Judicial Conduct Board Disciplines Judge Pease

Judicial Conduct Board Disciplines Judge Pease By Cornelia Cesari

The Vermont Judicial Conduct Board (JCB) last week imposed what it called “deferred discipline” against Orange County Assistant Judge Prudence Pease.

While not bringing formal charges against the controversial judge, the JCD statement expressed “concern” over two complaints about her.

Atty. Robert Keiner of Middlebury, chair of the JCB, said the first concern “involved a case in which Judge Pease sat as a traffic court judge in May of 2007. In that case, it appeared to the Board that the judge may have shown bias in favor of one of the parties.

“In the second case, it appears that the judge publicly commented about a confidential employee matter,” Keiner said.

“Consequently, the Board and Judge Pease have entered into a Deferred Discipline Agreement.”

The agreement requires Judge Pease to take a course in judicial ethics; once completed, the remaining two complaints will be dismissed.

The JCB report came less than a month after a May 8 letter from eight Orange County legislators to the JCB, urging immediate investigation of complaints against Judge Pease, and saying that the legislators “are considering drafting articles of impeachment.”

The letter described 13 specific allegations falling into the categories of “misappropriating funds, engaging in malicious and harassing behavior toward the County Clerk and other county employees, and engaging in behavior that is inappropriate to and unbecoming of the office of assistant judge.”

Long-Awaited Ruling

The long-awaited JCB ruling was a response to multiple complaints dating back almost two years. Keiner said that several of the complainants “referenced the same behavior on the part of the judge, all of which boiled down to seven allegations of misconduct.

“Of those seven, five were determined to be without merit and have been dismissed.” Keiner declined to comment about any of the charges that were dismissed.

The board also did not release any details about the two complaints that were “of concern.” Its rules preclude divulging any information about complaints unless formal charges are brought against a judge (as in the recent case against Windsor Co. Asst. Judge William Boardman). Only then is the full report of findings was published.

Keiner also declined to comment as to whether any complaints remain pending against Judge Pease; whether any or all of the 13 allegations listed in the legislators’ letter were investigated is also unknown.

At this point, the JCB has not filed formal charges against the judge nor has she admitted misconduct.

Pease did not return The Herald’s telephone messages left for her this week.

Controversy Continues

The JCB’s report may not end the controversies surrounding the Orange County Court, however. Jean MacDonald of Vershire, issued a statement on behalf of a bipartisan group of citizens hailing from several county towns. She said her group includes elected members of each party, including the chairs of both the county Democratic and Republican parties, acting as private citizens.

“We were disappointed because, although she was found to be guilty, Ms. Pease is reported to have said that she is ‘very pleased’ with the board’s decision,” MacDonald’s statement said. “When a judge has been found guilty of judicial misconduct, you have to be concerned when she does not express any regret or remorse.

“An apology to the people of Orange County would have been more appropriate.”

The statement called on the legislators who wrote the earlier letter to proceed to draft articles of impeachment.

Rep. Jim Masland of Thetford, however, did not seem inclined, immediately following the ruling, to pursue impeachment.

“We don’t know how the Judicial Conduct Board conducted their inquiry but have no reason to second-guess them,” he told The Herald. “Barring further evidence, I don’t think there is anything further for me to do.”

Rep. Phil Winters of Williamstown said he also hopes for an end to the controversy.

“I would certainly hope [the ruling] will bring some closure to this,” he said. “Whether the Judicial Conduct Board’s actions bring better working conditions to the Court, only time will tell.”

But some citizens of Orange County do not seem to be looking for quick closure—even after a case that has been dragged on for two years through county budget hearings, state police investigations, scrutiny by the state auditor and attorney general, and now the JCB.

Jean MacDonald spoke for a that group this week when she declared, “Ms. Pease says, ‘the process is over.’ We don’t agree.”