ILNews

Security increased following threats to judge

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Huntington County Sheriff’s Department has taken steps to protect a northeastern Indiana judge after learning of threats made against the judge late last week.

The sheriff’s department released a brief statement saying it learned of the threats Jan. 7 against Huntington Circuit Judge Thomas Hakes. The sheriff’s department said the threats are being investigated by the Indiana State Police, but both law enforcement agencies declined to give specifics concerning the nature of the threats, who may have made the threats, or any motives, citing the ongoing investigation. The release didn’t specify what steps the sheriff’s department is taking, and Sheriff Terry Stoffel would only say it involves personnel protecting the judge.

Indiana State Police spokesperson Sgt. Ron Galaviz said it’s common for the state police to become involved in investigations regarding threats against public officials. The Huntington County Sheriff’s Department received the initial complaint regarding the threats and then contacted the criminal division at the ISP post in northeast Indiana to investigate. The investigator will determine if the threats have merit, and if so, will submit findings to the county prosecutor.

Galaviz said the investigator hopes to complete the investigation in the next week.

Stoffel, who served as chief of the Huntington Police Department for eight years prior to taking office as sheriff last week, said, fortunately, these types of incidents are rare.

Judge Hakes was appointed to the bench in June 2006, with his term ending Dec. 31, 2012. His office declined to comment on the matter.
 

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. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  2. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

  3. I will agree with that as soon as law schools stop lying to prospective students about salaries and employment opportunities in the legal profession. There is no defense to the fraudulent numbers first year salaries they post to mislead people into going to law school.

  4. The sad thing is that no fish were thrown overboard The "greenhorn" who had never fished before those 5 days was interrogated for over 4 hours by 5 officers until his statement was illicited, "I don't want to go to prison....." The truth is that these fish were measured frozen off shore and thawed on shore. The FWC (state) officer did not know fish shrink, so the only reason that these fish could be bigger was a swap. There is no difference between a 19 1/2 fish or 19 3/4 fish, short fish is short fish, the ticket was written. In addition the FWC officer testified at trial, he does not measure fish in accordance with federal law. There was a document prepared by the FWC expert that said yes, fish shrink and if these had been measured correctly they averaged over 20 inches (offshore frozen). This was a smoke and mirror prosecution.

  5. I love this, Dave! Many congrats to you! We've come a long way from studying for the bar together! :)

ADVERTISEMENT