The qui tam law is an action brought by a private person on behalf of the State of Indiana. The AG has a very special role in qui tam…he can can choose to take over the case for the Plaintiff or not…including taking over the case for the Plaintiff asking the case be dismissed. I am not aware of any place in the country where the AG or the U.S. Attorney’s offense has reprsented a defendant in a state or federal qui tam lawsuit.

It doesn’t make any sense to do so. The AG can always take over the case for the Plaintiff and asked that it be dismsised.

We would certainly move to strike any appearance by the AG to represent a defendant in an action brought on behalf of the citizens of the state of Indiana. The procedures in the qui tam law need to be complied with.

Zoeller isn’t afraid to go boldly where others fear to tred.

Zoeller: don’t really care.

IMPD’s opinions of their superiors: truly don’t care.

Schools: got me there. Franklin is the same district which built a hugely-expensive football stadium back in 2005, I think…as if winning football records have any bearing on that issue.
As long as we let Superintendents piddle around the edges of budgetary reform, we’ll get garbage-in/garbage-out. They just don’t get it. Never have, and likely never will.
FYI, Abdul, from someone who’s been there–you don’t want to out-source HR functions. If done properly, it’s the backbone of the school system’s continuity. (See: HSE, Wash. Twp., New Pal, Zionsville, et al). Done poorly, it’s the bane of our existence (see: IPS administrative HR, Perry and Franklin ALL H.R.).
The southside school folks have had lousy leadership for a decade or more. The Perry Super and his board went round-and-round then, as I recall, they got rid of him, amid much kerfuffle.
This is what you get with lousy leadership and lapdog school boards: it does ultimately come home to roost.
Scare tactics won’t work. Sadly, the kids lose during these charades. So instead of clearing out the Admin offices, you really expect kids to get to school on their own? It’ll never happen. Half those neighborhoods don’t have sidewalks. In the winter, they’d be walking to the school in the dark.
Hell even Dr. White had the sense to contract-out school buses. They’re awful, they drive like maniacs, and the discipline problems are worse than ever. But it has saved money.

Zoeller: don’t really care.

IMPD’s opinions of their superiors: truly don’t care.

Schools: got me there. Franklin is the same district which built a hugely-expensive football stadium back in 2005, I think…as if winning football records have any bearing on that issue.
As long as we let Superintendents piddle around the edges of budgetary reform, we’ll get garbage-in/garbage-out. They just don’t get it. Never have, and likely never will.
FYI, Abdul, from someone who’s been there–you don’t want to out-source HR functions. If done properly, it’s the backbone of the school system’s continuity. (See: HSE, Wash. Twp., New Pal, Zionsville, et al). Done poorly, it’s the bane of our existence (see: IPS administrative HR, Perry and Franklin ALL H.R.).
The southside school folks have had lousy leadership for a decade or more. The Perry Super and his board went round-and-round then, as I recall, they got rid of him, amid much kerfuffle.
This is what you get with lousy leadership and lapdog school boards: it does ultimately come home to roost.
Scare tactics won’t work. Sadly, the kids lose during these charades. So instead of clearing out the Admin offices, you really expect kids to get to school on their own? It’ll never happen. Half those neighborhoods don’t have sidewalks. In the winter, they’d be walking to the school in the dark.
Hell even Dr. White had the sense to contract-out school buses. They’re awful, they drive like maniacs, and the discipline problems are worse than ever. But it has saved money.

Zoeller: don’t really care.

IMPD’s opinions of their superiors: truly don’t care.

Schools: got me there. Franklin is the same district which built a hugely-expensive football stadium back in 2005, I think…as if winning football records have any bearing on that issue.
As long as we let Superintendents piddle around the edges of budgetary reform, we’ll get garbage-in/garbage-out. They just don’t get it. Never have, and likely never will.
FYI, Abdul, from someone who’s been there–you don’t want to out-source HR functions. If done properly, it’s the backbone of the school system’s continuity. (See: HSE, Wash. Twp., New Pal, Zionsville, et al). Done poorly, it’s the bane of our existence (see: IPS administrative HR, Perry and Franklin ALL H.R.).
The southside school folks have had lousy leadership for a decade or more. The Perry Super and his board went round-and-round then, as I recall, they got rid of him, amid much kerfuffle.
This is what you get with lousy leadership and lapdog school boards: it does ultimately come home to roost.
Scare tactics won’t work. Sadly, the kids lose during these charades. So instead of clearing out the Admin offices, you really expect kids to get to school on their own? It’ll never happen. Half those neighborhoods don’t have sidewalks. In the winter, they’d be walking to the school in the dark.
Hell even Dr. White had the sense to contract-out school buses. They’re awful, they drive like maniacs, and the discipline problems are worse than ever. But it has saved money.

What you fail to see is that where IC 5-11-5.5-3 permits the AG to bring an action or intervene in a False Claims Act case IC 33-23-13-3 requires the AG to defend a prosecutor who is sued for civil damages or equitable relief and the suit would be construed, under notice pleading, as arising out of an act performed within the scope of the duties of the prosecuting attorney. Additionally, IC 33-39-9, calls for the indemnification of the expenses, including a judgment or settlement, incurred in the defense of a prosecutor in a civil action. Since the state will have to pay the expenses of this suit, a win for the attorney/relator will only take money from the state’s coffers and put it into the attorney/relator’s pocket.

if you can admit the vast majority of IMPD is doing their job then why is it not disconcerting (for those who care about such things) that the vast majority of IMPD does not respect the command staff? isn’t that likely to have a direct impact on the main issues you concern yourself: improving the its image and rooting out the bad apples? is it impossible to find a leader for the department that has the respect of the IMPD or can win it? no one at IMPD has a problem with getting rid of the bad officers but we need a command staff that can make decisive decisions that are still reasonable and fair.

IMPD Code 1: How’s that public vetting been workin’ for ya the last month?

Whoever thought up this strategy should be drawn-and-quartered. You’re losing. Sadly. Take all the internal surveys you want. Face it: the survey was taken knowing full-well what the results would be, and the FOP wanted to use it as a bully pulpit, publicly. Which is shameful.

Oh yeah, before I forget it: if any of this morale problem is a leftover from the merger, as I’ve read on some other blogs or IndyStar comment section, get over it.

Shorthand: you don’t root out bad command staff in the public arena. Especially when too many of your fellow LEOs have behaved so miserably in the recent few months.

I’m still a huge LEO fan. Whatever they need to do their jobs well, I’m for. I don’t care about the cost of take-home cars. I want you to have the best communications equipment and capabilities. And the tools to properly protect and train yourselves. I’d take a few more potholes, if the street budget had to be cut, to give you the tools you need. If that’s the choice that needs to be made.

But we have civilian control of IMPD, like we have civilian control of the military, for one reason: accountability. If every PSD and Chief were put to a public vote on a monthly basis, it’s be a Heyday for the criminal element. That’s not how the system works.

Or, put another way, in old-line military parlance: shit flows downhill. Wipe it off, do your job, and be quiet. And pray like hell that the Commander-in-Chief (mayor, president, whomever) is up to the task.

There’s an election next year. The math is on your side, if you want a new commander-in-chief.

Well good. I couldn’t figure out how a Realtor would be involved. Thanks.

“out of an act performed within the scope of the duties of the prosecuting attorney”. Hmm. Are you saying that it is within the duties of a prosecutor to misconstrue the plain intent of the law the Legislature made so as to divert ALL THE MF MONEY to his own personal pockets or the pockets of his cronies? The Mayor of Muncie certainly did not think so and filed suit-I don’t know if the AG helped either side of that suit but the public is/was well served by ceasing the “shot stopping” pigs aks prosecutors. The result in Muncie is still pending although the Democrats there bounced their little piggie in the primary and for some reason the Indiana SC is developing very flat hands from sitting on the final disposition.
It would not be remiss to point out that had the Legislature wanted these funds converted by dishonest prosecutors they would have made no mention at all of common school funds. It is long past time for elected officials to be brought to heel-see Cady’s book on past transgressions right here in River City.
Requiring said prosecutors to disgorge their sticky fingered gains will more than recompense the State for prosecuting THEM. Defending them? Defending them? Defending them? (to paraphrase a former Colt coach). Get a clue.

TA, interesting perspective. While I truly do appreciate your support of IMPD I am at a loss at why you can’t get your head around the concern that the majority of officers have with their leadership. You want to cite that “too many” of the fellow officers are getting into trouble. How many is that “too many” number? There are roughly 1700 men & women that serve on IMPD, the number of officers involved in wrong doing amount to less than 1% of that overall number.

Now I can tell you that the remaining majority of officers who go in each day and serve with integrity and pride are just as tired of hearing about coworkers in the news as the public is. Everyone is sick of hearing it, and the police are as disgusted and ashamed of it as anyone could be.

IMPD rank and file KNOW there needs to be change. They would like to have input on that change for 2 reasons;
1. They are the ones expected to carry it out.
2. They know what will work and what won’t.

Now neither one of those points mean that officers do not want or are not willing to accept changes. The bully pulpit as you like to term it was an attempt to get the public focused on the change and how it is being shoved down everyone’s throat at IMPD. Not the fact that IMPD is a bunch of whining misfits who don’t derserve a say in anything that effects how they do their job or their safety on the job.

Mein Fuhrer, heir Straub (and I refer to him in that context because his personality and ego demand it) may have a Phd in criminal justice, but he is not a police officer, never has been, and lacks the knowledge of how to incorperate his ideas (some of which may be good, others not) into a structure that admittedly needs some change. His “my way or the highway” mentality was a concern long before the events of this past spring and summer that cast a negative light on IMPD.

Straub continues to widen the divide between line officers and the administration with his ridiculous demands for respect when he has none to give his officers. (STAND when I enter a room and prepare for a dressing down) Sorry, that approach may work on kids, but not seasoned officers who are expected to think on their own. While there are a few officers who have lost the respect of the community (and rightly so) the remaining 99+% deserve leadership that respects the job they do, and the challenges they face each day without the threat of disciplinary action for not agreeing with Heir Straub.

The union is trying to get the mayor to open his eyes and see that the rank and file are behind the need for change, and will get behind a workable plan administered by leasdership that is worthy to follow. At the moment, that last part is seriously lacking.

Whatever you say, Mr. “Economist.” LMAO

Typically, our elitist, self-appointed Yoda was trying to demonstrate her/his/its intellectual superiority by attempting to embarrass another–and just got smacked down! What a beautiful thing!

Know,

It’s is a fundamental principle in legal interpretation that specific controls over general. A qui tam action is brought on behalf of the State of Indiana by the plaintiff it has to be. The AG as the State’s attorney can intervene for the Plaintiff, settle it, litigate it or ask that it be dismissed. There is a procedure in the law that deals with the situation where the AG has taken over the lawsuit from the Plaintiff and asks that it be dismissed.

For some reason this AG doesn’t want to follow the procedure in qui tam law and wants to do something unique for all 50 states, represent the state in an action filed on behalf of the state.

Absolutely there is law that lets the AG represents the prosecutors. The specific provisions of qui tam control though.

For some reason this AG doesn’t want to follow the procedure in qui tam law and wants to do something unique for all 50 states, represent the state in an action filed on behalf of the state.

Okay, I didn’t say that quite right…represent the DEFENDANT in an action filed on behalf of the state.

I’m truly interested in this avenue of discussion, Paul.

So, is the AG, once again, going where he shouldn’t?

Paul, why all the interest in forfeitures? That seems a strange field for you to take an interest in. Tell us, do you or your firm have an interest, financial or otherwise, in a forfeiture action? If so, which ones?