ILNews

Voyles: Thoughts for this, my final column

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


As my year as your President comes to an end and my friend, Chris Hickey, begins her year as your President, I just wanted to take this opportunity to jot down some of my random thoughts from the past year.

As a lawyer who practices in the field of criminal law - and one of the few who has been given the honor of being President of the IBA - I would like to thank all of the other great lawyers who also practice criminal law and all the public defenders who labor so long and hard, making us proud as they protect the rights of all citizens.

To all the other wonderful lawyers who have stopped me on the street or shook my hand at a social event to tell me that they are proud of the IBA, the work that we do and the effort that our staff makes to carry out its duties, I say "thank you."

At the beginning of my term last January, I could not have predicted all the support I have received. Those things I told you I wanted do for the IBA this year, I believe we have met our goals. We've increased membership and seen dues renewals come in at a tremendous rate, given the state of the economy.

We've seen young people get involved in the Bar, whether it's through committee work or pro bono projects. That's something that I am proud of - that our local practitioners continue to see the value of making connections and collegiality.

I must tell you that when I was asked to meet with the nominating committee almost three years ago as a possible candidate for the President of the IBA, I agreed very reluctantly to attend that meeting. When I was called and informed that I had been chosen, I was both surprised and fearful that I had just made a very bad mistake.

Now three years later, I can tell you it has been one of the best years of my law career. Somehow, with the help of all of the invaluable people I count on every day, I was able to make most of the meetings and social events - and finish this column on time. I have used other columns to thank both my staff and the staff of the IBA for all that they have done, but the sentiment bears repeating.

I guess you never really know if you have been able to keep up the standards that others have set for the IBA, but as I look back over the last year, I think we have had some success in that area. With my hard-working and dedicated board and the association's standing committees, we tackled issues such as judicial criticism, membership recruitment and retention, professionalism standards and recognition, and more.

One of the things I treasure most is having a sense of humor and boy did that come in handy this year. Not only did I take the time to laugh at myself pretty often, but also to enjoy some light moments with my board and fellow officers. As a famous comedian once said, "Laughter is the shortest distance between two people."

During the last year we have also had some sadness, as members of our profession have passed away, along with family members and friends. This is all just part of the human experience we deal with in our lives.

As we move into the new year, I hope all of you will continue to be active in the IBA by helping to bring in a new member and enjoying the benefits of the best bar association in the country.

The role any President has is merely a reflection of the quality of the organization he or she leads and to keep your hand firmly on the rudder so that you guide that association both through smooth and troubled waters.

I hope you believe I have done that for the IBA in 2009.

Thank you all for permitting me to lead you and for all of your support - it has been a wonderful experience. Please help Chris Hickey have an even better year in 2010 for the IBA.

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. It's a big fat black mark against the US that they radicalized a lot of these Afghan jihadis in the 80s to fight the soviets and then when they predictably got around to biting the hand that fed them, the US had to invade their homelands, install a bunch of corrupt drug kingpins and kleptocrats, take these guys and torture the hell out of them. Why for example did the US have to sodomize them? Dubya said "they hate us for our freedoms!" Here, try some of that freedom whether you like it or not!!! Now they got even more reasons to hate us-- lets just keep bombing the crap out of their populations, installing more puppet regimes, arming one faction against another, etc etc etc.... the US is becoming a monster. No wonder they hate us. Here's my modest recommendation. How about we follow "Just War" theory in the future. St Augustine had it right. How about we treat these obvious prisoners of war according to the Geneva convention instead of torturing them in sadistic and perverted ways.

  2. As usual, John is "spot-on." The subtle but poignant points he makes are numerous and warrant reflection by mediators and users. Oh but were it so simple.

  3. ACLU. Way to step up against the police state. I see a lot of things from the ACLU I don't like but this one is a gold star in its column.... instead of fighting it the authorities should apologize and back off.

  4. Duncan, It's called the RIGHT OF ASSOCIATION and in the old days people believed it did apply to contracts and employment. Then along came title vii.....that aside, I believe that I am free to work or not work for whomever I like regardless: I don't need a law to tell me I'm free. The day I really am compelled to ignore all the facts of social reality in my associations and I blithely go along with it, I'll be a slave of the state. That day is not today......... in the meantime this proposed bill would probably be violative of 18 usc sec 1981 that prohibits discrimination in contracts... a law violated regularly because who could ever really expect to enforce it along the millions of contracts made in the marketplace daily? Some of these so-called civil rights laws are unenforceable and unjust Utopian Social Engineering. Forcing people to love each other will never work.

  5. I am the father of a sweet little one-year-old named girl, who happens to have Down Syndrome. To anyone who reads this who may be considering the decision to terminate, please know that your child will absolutely light up your life as my daughter has the lives of everyone around her. There is no part of me that condones abortion of a child on the basis that he/she has or might have Down Syndrome. From an intellectual standpoint, however, I question the enforceability of this potential law. As it stands now, the bill reads in relevant part as follows: "A person may not intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion . . . if the person knows that the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion solely because the fetus has been diagnosed with Down syndrome or a potential diagnosis of Down syndrome." It includes similarly worded provisions abortion on "any other disability" or based on sex selection. It goes so far as to make the medical provider at least potentially liable for wrongful death. First, how does a medical provider "know" that "the pregnant woman is seeking the abortion SOLELY" because of anything? What if the woman says she just doesn't want the baby - not because of the diagnosis - she just doesn't want him/her? Further, how can the doctor be liable for wrongful death, when a Child Wrongful Death claim belongs to the parents? Is there any circumstance in which the mother's comparative fault will not exceed the doctor's alleged comparative fault, thereby barring the claim? If the State wants to discourage women from aborting their children because of a Down Syndrome diagnosis, I'm all for that. Purporting to ban it with an unenforceable law, however, is not the way to effectuate this policy.

ADVERTISEMENT