ILNews

Judge: Conour to stay behind bars before sentencing

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Former attorney William Conour will remain jailed pending his sentencing in a little more than two months, a federal judge has ruled.

Chief Judge Richard Young of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana on Monday denied Conour’s motion for release, indicating he will remain in custody of U.S. marshals pending sentencing on Oct. 17. Conour is being held in the Marion County Jail.

Conour pleaded guilty July 15 to government charges that he defrauded at least 25 personal-injury and wrongful-death clients of more than $4.5 million he received in negotiated settlements. He entered a plea a short time after he was jailed in June for dissipating assets in violation of terms of bond.

Young also on Aug. 1 approved an order clearing the way for Indiana University to deposit with the court $450,000 that Conour had donated to the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, which since has excised the honorary naming of the William and Jennifer Conour Atrium.


 
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Ms Ogynist
    Misogynist definition: 90% of UrbanDictionary.com male users. Back to the article above; finally the judge is denying a motion and letting Conour know he’s not special nor deserves special treatment…he’s just another convict.
  • HOUSEWIFEING-WHAT ATE THE DOCUMENTED FACTS?
    Housewife has been defined: "Housewife: An uneducated woman with no self-esteem and no life who thinks she has to devote herself to rearing children, her husband, the home and the pets." URBAN DICTIONARY If this does not fit [except for "uneducated"]90% of Carmel "stay at home moms" would be surprising. Not speaking of anyone in particular but Carmel h
    • Politically Correct
      Housewifing? But REALLY working not JUST Housewifing? All things considered, that’s probably as “politically correct” as a misogynist can get. Probably uneducated in other areas as well, you may want to look at documented facts before you make accusations and assumptions in a public forum…otherwise you look like a, what’s the politically correct term for it? Oh, yes…moron.
    • Er Allein ist Schuldig
      Conour’s latest motion is likely a harbinger of how his time will be spent in jail. And each new motion will probably put his unfortunate family back in the press, open to attacks from antagonists who have little understanding or sympathy of what he and his crimes did to his family members. From what has been reported and what is available in public records, he sent all properties into foreclosure and left nothing for his family but debt. A reporter should look into why the Disciplinary Commission allowed Conour to practice law after his illegal practices were reported. An attorney who worked with him reported him in 2008 and Conour’s frauds date back to at least 1999. I agree with Paul Ogden…that’s the red-flag that needs further investigation. And taking a quote from Ogen’s posting, “Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it matter most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph.” Haile Selassie.
    • RED FLAG IF EX-WIFE IS NOT WORKING!
      It is a big waving flying red flag if the ex-wife is not working [outside the home to be politically correct--but really working not just housewifing] but continuing her role as a Carmel housewife; then there is likelihood she is living on moneys acquired from Conour which were stolen and belong to clients/others. There were mentions in this paper that Conour had considered bankruptcy; no mention of Conour AND wife/ex-wife filing. I suggest that a reporter see if she has a real job.
      • HA! HA! CONOUR!
        Imperious, arrogant self-important William Conour can leave the house and Bentley and whatever to the squirrels and raccoons! Apparently he has already squirreled away his clients' money, likely in his divorce! Is anyone looking at ex-wife's or Conour's spawn's assets and the source of those assets? If it was clients' moneys or moneys or clients it should be restored to the clients. If it means taking things from a [former] domestic engineer [stay at home mom or whatever eupehemism for Carmel housewife who does not work] and horse farm manager and her kids, so be it. Conour can now use his time acclimating to being with the guys. Enjoy your time. Squirrel

      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. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

      2. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

      3. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

      4. I am the mother of the child in this case. My silence on the matter was due to the fact that I filed, both in Illinois and Indiana, child support cases. I even filed supporting documentation with the Indiana family law court. Not sure whether this information was provided to the court of appeals or not. Wish the case was done before moving to Indiana, because no matter what, there is NO WAY the state of Illinois would have allowed an appeal on a child support case!

      5. "No one is safe when the Legislature is in session."

      ADVERTISEMENT