Sitting Municipal Judge Featured on Campaign Literature for Mayor Slay
We often think of the judicial branch of government as being separate from the executive and legislative branches. Generally that is true. But not in St. Louis.
A recent mailer for incumbent Francis Slay features Judge Margaret Walsh being “tough on crime.”
Walsh is a judge in the city’s court system and was appointed by Mayor Slay. Judges are often appointed, but you’d never see a US or Missouri Supreme court judge on campaign literature for the President or Governor that appointed them.
Judge Walsh helped get the city in hot water over the treatment of the homeless in 2004. From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch September 24, 2004:
A municipal judge should not have prescribed community service work for people accused — but not convicted — of nuisance crimes, said Jeff Rainford, chief of staff to Mayor Francis Slay. He pledged that the tactic will not be repeated.
The announcement will not stop two lawsuits that target the practices, lawyers who filed them said. Those suits generally claim that the city is trying to drive the homeless out of downtown by violating constitutional rights. U.S. District Court Judge E. Richard Webber held hearings Friday and Monday on the alleged mistreatment.
A big part of the federal case concerns an order, signed July 2 by Chief Municipal Judge Margaret J. Walsh, that allowed the jail to release people who were arrested for certain offenses during the July Fourth weekend if they performed eight hours of community service work. As a result, about two dozen suspects picked up litter around Lucas Park downtown without ever seeing a judge.
The lawyers compared it to slavery and allege it was part of a strategy to keep the homeless away from Fair St. Louis.
Rainford said Judge Walsh signed the special work-release order at the request of Bob Crecelius, director of the city’s probation and parole office. Rainford said city jail administrators were afraid of being swamped by arrests during the fair and wanted a safety valve.
Walsh said she signed the order “in a hurry” shortly before the fair began. She and Rainford said that, in the future, the city court will establish special hours during the fair to handle cases. Rainford said the city has no plans to discipline Crecelius or Walsh.
The involvement of the Slay administration in the municipal court worrys me.
This and other topics will be discussed tonight at The Royale:
Last week we had a casual discussion about the upcoming city primary. We will be continuing this next Monday, the 23rd, with a new sponsor to the event, the Saint Louis Beacon’s Bob Duffy offering some structured conversation. Along with the Beacon, we will also have hosts Steve Patterson of urbanreviewstl.com, Dave Drebes of the Arch City Chronicle and the Missouri Scout, and DJ Wilson of KDHX’s Collateral Damage.
A discussion of race at a time of political engagement in St. Louis, co-sponsored by The Royale and the St. Louis Beacon. February 23, 2009.
Agenda:
The purpose of this meeting is to encourage a civilized discussion of the racial tensions and progress in race relations in the St. Louis region – a topic that is always relevant here but even more so at a time when the Mayoral election in the City of St. Louis brings racial politics into high relief, if for no other reason than the fact that the incumbent is white and the opposing candidates are African American. The discussion is meant to initiate a long a searching examination of the topic. Its complexity assures nothing will be solved in the course of the evening,The Evening:
Steven F. Smith and Robert W. Duffy, proprietor of the Royale and associate editor of the St. Louis Beacon respectively, will moderate the discussion. Smith will introduce Duffy, who will discuss the background and the formation of the Beacon and will mention past collaborations with the Royale, including coverage by Smith et al of the Inauguration in January.Duffy will explain that in the organization phase of the St. Louis Beacon, one issue was mentioned constantly as being of paramount interest and concern to the Beacon staff, in terms of providing in depth coverage of the enormously complicated issue of Race. The Cookie Thornton Story in Kirkwood was an immediate concern as we just begun publication. The story and issues related to it have continued to be discussed in depth on the site.
Smith will explain his commitment to making the Royale a convivial meeting place for the civilized discussion of political, social and cultural issues of concern and relevance to the region. His commitment is based on a long standing interest in the revival of the city proper and the sustained economic and cultural health of the region.
Smith or Duffy will throw out an initial question: How seriously is race to be taken as an issue in this election, and Why? Or, How is the region enriched by racial diversity and how do racial issues have negative impact? Or, How do you personally deal with racial prejudices in your daily personal and business life?
Smith and Duffy will caution the audience that although heated discussions are encouraged, this is not Bill Reilly or even Jon Stewart, but a situation providing a place for and encouragement of honest but respectful discussion.
The partisan primary is March 3, 2009.
I got this in the mail over the weekend, too, but didn’t (and still don’t) think too much about it. One, I’d expect any judge to be “tough on crime”. Two, endorsements from people I don’t know, either personally or because they’re “famous” for some good reason(s), carry little weight in my decision-making process. Three, I don’t think government employees give up their rights to have opinions when they’re hired. Four, unless Mayor Slay is having to pursue cases in her court, I don’t really see a conflict of interest. And five, I see nothing to object to about the core statement, that Slay found the money to keep more criminals off the street (unless for some reason the statement is NOT true). Sure, he appointed her, and in some ways, she “owes” him, but the Mayor gets to appoint a lot of people, and I’d expect most of them to agree with him on many issues. Does the formerly-homeless veteran (in other Slay ads) have to live up to the same “standard”? He wasn’t, obviously appointed by the Mayor, but he’s both a former government employee and apparently receiving direct benefits from the city. Personally, I’d rather focus on the substance of the various candidates’ positions, and spend less time trying to spin “appearance” issue like these . . .
“We often think of the judicial branch of government as being separate from the executive and legislative branches. Generally that is true. But not in St. Louis.”
.
Not following your logic here. Numerous aldermen have endorsed Slay. Does that mean that there’s no separation between the legislative branch and the executive branch? On a day-to-day basis, I think there’s more potential for a conflict of interest with a mayor and an alderman than with a mayor and a municipal judge.
Yeesh. I wouldn’t want to find that gal staring at me from my mailbox. Glad I have an Irene sign out….. 🙂
We shouldn’t assume judges to be “tough on crime.” Some might believe the warehousing of drug offenders to be ineffective.
Personally I’m glad the judge pointed out Mayor Slay’s views on crime and punishment as they are not in agreement with mine.
Nothing in the City Charter or Missouri Constitution prohibits her endorsement. Personally this seems like a non issue. We shouldn’t really contrast municipal court with the Federal or Supreme Court as their cultures are far different than that of a machine politics city.
@Otto Alderpersons are elected by the people and not appointed by the mayor.
@Duckworth – there needs to be a major change in what people accept is appropiate on the municpal level. There shouldn’t be the level of politics involved like there is. We need to tranparency that is on the higher levles of government.
We have got to stop accepting dirty politics as being okay. “Oh, that just the way it is.” It doesn’t have to be.
I’m not so sure about this claim of adding 450 new jail spaces. I know alot of City employees and they are saying this is an outright live.
The judge in question doesn’t see serious crimes like she is trying to state in the literature.
Why aren’t residents on the Northside being sent these mailings? There have been several mailings made to Southside residents, but only one made to those on the Northside.
Slay is in trouble. Why wouldn’t he lie? I have gotten a TON of mailings, apparently I’m in a swing area. I don’t think it will work. Slays days are numbered. He has angered too many people. The idiots at the Post-Disgrace keep trying to ram the 2001 Irene Smith incident down peoples throats, it won’t work. She gets out too much, meets too many people. She was impressive at the Marine Villa meeting last night, too bad I couldn’t get to the Royale.
Turd, you’re kidding, right? Slay in trouble? Are you serious? People need to get real. Slay will win this election in a landslide.
.
That’s why McMillan didn’t enter the race. He’s waiting for a clean slate of new candidates. Slay is a powerhouse and McMillan knows it. He doesn’t want to make a strategic mistake at this point in his political career. McMillan has a bright future and is waiting for the appropriate time. At that stage, he might even get a Slay endorsement, and lots of southside votes.
.
Ask the average city resident, the average VOTER, and you will hear 70-80 percent approving of Slay. Most would consider Smith a non-serious contender. Irene will get maybe 20-25 percent of the vote.
.
Slay wins with huge majorities on the south side, maybe 10% of the northside vote, and clear wins in the central corridor. Don’t get me wrong, I like Irene. She is bright, articulate, and a voice for progress. She is a good person. But even I can predict the outcome of this election, and I am dumb. Dumb me.
“@Otto Alderpersons are elected by the people and not appointed by the mayor.”
.
The voter turnout in some wards is so low that it’s almost not true to say that alderpersons are elected by the people. I think alderpersons are “appointed” all the time in the City of St. Louis.
.
In any event, if Mayor Slay somehow ends up in Judge Walsh’s court (for a traffic ticket or something similar), I agree that Judge Walsh should recuse herself (which is the proper remedy when a judge has a conflict of interest).
I wouldn’t be so sure, dumb me. Irene got 31% running in 2005. There are several things that could work her way:
-Public perception of the “incident” in 2001 rapidly faded. I’d be willing to bet a few people have forgotten about it. Just as well, since it doesn’t matter in the larger scheme of things.
-However, public perception of Slay has gone negative. He has made a lot of waves, a lot of enemies. Black turnout is almost certainly going to be higher this time. The same for teachers and parents. Know how the Daly’s stay in power in Chicago? “Don’t make no waves, don’t back no losers.” Slay has violated at least one of those rules.
I think there are a lot of things that could swing in Irene’s favor. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think that the mayor’s seat is safely hers. I just don’t agree with the “Oh she’ll never win so don’t even bother voting” crap from the Post-Disgrace. 🙂
I apologize for being somewhat off-topic, but in regards to the homeless issues DT, I am not finding issue with Project Hero. I am not saying there isn’t something that some are rightfully concerned about, I am just not finding it based on what was printed in the Post today. Can someone explain to me what is at issue with some they are quoting? Thanks.
Let us be very clear about what took place. The fact of the matter is people who were not convicted of a crime or were ever seen by a judge in a court were sentenced on the spot to punishment to begin at once. This was found unconstitutional in Federal court and the people sentenced by virtue of ‘city decree’ were declared innocent and the city was punished to the tune of $80,000.00. The very eloquent Brief written by the Federal Judge began with the words, “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times” and was clear about how the constitutional rights of citizens were deliberately ignored by this city government and this particular judge. SHAME ON THEM! Firecrackers were thrown by city policemen at people they thought homeless. People thought homeless were rounded up and sent out to clean up the trash of other citizens and some of them were not only not homeless they missed worked. Keep in mind this is when the downtown area is crowded with people who are all drinking from open containers which IS against city law. Like it or not….the constitution does not require an address to be a citizen of this United States and receive all the protections it guarantees.
The Downtown Partnership was also a partner with the city and this judge in this fiasco.
I think her idea of “tough on crime” is to be utterly rude to people in her courtroom. It is appalling and a charade. The time i saw her in action, she walked in, mumbled her instructions about how the proceedings were going to go down, then belittled everyone who didn’t follow these mumbled instructions. And continued to belittle EVERYONE. I will not vote for Slay because of this woman.