not receive compensation in excess of $5,000 from a business that does business with or solicits business from the city or county despite the fact that his employer bills city and county agencies for hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of legal work every year. Even new-comer to the council Angel Rivera, who is not an attorney, knew how to answer that question correctly on his statement of economic interest.

I know it sounds strange, but I do feel sorry for Lincoln. He's a small fish as they say in a sea of corruption. Prosecuting him does little to shake things up in what has become a very corrupt environment here in Indianapolis and Marion County. He did wrong and he deserves to pay a penalty for his crime. There are many others, however, who deserve the justice he is getting far more. His cut was peanuts compared to the large haul other more powerful figures are making at the public's expense. I truly hope Joe Hogsett meant what he said today when said "nobody is above the law" and that his office will hold accountable those who have a "for sale" sign hanging from their public offices. The public will anxiously await to see if he keeps his word.

UPDATE: In light of reality, I got a chuckle reading this quote from Ryan Vaughn in Carrie Ritchie's story in the Star today:

Council President Ryan Vaughn, who's also a Republican, said he thinks the council's ethics rules are strong enough to dissuade others from crossing ethical boundaries and to punish those who do.

The council tightened its rules two years ago -- a move Plowman supported. It now has an ethics committee that quickly and publicly reviews complaints against council members, Vaughn said.

"It's not that our process failed," he said, "it's that he failed our process."

Whatever. Is that the same explanation for your ethical lapses in judgment, Ryan?

Lugar Wants To Weaken Little Hatch Act

A press release from the office of U.S. Senator Richard Lugar could not be more untimely. Only hours after a federal jury in Indianapolis found a former high-ranking IMPD officer and City-County Councilor, Lincoln Plowman, guilty on bribery and attempted extortion charges, Lugar's office issued a press release announcing his sponsorship of legislation that would weaken the federal Little Hatch Act as applied to law enforcement officials. From Lugar's press release:

Today, Republican Senator Dick Lugar, along with Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), introduced legislation reforming the federal Hatch Act to allow state and local law enforcement officers to run for the Office of Sheriff without having to step down from their job.

“At a time when local law enforcement officers are being called upon to respond to a growing number of criminal, disaster, and homeland security situations, we must ensure that communities have the opportunity to elect the most capable individuals as sheriff,” said Lugar.  “Unfortunately the federal Hatch Act, that is currently applied, often requires capable deputy sheriffs and other officers to leave their current position in order to run for election as sheriff.  The reforms made by our proposal tailor the Hatch Act to the unique situations faced by law enforcement officers.” 

Currently, the federal Hatch Act restricts political activity by state and local employees who have duties in connection with programs financed by federal funds.

The State and Local Law Enforcement Hatch Act Reform Act of 2011 reforms the portion of the federal Hatch Act, as it applies to state and local law enforcement officers.  Because law enforcement agencies at every level of government must coordinate with the federal government for disaster response and homeland security missions and often receive federal funds to do so, many capable officers have been prevented from standing for election as sheriff. 

I've got one simple answer to the law enforcement agencies that want to free up their employees to engage in more political activity during the course of their jobs: Stop taking the federal dollars!

I guess we shouldn't be surprised that this legislation would be offered by Sen. Lugar. He ran one of the most corrupt police agencies in the country when he served as Indianapolis mayor. Anyone who wants to know the real story behind Dick Lugar's years as Indianapolis mayor should read former Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Dick Cady's book, "Deadline: Indianapolis." It recounts at length the shocking corruption Cady and his fellow reporters uncovered in Lugar's police department.