ILNews

Ex-prosecutor candidate’s bar resignation accepted

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A southwest Indiana attorney and former Democratic candidate for Gibson County prosecutor has been allowed to resign from the bar, according to an order from the Indiana Supreme Court.

William Wallace III was indicted in June 2010, after he was accused of videotaping himself having sex with a former client and an employee without their knowledge. He was accused of telling the former client that he would forgive legal fees in exchange for sex. When police executed a warrant and searched his computer, they found child pornography.

Wallace was charged with Class D felony counts of obstruction of justice, voyeurism and possession of child pornography, and misdemeanor charges of patronizing a prostitute and false informing.

In October 2011, Wallace pleaded guilty to the obstruction and child porn charges and was ordered to register as a sex offender. He was suspended from the bar three months later.

The Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission filed a verified complaint against Wallace in January 2013. The court order issued Aug. 14 accepts his resignation, which under Discipline Rule 23(17) requires an acknowledgment from Wallace that the material facts alleged are true, that he couldn’t successfully defend the disciplinary case if prosecuted, and that the charges would have resulted in disbarment.

Costs of the proceeding are assessed against Wallace, who may not petition for reinstatement for five years. If he does, he would face the most stringent burden for reinstatement and the allegations in the disciplinary complaint also would be addressed, according to the order.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Could have been a contender?
    Interesting to note that had his secrets remained secret, William Wallace III could have entered elected office, could have risen through the ranks, could have even become a judge. And then he would have been well protected, beyond reproach, it would seem, by operation of the old boy network. In this case his secrets slipped out too early to afford him much protection by The System.

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT