Louisiana Supreme Court in turmoil

Currently the members of the Louisiana Supreme Court are fighting like school children. This all stems from the announcement by Chief Justice Kitty Kimball that she intends to retire in January 2013.

In a very rare event, the justices have essentially aired their dirty laundry and disagreements publicly. Associate Justice Bernette Joshua Johnson by all practical accounts, who has been on the court since 1994, would ascend to the post vacated by Chief Justice Kimball upon her retirement. Right?

Not so fast, Associate Justice Jeffrey Victory has asserted that he is next in line to serve as Chief Justice, having been elected to the court in 1995. You would think it's a no brainer with Johnson being elected in 1994 and Victory in 1995, right? Wrong!

Justice Victory is arguing that when Justice Johnson ascended to the court, she was essentially a Court of Appeals judge, on loan or sitting "ad-hoc" to the Supreme Court, to be in compliance with a federal consent decree. The argument now is whether Justice Johnson's appointment afforded her the same privileges that the other "elected" justices received. The Louisiana Legislature addressed this question in 1997 in which they stated, "Any tenure on the Supreme Court gained by such judge while so assigned shall be credited to such judge". This would lead us to believe that there is no question to the validity of Justice Johnson's argument. Unfortunately, that's not the case here as Justice Victory is arguing that this violated the Louisiana Constitution and therefore the consent decree and subsequent actions were illegal.

Now I'll go into what's at stake, if determined to be the longest serving member of the Supreme Court, Justice Johnson will face a very tough time, as she has been pitted against all six of her current colleagues as they have met without her to discuss the problem, causing her to file an injunction in the Federal Courts to prevent arguments on the subject. Also at stake is history. Prior to Justice Johnson taking office, Justice Revius Ortique was the appointed the "Ad-hoc Justice". Justice Ortique went down in history as the first African American Justice of the Louisiana Supreme Court. Ironically, Justice Ortique was never elected to the post and was only appointed to comply with the consent decree.

So I ask, if the courts decide that Justice Johnson's assertion that she is next in line to become Chief Justice is invalid because the consent decree violated the Louisiana Constitution, does that also negate Justice Ortique's standing as the first African American Justice? If so, that would make Justice Johnson, in addition to being the first African American Female Justice, the first African American Justice since she was elected to the bench in 2000.

Personally I can't wait to see how the courts rule. However, I believe that either way, there will be severe consequences and bad blood for years to come on the Louisiana Supreme Court.

PANO Poll of New Orleans Police Officers

Today Dr. Peter Scharf of Tulane University, in conjunction with the Police Association of New Orleans released the results of a poll of members of the New Orleans Police Department. This poll questioned officers about their feelings about working conditions, their feelings for their supervisors, new initiatives implemented by Supt. Serpas, etc.

Before Supt. Serpas had the opportunity to review the complete results, he issued a statement saying that the poll by PANO was "predictably negative". Instead of the chief making positive comments about how he plans to use the results of the poll to make things better for his officers, he took to the defensive, as usual.

If over 400 officers were brave enough to complete the survey, I'd venture to say they are supported by the majority of their brethren that failed to complete the survey, for whatever reason.

Again, Supt. Serpas is failing to take a prime opportunity to boost the morale of his subordinates. Instead, he is stuck on stupid. Just because you believe everything is okay in the department, doesn't mean it's true Chief. Get off your high horse and recognize that other people have the ability to prepare statistics and analyze data. You aren't the only person that has a terminal degree (i.e. PhD, EdD, etc.), and as a matter of fact, the other people earned their degrees, what about you? Learn to accept criticism from other sources and stop believing your own sanctimonious press!!

Just my $.02

New Orleans Police Policy on Field Interview Cards (F.I.C.)

So an article was released today by the Times Picayune that discussed questions on the NOPD's policy of completing Field Interview Cards on all parties they come in contact with.

As always, Supt. Serpas made the argument that the department is doing nothing wrong. He stated that "officers are utilizing judgment in accordance with law and professional practice."

How can this be the case when officers have been ordered to complete and FIC anytime they conduct a criminal history or driver's license check of a subject, even in instances involving minor traffic infractions or traffic crashes.

This is all coming out after the Legal Aspects instructor in the NOPD Academy, P/O IV Larry Cager sent a memorandum to Chief Serpas and his top advisors that the practice was illegal and in violation of the 4th Amendment. I should note that Officer Cager has a Juris Doctorate and was admitted to the Louisiana State Bar Association on April 18, 1997.

Evidently Officer Cager has some knowledge on the subject and should be taken seriously. More so because Officer Cager is the sole instructor for Legal Aspects for the NOPD and teaches every academy class and those completing in-service training.

Step up and admit your policy was wrong Chief. Don't stand behind the members of the department when your acts are found to be wrong.

Just my $.02