ILNews

Prosecutor faces misconduct charges

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Supreme Court's Disciplinary Commission has filed a complaint against Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi alleging he played to the media and violated professional conduct rules when commenting about two murder cases.

Filing a six-page complaint Oct. 1, the Disciplinary Commission is charging the 15-year prosecutor with making statements that went beyond the public informational purpose and prejudiced the pair of cases. He is charged with violating Indiana Professional Conduct Rules 3.8(f) and Rule 3.6.

The complaint says Brizzi's statements "... were not necessary to inform the public of the nature and extent of the prosecutor's action and did not serve a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and the same were extrajudicial comments that had a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation ...."

Some of the comments were made at an April 2008 news conference during which Brizzi speculated about accused multi-state serial killer Bruce Mendenhall's mindset at the time of the Indianapolis killing of Carma Purpura, and also detailed evidence against the man. Comments included details of the victim's death and Brizzi said: "It's almost as if he (Mendenhall) wanted to get caught and then play a game of I'm smarter than the police."

The commission's second allegation involves a 2006 news release about seven family members who were brutally killed at a Hamilton Avenue house in Indianapolis, a case in which Brizzi initially sought the death penalty. A comment in that news release stated about the defendants, "They weren't going to let anyone or anything get in the way of what they believed to be an easy score."

Defendant Desmond Turner is set to begin a bench trial early next week; the prosecutor now is seeking a penalty of life without parole. The Marion County Prosecutor's Office couldn't be reached today for comment about what, if any, impact this disciplinary action could have on that trial next week.

Neither Brizzi nor his spokesman returned messages from the newspaper seeking comment on the commission's action.

Brizzi has until the end of October to file a response to the charges, though that is not required. The Indiana Supreme Court has final say over attorney disciplinary issues, and if it finds misconduct the penalties could range from a private reprimand to suspension or disbarment.

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. CCHP's real accomplishment is the 2015 law signed by Gov Pence that basically outlaws any annexation that is forced where a 65% majority of landowners in the affected area disagree. Regardless of whether HP wins or loses, the citizens of Indiana will not have another fiasco like this. The law Gov Pence signed is a direct result of this malgovernance.

  2. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  3. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  4. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  5. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

ADVERTISEMENT