After reading The Blade's recent article on Jim Bishop, I am dumbfounded that a man running for judge could be so arrogant to simultaneously act as a defense attorney for his wife Maureen Bishop, in the same court that he was appointed prosecuter. I would call that a major conflict of interest when your fellow co-workers are prosecuting a case against you.
Average Joe Citizen that Mr. Bishop is campaigning to represent on the Municipal Court would never be able to strike up a sweet-heart deal like that on the side.
However, even neglecting all that, Bishop told an out-and-out lie that the Blade was unable to pick up on (link to article):
"Mr. Bishop...added that he accompanied his wife to court but did not represent her in the case."
Contrast that with the official court transcript:
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| bishoplie.jpg | 21.87 KB |
| bishop2.jpg | 98.62 KB |
...out of mole hills, i.e. American politics.
I agree the statement he gave to the Blade reporter is contradicted by what the transcript says, yet the Law Director stated that a City Attorney can represent family or friends as long as they charge no fee. Should they be able to is a valid question, but they are allowed to under the present system.
Given the Law Director's ruling, I can't claim to understand why Bishop did not just tell the Blade reporter that yes, he represented his wife and that he is allowed to do so rather than to create a situation where he said one thing and the transcript implies another.
I did some research on the other issue raised in the Blade article on the house sale and it did involved a very complex case concerning an out of state debt/lien. Between Aeris records and Lucas County Common Pleas Court records it was clear that situation was a very unusual one.
I don't believe that representing his family is the issue. He did engage in a conflict of interest: 2 city prosecutors in the same court making a deal to benefit one's wife is against the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.7. It appears that Bishop represented both the city as a prosecutor, and his wife, a defendant being prosecuted by that city.
If you do a Blade archive search on this guy, he does not seem to be the most ethical person in the world. He was basically sued by Lourdes College to get there money back after they alleged that he coerced a 91 year old lady to sign over her life savings to him. She initially gave I believe 2 million dollars to different catholic charities before she strangely signed everything over to her lawyer (Bishop) two weeks before she died, when she was legally blind.
I was not aware of any of this when I posted my poll on the Muni Court Race a week ago, and decided to do some research only after I saw how overwhelming of a lead Goulding had in a democrat town. If the average voter is aware of Jim Bishop's unethical activities then I can certainly see why he faired so poorly in the poll.
I agree people have raised concerns with Jim Bishop being a judge, and that Michael Goulding has the respect of many in the community as well as the Bar Association if you look at the numbers that were released when it came to "highly recommended and recommended" for Judge Goulding, but it appears that the Law Director took the position that Bishop could represent his wife on the traffic issue and he was not acting as the prosecutor on that case. Quinterro was the prosecutor...