Main Menu

blog advertising is good for you


They Were Just Kidding

No audio blog today, so this one will be in writing.

Apparently Marion County Superior Court Judge Becky Pierson-Treacy is telling fellow judges and lawyers that she and husband Marion County Democratic Chairman Ed Treacy were just joking when they put out their fundraiser invitation that suggested a $1000 contribution will get you a “favorable ruling”.

The Treacys are on vacation in Wyoming, but apparently their phones have been ringing off the hook.

A number of lawyers who dabble in politics have asked why she even needed to raise money in the first place as judges in Marion County are slated and usually win.   And some have gone so far as to contact the Indiana Judicial Qualification Commission and file formal complaints.

Judge Treacy and I have never met personally, however from what I have heard in the legal community she is not going to be winning any judicial scholar awards anytime soon.  Even in 2006 an Indianapolis Bar Association survey of judges had her as the third-lowest approved judge on the bench.

And after seeing the fundraiser flyer she sent out, I am not surprised in the least.

  • Pogden297

    They have to raise money to the very least pay the “voluntary” slating fee.  (The ethical rules actuallly judge candidates from seeking party endorsements and the payment of a slating fee.)  Since the rule was changed, the Marion County parties claim it’s only voluntary.

  • Pogden297

    There will almost certainly be a non-slated D judge candidate run too.

  • John Howard

    Were they kidding?  I wonder.

  • just kidding

    I have had several cases in her court as a police officer. I think she makes awful decisions. That being said. It’s a bad joke. Nothing more.

  • Guest

    RULE 1.2: Promoting Confidence in the

    A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes
    public confidence in the independence,* integrity,* and impartiality* of the
    judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.


    [1]     Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by
    improper conduct and conduct that creates the appearance of impropriety. This
    principle applies to both the professional and personal conduct of a judge.

    [2]    A judge should expect to be the subject of public
    scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if applied to other citizens, and
    must accept the restrictions imposed by the Code.

    [3]    Conduct that compromises or appears to compromise the
    independence, integrity, and impartiality of a judge undermines public
    confidence in the judiciary. Because it is not practicable to list all such
    conduct, the Rule is necessarily cast in general terms.

    [4]    Judges should participate in activities that promote
    ethical conduct among judges and lawyers, support professionalism within the
    judiciary and the legal profession, and promote access to justice for all.

    [5]    Actual improprieties include violations of law, court
    rules, or provisions of this Code. The test for appearance of impropriety is
    whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds a perception that the
    judge violated this Code or engaged in other conduct that reflects adversely on
    the judge’s honesty, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge.

    [6]    A judge should initiate and participate in community
    outreach activities for the purpose of promoting public understanding of and
    confidence in the administration of justice. In conducting such activities, the
    judge must act in a manner consistent with this Code.

  • Anonymous

    I’m sure that paying the slating fee is quite simple when that judge has made a 6-figure annual salary for the past term.

  • Anonymous

    -I still think that legal advertisement sent to defendants in Becky’s court that states the attorney is a “Favorable Ruling Donor” to Becky’s election is going to rake in clients with the hope of availing themselves of that attorney’s ability to get favorable rulings. 

    Will Becky publish the list of “Favorable Ruling Donors” outside her courtroom so that defendants may avail themselves of legal services?

  • John Howard

    The kid who brought that blow up doll to school as a prank was ‘kidding’  and he’s still being looked at by authorities as though it was real.

    A number of people over the years have made improper phone calls and those got taken seriously even when the caller was ‘just kidding.’

  • Scooter

    Nah.  They called it a ‘joke’ after copies of that thing were mailed to Stewart, Letterman, Leno, and a number of news sites…..

  • Anonymous

    …and don’t you think those stupid rulings (many overturned on appeal with the likes of Z. Mae Jimison) you refer to have a reason????

    “Corruption is as corruption does.”

    –The Democrat Machine

  • Dave

    Judges are no less human & that was probably sent to friends o’ the campaign; albeit devoid editing / poor choice of donation descriptions.  

    The hopefully not but possibly bigger problem for taxpayers, could be so based challenges to former rulings involving contributors, etc.  


  • IndyDemocrat

    The fundraiser has been cancelled.

  • MH

    “Fundraiser” and Judge is an unpalatable combination.
    If they cant pay their own slating fees on the salary they make, they don’t deserve to be on the bench.  Financial responsibility is also an example of judgement. 

  • Anonymous

    I believe Gust has this one covered.

  • Comment

    The former governor of Illinois said he was joking too.