|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
December 16, 2004Judge Haley: I did nothing inappropriateHe was 'taken aback' by U-M ticket offerBy andRecord-Eagle staff writers TRAVERSE CITY - The chief judge of the 86th District Court said he did not act improperly by accepting free football tickets from a defense attorney, according to a written response to a judicial watchdog group's allegations. The state Judicial Tenure Commission accused Judge Michael Haley of impropriety for accepting a pair of University of Michigan football tickets from attorney and former judge Richard Benedict. Haley, who in January acknowledged his actions created a bad appearance, was sentencing a Benedict client when the ticket swap occurred. "Under the facts of this case, the Judicial Tenure Commission will find he did not violate any duties or responsibilities of a judge," said one of Haley's attorneys, Brian Einhorn of Southfield. When Benedict approached Haley to offer the tickets, Haley was "surprised and taken aback by Mr. Benedict's inappropriate action," according to his response. But Haley said he had no responsibility to rebuff or admonish Benedict. "Maybe (Benedict) is a little too casual, and he probably does things he shouldn't do, but that doesn't translate to Judge Haley was wrong in not taking some action," Einhorn said. Haley also denies his actions eroded public confidence in the judiciary. Antrim deputy Terry Skurnit reported the ticket incident and Haley subsequently banned him from his courtroom. Haley's response focuses on alleged friction between himself and Skurnit and challenges Skurnit's credibility. "I don't know why they are attacking my credibility as a witness," Skurnit said. "Haley doesn't deny it happened." The second count of the complaint accused Haley of misrepresentation and lack of candor for denying he sent a letter to Antrim Sheriff Terry Johnson that banned Skurnit from the courtroom. Haley's response includes an affidavit from his secretary stating Haley asked her in February for copies of all letters regarding Skurnit. She told Haley there were no such letters. She found the letter when asked by Haley again in June, citing a "filing error" for her inability to find it the first time.
|
|
