.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sunday, February 26, 2006

 
UTAH TO REMOVE JUDGE FOR BIGAMY

The Associated Press has just reported that the Utah Supreme Court has ordered that a small-town judge with three wives be removed from the bench. The court unanimously agreed with the findings of the state's Judicial Conduct Commission, which recommended last year that the judge, Walter K. Steed, be removed for violating the state's bigamy law.

According to the AP Judge Steed said he accepted the decision. "I had hoped that the court would see my case as an opportunity to correct the injustices that are caused by the criminalization of my religious beliefs and lifestyle, and I am disappointed the court did not reach those issues in my case," he said in a statement.

Judge Steed has served for 25 years on the Justice Court in Hildale, a polygamist community in southern Utah. These judges are appointed by city councils or county commissions to handle misdemeanors. Judge Steed legally married his first wife in 1965, according to court documents. He married the second and third wives in religious ceremonies in 1975 and 1985. The three women are sisters.
We take no position on whether polygamy should remain illegal. But given that Hildale polygamists have been under scrutiny for years, one has to wonder how a judge managed to openly violate the law for thirty years without being caught. More important, one has to be concerned about whether anyone in this community received justice in a family court system that apparently applies a different set of laws than anywhere else in the country.

Comments:
This is interesting information. However, the distinction between the Arizona and Utah cases is that there was no attempt to be secretive in Utah. While there may well be other cases of corruption in other parts of the country, we do not ordinarily see the law broken so openly and over such a long period of time.
 
Our position has always been that the system needs to be modified so that only those who are both able and unwilling to pay can be incarcerated for nonpayment of support. Remember, incarceration is supposed to be for contempt, not for debt. Therefore, if Judge Rivers ever incarcerated someone who was only a debtor but not a contemnor, then he was misapplying the law.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?