sds71
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 13,900
- Reaction score
- 150,051
I agree. The not guilty plea tells us he's going to fight this. I don't think he will resign from his job either. Miller said they believe he is in the "process of losing his job" - that's not a resignation!MOO Stines is not psychotic and appears to be in full possession of his faculties.
yep, I picked up on that as well. Losing one's job is an indication they have no intention of giving it up voluntarily.I agree. The not guilty plea tells us he's going to fight this. I don't think he will resign from his job either. Miller said they believe he is in the "process of losing his job" - that's not a resignation!
Perhaps it should be addressed. My guess is that as an elected official, a governor can not remove another elected official. Can you imagine if the governor was a different party from many of the sheriffs and had the "to the victor belong the spoils" mentality? A governor would be able to replace officials elected by their own voters in a smaller area. That would not work.Years ago it used to be that sheriffs in Kentucky were limited to only serving one term in office for four years and couldn't run for reelection.
Now they can serve more than one term in office.
I don't know if anyone has to meet certain legal qualification requirements before they run for election or are appointed to the Sheriffs Office in Kentucky nowadays.
I do know that years ago anyone in Kentucky could be appointed Sheriff by a county judge executive.
I've heard of death in office vacancies from years ago where the county judge executive appointed the spouse of the deceased sheriff to serve out the remainder of the deceased's sheriff's term in office.
My thinking is that the state legislature may have to update their laws as to dealing with qualifications for being a sheriff in Kentucky, situations involving sheriffs that are charged with a violent crime, protocols for removing a sheriff from office and filling those vacancies.
It might be more simpler to have the Kentucky Attorney General rather than the Kentucky Governor or the Kentucky General Assembly deal with the issues of removing sheriffs from office and filling the vacancies with someone that is legally qualified to be a sheriff in Kentucky.
Years ago when the county was dry, folks had three options to get their alcohol in a dry county.This is an excellent point. I would imagine that a county wide alcohol sale vote could motivate a lot of people on both sides of the argument. The revenue for a struggling county could be substantial and also for businesses that serve and sell alcohol. If the county is as small as reported I don't see where there are many increase the revenue opportunities.
I'm a supporter of public defenders for anyone who cannot afford one, of course. I hate the thought a family losing everything to legal counsel for a loved one.Miller: Sir, it is my understanding that he is in the process of loosing his job, his family cannot afford to hire him counsel.
Allow me to add something to the list of possibilities - something physical that may be undiagnosed. Something I would never have known about until this past year.MOO Stines is not psychotic and appears to be in full possession of his faculties.
I honestly wouldn't put much measure into what he was wearing
I understand what you're saying, and you do bring up very good points about the pitfalls of having either a governor or attorney general appoint a county sheriff.Perhaps it should be addressed. My guess is that as an elected official, a governor can not remove another elected official. Can you imagine if the governor was a different party from many of the sheriffs and had the "to the victor belong the spoils" mentality? A governor would be able to replace officials elected by their own voters in a smaller area. That would not work.
I'm not sure I'm explaining this right. But there's a good reason a governor can not remove a sheriff. I'm not sure how the Attorney General of a State works. However, if he's elected . . . well, I'm not sure it's a good idea that he have dominion over county officials.
And, just as a wonder: would Sheriff Stines have had the authority to arrest a sitting judge who was also elected?