ILNews

Delayed releases continuing problem at Marion County Jail

Dave Stafford
August 15, 2014
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Two Marion Superior criminal court judges said Friday they continue to be frustrated by delayed releases of arrestees detained after orders have been signed for their release.

Criminal Division 6 Judge Mark Stoner and Criminal Division 8 Judge Amy Jones told the Marion Superior Executive Committee that delayed releases continue despite efforts to improve the processing of release orders by staff at the Marion County Jail.

Stoner noted a case “as recently as this week” in which a person was detained two days after a release order had been signed. Jones said an arrestee recently was held an extra day after a release order from her court.

Stoner said bailiffs in his court have told him “it happens so often they feel like the only way they can deal with it is doing it by paper,” either faxing or delivering release orders. “The duplication staff is doing – it’s just not good,” he said.

Jones said in a recent case jail staff informed her court a release was delayed because an improper code had been entered in a computer system. However, she said an email had been received from the jail confirming receipt of the release order.

“What more do we need to do?” Jones said.

Executive Committee Chairman Judge David Certo said Friday the fresh concerns hadn’t been expressed to him previously.

The problem of delayed releases were raised in November of last year when then-Senior Judge Barbara Collins testified in the judicial discipline case against Marion Superior Judge Kimberly Brown, who ultimately was removed from the bench on almost four dozen judicial misconduct counts.

“There has been this problem forever,” Collins testified as a witness for Brown last year.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT