Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Public official eligibility

  • 12-06-2012 1:26am
    #1
    bois8726
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭


    It was recently discovered that a local elected official (Arkansas Sheriff) plead no contest to a negotiated plea of misrepresenting information (misdemeanor) on a state document in Kansas. The Ark Constitution says that a person convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor "infamous crime" is ineligible to hold public office in this state. Later, our Supreme Court defined infamous crime as any crime that has any element of deceit or dishonesty. The sheriff was found guilty by the court in Kansas. Since he refuses to resign, the only recourse is for our prosecutor to file a complaint with the court to have him removed. However, our prosecutor is hesitant because he says rule 410 says that a no contest plea cannot be used in a future civil case, which this would be. I personally think he is just trying to get out of filing the complaint due to political reasons. Rule 410 says "Evidence of the plea" is not allowed. It doesn't say the conviction is not allowed. I am just a concerned citizen. Am I wrong in thinking the conviction is admissible? Thanks in advance for your help.


Comments

  • #2
    Delancey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,451 ✭✭✭Delancey


    You do realise this is an Irish discussion board for discussion of Irish legal issues ?


  • #3
    bois8726
    Registered Users Posts: 2 ✭bois8726


    Delancey wrote: »
    You do realise this is an Irish discussion board for discussion of Irish legal issues ?


    Sorry, I did no realize that. Does it make a difference that I'm from Irish decent and have red hair? LOL


  • #4
    ResearchWill
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,111 ✭✭✭ResearchWill


    I think the problem may be the 5th amendment to the US constitution. The right not to incriminate yourself. If the only evidence against the guy is his own admission then that admission can not be used against him. If there is enough independent evidence then it would be ok.

    I am just assuming all the above btw.


Advertisement