Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Reprimand For Embezzling Probate Judge

The South Carolina Supreme Court has reprimanded a former probate court judge basded on the following findings of fact:

On or between April 19, 2007, and December 21, 2007, respondent embezzled public funds while working as a Newberry County Associate Probate Judge.  In mitigation, respondent submits that she took the money to pay for medical expenses and to pay deposits needed for surgery and medical testing.  Further, respondent submits that, at the time she took the money, she hoped to repay the funds at a later time. When confronted by agents from the South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division (SLED), respondent confessed and accepted responsibility for her actions. 

On April 28, 2008, respondent was arrested and charged with embezzlement of public funds over $1,000.00.  Respondent entered Pre-Trial Intervention (PTI) and, as a condition of PTI, made full restitution.  Respondent has successfully completed PTI and her criminal record has been expunged. 

The court's order contains the following condition:

Respondent shall not apply for, seek, or accept any judicial position whatsoever in this State without the prior express written authorization of this Court after due service on ODC of any petition seeking the Court’s authorization. 

This was a consent disposition. (Mike Frisch)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2009/11/the-south-carolina-supreme-court-has-reprimanded-a-former-probate-court-judge-basded-on-the-following-findings-of-fact.html

Judicial Ethics and the Courts | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef0120a66e3bce970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Reprimand For Embezzling Probate Judge:

Comments

More than bar and medical review boards couching malpractice within the veil of professional standards committees, malpractice suits alone if not frivolous bring the strength of accusations which if found valid produce the presumption of criminal negligence if not intentional wrongdoing. If the professions are to be more than mere disguises, the industry must discipline by mandatory license removal, and subjection to criminal enforcement where warranted.

Ethics violations for industries who tout ethics must be serious or they are mere "ideals" of the profession which few are expected to achieve or maintain. Professions without professional standards and no intention of meeting them are mere quacks, regardless of the industry.

Posted by: Pat | Nov 22, 2009 9:48:39 AM

Post a comment