Thread by @DavidPepper

🚨 🚨

🧵

UPDATE: Yesterday, I wrote about the blatant conflict of interest at the Ohio Supreme Court. It went viral.

Well, today that conflict played out.

And one simple photo captures it all.

It’s this one:

1/

Now what is so egregious about this photo?

Let’s take a close look.

The woman standing before the Court, arguing this case—Ohio v. Glover—is a fine lawyer by the name of Paula Adams.

2/

And among the seven Justices looking down at her from the bench, listening to the argument, is this one.

His name is Joseph Deters.

Adams and Deters.

Remember those two names…

2/

Two years ago, the names Adams and Deters also appeared together.

Here’s the document where it happened…twice.

It’s in a case where they both were listed as and serving as counsel.

As prosecutors.

3/

What case was it? Funny you should ask.

Here’s that info, on the cover page of the document they signed:

Ohio v Glover!

The SAME CASE that Adams was arguing today.

4/

But today, Deters is no longer co-counsel on the case.

He’s a Justice who will be ruling on the case.

Yes, HIS own case.

And he could end up being the swing vote on the case.

5/

And if this seems totally inappropriate, it’s because it is.

The Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct is very clear that a judge should not sit on a case in which he has been involved as a lawyer.

Instead, that judge is required to disqualify himself from that case.

6/

Only a few years ago, the US Supreme Court actually found it to be a violation of Constitutional due process for a judge to rule on a criminal case where he was prosecutor.

Here’s that case:

7/oyez.org/cases/2015/15-…

But today, defying such clear rules, Justice Deters sat on the bench, watching his prior co-counsel make the same argument they made together (and lost) two years ago at the appellate level.

Although he hid it in this photo, I bet he really liked her arguments.

7/

And he got to watch counsel for the defendant, who had triumphed over Deters’ argument two years ago, make the case to him.

That must have been fun: sitting as a judge watching your former opponent now being forced to win you over in the same case

I mean, how great is that!

8/

At one point in today’s argument, a question arose as to the actions by the prosecutor’s office around an original plea offer to the defendant in the case.

The Justices were asking about a deal that had been offered, and who’s idea that offer was.

People weren’t sure.

8/

Ironically, their colleague Deters—sitting right up there with them—could very well have had personal knowledge of the question that they were all asking about, since he was the prosecutor at the time that deal was offered.

More knowledge than anyone, perhaps..

Heck, someone should have asked him what he remembered about the deal.

But of course, that would have underscored just how bad this all was.

So he just sat their quietly, listening to his former co-counsel making the arguments they had made together only two years ago.

9/

For all the details on this, you can read this thread:

10/

But in the meantime, when you keep seeing stories about how Ohio has become the most corrupt state in the country, is incapable of self-policing, and has lost its rule of law, now you’ll understand why.

And why a single photo sums it up.

END