It’s no secret that the state of Indiana is trying to be smarter with its money during this roller-coaster ride sometimes
called the great recession. It’s behaving just like every other state in the union and every citizen of the republic.
Lawyers are no exception; the practice of law ultimately is a business. So you’ll doubtless be familiar with the phrase
“trimming the budget to the bone.”
Well, we believe the state of Indiana has hit bone with a budget cut instituted earlier this month. You can read about the
change regarding victim notification in a story that starts on Page 3 of this issue of the newspaper.
Spending only $375,000 annually on something that the state had spent $1 million a year on sounds like a smart fiscal decision
on paper.
In reality, victims and their lawyers are worried. While it is too early to determine the effectiveness of the Department
of Correction's move to bring victim notifications in house rather than utilizing the previous system, it doesn’t
appear to be off to a smooth start.
Previously, the state had contracted with a company called Appriss, which operated the Indiana Sex and Violent Offender Registry
and Alert Notification Services. The company handled 10,000 monthly automated phone calls to victims who had asked to be notified
of changes in their perpetrator’s status, and processed 2,500 new registrants per month. The former service also could
make automated phone calls and send e-mails in multiple languages.
Now this service is being performed by the DOC through Microsoft’s Information Strategies. Phone calls are being made
by three DOC employees during regular business hours, with support on nights and weekends by other DOC staffers. The DOC stresses
that the service has the potential to be more personal as victims will be able to talk with a real person and ask questions,
which would be a big improvement over an automated call or an e-mail. The DOC can make the phone calls in Spanish and has
access to a translation service for other languages.
But the experiences of lawyers for victims who have registered with the system seeking notification about offenders tell
another story.
One advocate called the DOC after receiving notice of the system change, only to get a message that the line was busy and
to try calling later. The advocate did that and talked to a DOC employee who was “nice and polite” but lacked
information to answer the advocate’s questions.
This lawyer also told our reporter that she has registered against seven offenders in Marion County. She had not received
an immediate notification of their release, even though she was able to confirm on her own they had been released. Another
lawyer who had also registered against an offender got an e-mail notification of the offender’s release, but didn’t
get the requested phone call until three hours later.
This may sound like merely a bumpy start over something that has the potential to save the state $625,000, and that is a
great deal of money, particularly when viewed through the lens of our current economic condition.
But this is truly a life and death situation, and the state is putting a price tag on the lives of victims with this move.
In domestic violence and domestic battery cases, the potential for more bloodshed that could escalate into a lethal situation
is at its highest when the perpetrator is released from jail.
The state must prove right now, not a month or six months from now, that this move will not only result in cost savings,
but in a victim notification system that some of its most vulnerable citizens can depend upon.•
on Facebook & Twitter
Back to Top
G. Michael Witte letter states he's suspended for three years. The case that got him suspended is identical to my estate case, including havin the Late Judge Deiter recuse himself because Newman had a conflict of interest with the judge. His Modus Operandi is nearly identical.
SIGNED BY G. MICHAEL WITTE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY INDIANA SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION DATED MAY 17, 2012.
Your 6th complaint against Lawrence T. Newman filed on 4/12/2012. On 1/31/12, the Indiana Supreme Court entered an order suspending Lawrence T. Newman’s law license for a period of three years. More important, even after three years, Lawrence Todd Newman will not get his license back unless and until he goes through a separate proceeding to prove that he is fit to practice law. This is not an easy process, and the burden is upon Lawrence T. Newman to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he is fit to return to practice.
Because of the length of Lawrence T. Newman’s license suspension and the fact he may never succeed in getting his law license reinstated, we are not opening an investigation file at this time.
Should Lawrence T. Newman seek reinstatement in the future, we will open your file and ask Lawrence T. Newman to address your grievance as part of his burden of proving fitness. We have attempted to notify Lawrence T. Newman that this will be required of him.
It may disappoint you to hear that we will be doing nothing on your grievance at this time. However, the most our office can ever accomplish is to take away a lawyer’s license to practice law. We have already done that, albeit as a result of misconduct in cases other than your own. It makes better sense for our office to focus its limited resources on cases where the lawyers are still actively practicing law.
Is there any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division? I am the unfortunate victim of a retaliatory lawsuit brought by Lawrence Todd Newman, the attorney from an estate case on which I worked as a unsupervised personal representative in 2006. The contract agreement for that case stated that the estate would be responsible for all attorney fees, but Newman refused to close the nearly insolvent estate when my duties were complete and his fees were paid. Instead, he tried to extort additional attorney fees from me by keeping the case open to address a wrongful death claim, despite the estate’s heir’s lack of interest in pursuing it and an expert doctor’s opinion that it would not be worth doing so. He also knowingly deceived me into believing that a “closing statement” was needed to close the estate, even though this requirement had actually been waived by the estate’s heir. The heir’s attorney filed a motion to have Newman removed from the case. After the court closed the probate case with prejudice (barred from further litigation) Newman illegally re-opened the case in another courtroom.
As a result of complaints filed against him for these and similar actions, Newman has been suspended from practicing law for 18 months by the Indiana Disciplinary Commission. In retaliation, he has filed suit against me demanding additional attorney fees for the 2006 estate case, despite the fact that I made no agreement stating that I would pay any fees from my own assets on behalf of the estate. This lawsuit violates the rules of ethics, due process of law, and equal protection of law. Newman has been allowed to file ridiculous pleadings at an alarming rate and has been supported by a biased court system. Judge Carroll refuses to recuse himself from the case despite the fact that, by his own admission, he intends to grant Newman sanctions regardless of the evidence. When my former counsel discovered that the previous judge on the case, Judge Sosin, was a long-time close friend of Newman’s family, Judge Carroll commented for the record during a hearing that Judge Sosin in so many words “he finds the door “was weak for recusing himself from the case as a result of this obvious conflict of interest.
This case is a public policy issue. Statutes put in place to protect unsupervised personal representatives in probate matters are being ignored. This case will affect thousands of individuals involved in probating and the personal representation of estates. Justice cannot possibly be served as long as a biased judge is allowed to defend a “vexatious litigant,” as Newman has been described by Judge Logan in Bradenton, Florida court. If there is any justice in the Marion County Superior Court Civil Division, this case against me will be dismissed with prejudice.
Every affront to decency and every style adopted by criminals is not per se a constituttional violation. Only fools believe or espouse that.
This was an unnecessary change in law, a needless fiddling with a tax that impacted very very few hoosiers, but one that erodes a tax base benefitting very many hoosiers. Just because some people wanted to chalk up a "tax cut" on their legislative brag-list, and didnt give a fig about replacing the revenue any other way. Really stupid. I am a republican my whole life and this just shames me like hell. I have to use a fake name over this because I know my fellow republicans are all brain washed over tax cutting too.