ILNews

IBA: Nod to professionalism

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Professionalism Committee of the Indianapolis Bar Association extends a Nod to Professionalism to Assistant United States Attorney Bradley A. Blackington. Unlike those of us who do not know what a ton of pure methamphetamine looks like and may not have considered the catastrophic effects it could have in our neighborhoods and schools, Brad serves in a leadership role on the front lines of the war against drugs in our community. With over 12 years of service in the criminal division of the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Indiana, Brad demonstrates daily his commitment to dismantling and prosecuting some of the state’s most significant drug trafficking organizations. He has supervised an unprecedented number of criminal investigations aimed at keeping our streets safe and free from illegal drugs. “Since 1999, Brad has led the United States Attorney’s Office in the fight against violent drug trafficking organizations. In accomplishing this demanding task, Brad has been successful in every Federal courthouse in the district. Although Brad’s conviction rate is impressive, what I find truly outstanding is his professionalism. Although criminal prosecution is inherently adversarial, Brad has always treated his opponents with remarkable courtesy. I believe this character trait reflects Brad’s commitment not only to this office, but to the legal profession he is so proud to serve.” said Joseph H. Hogsett, United States Attorney.

Most recently, Brad successfully prosecuted 27 Indiana residents engaged in a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine to Hoosiers and others. Based on their criminal history, six of those defendants now face a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment without parole. Robert W. Hammerle, who represented one of the 27, commented, “from a criminal defense attorney’s standpoint, litigating against Brad is like dealing with a Death Star with a conscience. With few exceptions, such a legal fight usually involves your client crashing to his inevitable destruction. Fortunately, Brad’s door is always open to a resolution that gives your client a safe place to land where he can at least try to mitigate an otherwise unavoidable ghastly result.”

Brad’s commitment to representing the interests of the United States government and his professional character are similarly exemplified by his reputation with the Federal judiciary.

“This is certainly an appropriate recognition. It’s been my observation that Brad exhibits professionalism by being very well prepared for hearings and trials. He understands the strengths and weaknesses of his evidence and also has a thorough understanding of the rules of procedure and evidence. His preparation and knowledge of the rules results in his case being presented in an organized and highly professional manner. It’s a pleasure to work with him in the courtroom.” stated Chief Judge Richard L. Young.

Brad and his wife Stephanie reside with their two children in Hamilton County. Brad graduated from Villanova University School of Law where he was Case and Comment Editor of the Law Review, and from The College of William and Mary where he graduated with Highest Honors.•

If you know of someone whom you believe exemplifies one of IBA’s five standards, please e-mail your nomination to iba@indybar.org.

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

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. 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!!!

  2. 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?

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT