Contempt charge on hold - Coeur d'Alene Press: Local News

Contempt charge on hold

Judge wants to wait until election challenge is decided

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, August 18, 2010 12:00 am | Updated: 10:17 am, Fri Nov 16, 2012.

COEUR d'ALENE - The election trial comes first.

After that, the court will take up whether Bill McCrory violated a court order and should be held in contempt, 1st District Judge Charles Hosack ruled on Tuesday.

"That should be the focus," Hosack said of the general election challenge suit, with trial scheduled to begin Sept. 13. The contempt of court issue "isn't as important as the court decides the election issues."

McCrory pleaded not guilty to the contempt charges on Tuesday. That trial has been scheduled for 9 a.m. Friday, Sept. 17, a day after the election suit is scheduled to wrap up. If he's found guilty on the two accusations, he could face up to $10,000 in civil fines.

Seat 2 City Council incumbent Mike Kennedy is accusing McCrory of violating a court ordered confidentiality agreement after McCrory filed an affidavit in July detailing some of the 877 anomalies he said he found after reviewing absentee envelopes.

Filing the affidavit was the first violation, Kennedy's attorney Scott Reed argued Tuesday, and the second was posting the affidavit online afterward. Each charge carries up to $5,000 in fines.

But before the court gets that far, it has a summary judgment hearing to possibly dismiss the election case entirely on Aug. 31. If the case continues after that, it will go to trial.

Hosack said he didn't want to complicate the suit that's nearing a year in the making by weighing in on the contempt case.

"There's a lot going on with the election case," he said.

McCrory's attorney, Arthur Macomber, said McCrory didn't violate the order. Filing an affidavit, which was about absentee envelopes and not the ballots, wasn't against the rules, and the two charges are "entirely frivolous," he said.

"There was no order of the court," Macomber said, adding that Kennedy was "dragging" an outside party into the suit. "I don't know why we're at this point."

Once the affidavit was filed it became public record, and The Press published articles about its details, revealing voter identifications. The confidentiality agreement McCrory signed said he would not discuss "any information" he observed, according to a copy of the signed document in court files.

More about

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.

18 comments:

  • RadRevD posted at 8:04 pm on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    RadRevD Posts: 3333

    lets not forget the soap and sleeping against the wall.

    and no...we can no longer trust our elections system.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 5:57 pm on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171


    SPOKESMAN REVIEW DFO SITE:
    FROM SPOKESMAN REVIEW DFO SITE:

    Phaedrus
    Member since December 2008
    Number of comments: 4724

    "Interests stirring thing up"

    Citizens: Phaedrus thinks he can sting like a bee! He obviously works overtime because he has made 236 comments each month of his membership over at Hucks. That's almost 8 comments per day. WOW

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 5:42 pm on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    FROM SPOKESMAN REVIEW DFO SITE:
    Phaedrus on August 17 at 1:49 p.m.
    "Depends." "And I hope McCrory is wearing them when Hosak sends him to the Graybar Hotel for the weekend.

    phaedrus posted at the Cda Press at 9:44 am on Wed, Aug 18 2010
    "I never said anything about jail"

    phaedrus is confused. So busy attacking he can't remember what he wrote.....I agree with you Dan!

     
  • Dan Gookin posted at 5:01 pm on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    Dan Gookin Posts: 656

    Phaedrus makes me laugh!

    He wrote that Bill was going to jail, but he forgot what he wrote
    He said that the election contest would be thrown out of court in February.
    In March.
    In April.
    In May.
    etc.
    But he forgot what he wrote.

    Phaedrus makes me laugh!

     
  • stebbijo posted at 12:12 pm on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    stebbijo Posts: 49

    In the confidentiality agreement McCroy says this, "I will not utilize any of this information in any manner or for any purpose other than this election contest."

    Who is part of the election contest? We the voters are, I would think. McCrory did nothing wrong when he published the information he received by informing the voter who is part of the elections contest. Why he had to sign a confidentiality agreement to get the information is beyond me and then Reed does not file it until he thinks he has a 'gotcha' moment against McCrory.

     
  • Gandookin posted at 9:52 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    Gandookin Posts: 3

    Outing attempts are so classy, Dan, but we would expect nothing less from a class act such as yourself. Pathetic.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 9:51 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    phaedrus, attack, attack, attack is your nick-name! Obviously, you are one of the people that want to stop the lawsuit and stop the people from "Taking Back Their Government" and avoid any discussions about the process.

    Let the election case speak for its self! Our citizens are expecting honest elections, honest govt and living in a healthy environment!

     
  • phaedrus posted at 9:44 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    phaedrus Posts: 96

    This is a civil charge. McCrory will not, repeat WILL NOT see any jail time if he's found guilty.

    Well, you're wrong on three counts:

    1- WHEN he is found guilty
    2- I never said anything about jail. (But $10,000 is nothing to sneeze at. Are you putting up the $$?)
    3- I'm not Thom (But keep hypocritically violating your own principles and keep the outing guesses coming, you might get it right some day.)

     
  • Dan Gookin posted at 9:07 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    Dan Gookin Posts: 656

    Oh, gawd. Legal advice from Wikipedia and Pheadrus. That's rich. Hey Thom: This is a civil charge. McCrory will not, repeat WILL NOT see any jail time if he's found guilty. Civil charge == penalty. Criminal charge == jail. If you practiced law instead of trying to sell real estate you'd understand that.

    Also (and this is one is even better): Explain how Starr Kelso is running for office.

    Or, better yet, slam a personal attack against me, Mary, or Bill. You do that best. Better than selling houses, I hear.

     
  • phaedrus posted at 8:49 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    phaedrus Posts: 96

    please send a contribution to attorney Starr Kelso, P.O. Box 1312, Coeur d’Alene, ID 83816."

    And make sure you get a receipt because the next case will be brought by the State AG for illegal campaign contributions!

     
  • phaedrus posted at 8:45 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    phaedrus Posts: 96

    If you are right, Capnbutch...

    Typical Souza. "IF uou are right...blah blah blah.' He/She is NOT RIGHT, so instead of going down the conjecture trail why not spend the 7 seconds it would take to do the research before you type out completely wrong and idiotic statements.? Just like your former newspaper column that had to make corrections and print retractions because you're only interested in pushing your agenda--right or wrong-- and facts be darned!

    it doesn't matter whether the judge ordered a confidentiality agreement or not, ot whether he had anything to do with the wording. McCrory signed it, McCrory knowingly and intentionally violated it. McCrory showed contempt. Game. Set. Match.

    BTW, was the 'free" publicity he sought at the CDA Press and KREM2 worth the $10,000 fine?

     
  • phaedrus posted at 8:38 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    phaedrus Posts: 96

    t is my understanding...

    Your understanding is incorrect.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court

     
  • WannaBe JD posted at 8:14 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    WannaBe JD Posts: 110

    It appears that the Judge has to cast aside the smoke and mirrors and focus on the real issues, fraud and mismanagement of the election.

     
  • LTRLTR posted at 7:24 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    LTRLTR Posts: 1171

    "This is about getting to the bottom of how our elections are conducted. If you care about honest and fair elections, and having your vote counted accurately and lawfully, please send a contribution to attorney Starr Kelso, P.O. Box 1312, Coeur d’Alene, ID 83816."

    The City of Coeur d'Alene and Kootenai County are working very hard to stop this case. This is a huge "red flag". Now is the time to 'Take Back Our Government". You can help by sending a contribution to support this case going forward.

     
  • Mary Souza posted at 6:53 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    Mary Souza Posts: 779

    If you are right, Capnbutch, why then would Mike Kennedy be able to bring charges of contempt? Wouldn't that charge have to come from the judge?

    And, by the way, the judge never ordered a confidentiality agreement and he had nothing to do with the wording of such. That all came from the County attorneys who, inappropriately, started working closely with the Kennedy team right from the outset of this whole thing last November. And why did the Election Challengers, including their attorney, have to sign the agreements but none of those on the Kennedy side did so?

    Notice that this article says Bill McCrory published the info AFTER it appeared in the newspaper. It was already public information!

    Bill McCrory is one of the most honest, upstanding men of integrity I've ever met. Thanks, Bill, for working for fair elections in our community!

     
  • local res posted at 6:43 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    local res Posts: 1157

    Can we trust any election results from the city or any that the county conducts?

     
  • Thaddeus posted at 6:13 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    Thaddeus Posts: 232

    Does "Bipolar" Bill McCorky always look like that?

    No wonder he's so cranky all the time.

     
  • capnbutch posted at 5:45 am on Wed, Aug 18, 2010.

    capnbutch Posts: 729

    The story contains this very odd phrase, "...pleaded not guilty to the contempt charges... "

    It is my understanding that the declaration of contempt is reserved for judges alone and contempt cannot be pleaded. The concept of contempt allows a judge to force proper behavior in and about the court. When a judge establishes contempt, there is no opportunity for discussion. Contempt cannot be appealed.

    If this is a change in American law, it is big news and deserves a story of its own.

     
default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard

Stocks