ILNews

Suspended judge faces disciplinary charges

Back to TopE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Commission on Judicial Qualifications has filed charges against the suspended LaPorte Superior judge who was shot in the head just before taking the bench this year.

The Judicial Qualifications Commission has charged Judge Jennifer Evans Koethe with three counts: violating Canon 2A of the 2008 Judicial Code of Conduct and Rule 1.2 of the 2009 Judicial Code of Conduct for withholding or misrepresenting pertinent information during taped statements with officials; violating Canons 1 and 2A of the 2008 code for asking a police officer destroy a handwritten note that was potential evidence in an official investigation; and violating Rules 8.4(b), (c), and (d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct by asking the officer to destroy the note.

Judge Koethe was the elected judge for Superior 3 when she was grazed in the head by a bullet from her 9mm handgun in late December 2008. At first, the judge said she accidentally shot herself and didn't know where the gun was. She later told a detective at the hospital that she put the gun to her head to scare her husband into thinking was going to kill herself, but she didn't know the gun was loaded when she fired it. She also told the detective she wrote a note to her husband on the back of a store box and asked him to get rid of it.

Judge Koethe deliberately omitted from her Dec. 23 statement that she went into the bedroom and wrote her husband a personal note before getting the gun. In her Jan. 9 statement, she contradicted statements from her Dec. 23 statement, including she thought the gun was unloaded because she removed the bullets from it, denying she put the gun up to her head, and instead said it accidentally went off when she picked the gun up off the bed. She then denied knowing about the location of the gun or the note.

Her husband, Stephan, admitted he hid the gun and the note when his wife was in the room.

The judge was indicted for attempted obstruction of justice as a Class D felony in May and has been suspended with pay since May 11, earning nearly $74,000 while off the bench. Her trial is scheduled for Jan. 4, 2010, before Special Judge Thomas Stefaniak of Lake Superior Court. According to Supreme Court spokesperson Kathryn Dolan, Judge Koethe is the first judge charged with a felony in Indiana since the 1980s.

ADVERTISEMENT

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