OCR Text |
Show ; Jack-Straws By Jdck Wallis ) The reasoning used in permitting a Uintah County Justice of the Peace, charged with misuse of public funds, to settle his case out of court by paying $1500 and resigning has come under state wide criticism. Uintah County Commissioners decided it would be better for the county to have Westside Justice of the Peace Richard Perry voluntarily resign and pay for the missing funds than to fight the case in court with the chances the case might be lost on the grounds of a technicality and still have Perry remain in office. Outsiders see the case differently. In an editorial in the Salt Lake City Deseret News entitled "Is this Justice?" last week, it stated, "Respect for the law in Uintah County has not been observed by allowing a judge to evade the full penalty for his deeds." The editorial stated, "Because of their favored position in administering the law, judges should be held to a higher accountability than laymen for their actions when they break the law. Only by such actions can respect for the law be maintained." By resigning and agreeing to pay back the $1500, Perry has admitted his wrong-doing. But is this enough under the law? Only one incident of falsifying his records is enough to get a criminal conviction, why was the case dropped? The case was given a preliminary hearing before a Circuit Court Judge with extra time given Perry to plea his case. If there had been criminal actions it would appear that the Circuit Court Judge would have continued the case instead of allowing it to be settled out of court. The questions of whether or not justice was served in the particular case is difficult to determine, not knowing all the facts. It appears to be an unfortunate circumstance that is all too common in our Justice of the Peace system. Many arguments have been made concerning the state's JP system. Some have expressed criticism for the way JP's are elected. In Uintah County the election problem was finally solved by dividing the county into JP precincts, one for the east side and one on the west side. Before this a JP could be elected from each of the voting districts in the county and only one or two votes could , elect a Justice of the Peace for that District. No professional or formal training is necessary to become a JP. This makes the JP job all the more difficult to handle. Defense lawyers can give JP's very difficult times until one wonders why we have the JP system at all. But still, JP's do serve a purpose. They handle the small cases that need enforcement that do not need professional training to handle. The more serious and complicated cases are referred to the Circuit and District courts where professional judges preside. A JP job is a tough one to handle. The job has power and it carries a great responsibility of determining right from wrong. The job brings one in contact with the problems of individuals, in-dividuals, it is demanding, time consuming con-suming and doesn't pay very well. Then why do individuals serve as JP's? On the plus side a JP can do a great service to his community. He or she can prevent further minor law violations by the attitude he takes and the way he metes out the law. If he is fair, considerate con-siderate and shows an honest desire to help those who have problems, his services are invaluable to a community. com-munity. A JP can give encouragement, direction and good advice to individuals that can save them from actions that could bring on more problems and cause additional community threats and expense. JP's are leaders in the community, they should be respected, and they should be looked to for sound judgement. We would hope that the recent problem on the Westside will serve as a lesson to all JP's. That those elected seriously accept their responsibilities to their communities, that they will preside with dignity and honesty and be an example as a judge over minor law enforcement activities. |