ILNews

Marion County senior judge dies

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A former Marion Superior judge and deputy prosecutor died May 2 after a long battle with cancer. Judge John R. "Jack" Barney Jr., 73, also served as a senior judge for Marion Circuit and Superior courts.

Judge Barney, an Indianapolis native, earned his law degree from Indiana University School of Law in 1962 and joined his father's law firm, Barney & Hughes, after graduation. He practiced at the firm, which later became Barney & Barney, until 1984.

Judge Barney was a Marion County deputy prosecutor for 12 years, including five years spent as chief deputy. He was elected judge in Marion Superior Court and served in the criminal division for 12 years, acting as associate presiding judge, presiding judge of jury pool, and presiding judge of probation department. He continued to serve as a senior judge after stepping down from the bench full time.

He was a pilot in the U.S. Air Force from 1956 to 1959 and continued to serve in the Air Force Reserves, retiring as a lieutenant colonel in 1978. He participated in the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, the same year he earned his law degree.

Active in the Republican Party, he was a co-founder with Sen. Richard Lugar of the first Marion County Young Republican Club. He was a longtime member of the Greater Indianapolis Republican Finance Committee and the Marion County Republican Veterans.

He was a past vice president and member of the Board of Managers of the Indianapolis Bar Association and a distinguished fellow of the Indianapolis Bar Foundation.

Judge Barney is survived by his mother, Helen A. Barney; wife, Nancy Campbell Barney; former wife, Sarah Cook Barney; children Elizabeth, John III, and Melissa; stepchildren Roger, Brad, and Brian; and grandchildren.

Calling will be from 2 to 8 p.m. Tuesday at St. Christopher's Episcopal Church, Carmel. The Burial Office and Holy Eucharist will be at 2 p.m. Wednesday at St. Christopher's. In lieu of flowers, memorial contributions may be made to St. Christopher's Episcopal Church Memorial Fund, 1402 W. Main St., Carmel, 46032 or to the IU Foundation-Cancer Research, c/o Dr. Larry Einhorn, 535 Barnhill Dr., Room 473, Indianapolis, 46202.
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. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

  2. Unfortunately, the court doesn't understand the difference between ebidta and adjusted ebidta as they clearly got the ruling wrong based on their misunderstanding

  3. A common refrain in the comments on this website comes from people who cannot locate attorneys willing put justice over retainers. At the same time the judiciary threatens to make pro bono work mandatory, seemingly noting the same concern. But what happens to attorneys who have the chumptzah to threatened the legal status quo in Indiana? Ask Gary Welch, ask Paul Ogden, ask me. Speak truth to power, suffer horrendously accordingly. No wonder Hoosier attorneys who want to keep in good graces merely chase the dollars ... the powers that be have no concerns as to those who are ever for sale to the highest bidder ... for those even willing to compromise for $$$ never allow either justice or constitutionality to cause them to stand up to injustice or unconstitutionality. And the bad apples in the Hoosier barrel, like this one, just keep rotting.

  4. I am one of Steele's victims and was taken for $6,000. I want my money back due to him doing nothing for me. I filed for divorce after a 16 year marriage and lost everything. My kids, my home, cars, money, pension. Every attorney I have talked to is not willing to help me. What can I do? I was told i can file a civil suit but you have to have all of Steelers info that I don't have. Of someone can please help me or tell me what info I need would be great.

  5. It would appear that news breaking on Drudge from the Hoosier state (link below) ties back to this Hoosier story from the beginning of the recent police disrespect period .... MCBA president Cassandra Bentley McNair issued the statement on behalf of the association Dec. 1. The association said it was “saddened and disappointed” by the decision not to indict Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for shooting Michael Brown. “The MCBA does not believe this was a just outcome to this process, and is disheartened that the system we as lawyers are intended to uphold failed the African-American community in such a way,” the association stated. “This situation is not just about the death of Michael Brown, but the thousands of other African-Americans who are disproportionately targeted and killed by police officers.” http://www.thestarpress.com/story/news/local/2016/07/18/hate-cops-sign-prompts-controversy/87242664/

ADVERTISEMENT