The Case against Mayor's courts

[DGUtley]

Every now and then in Ohio we get an uptick in cases challenging the existence of Mayor's Courts. This article is interesting.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index...art_river_home

[Chris]

Violates a basic principle of separation of powers. Administrators shouldn't be adjudicators.

[DGUtley]

Agree. Prone to abuse and bias.

[Chris]

The idea of being more efficient and saving taxpayer money is good. Here they (Courts, Sherrif, Police) have instituted a new policy where many misdemeanors no longer result in arrest and trial, you just pay a fine or do community service and the offense is expunged. That's a better way to do it, I think.

[Kacper]

All about the money. Our local criminal statutes just incorporate the state statutes by reference. If someone is charged under the state statute, the state has to pay for their appointed lawyer. If they are charged under the local statute, the city has to pay for them (and the city poots a brick). Whenever the local politicians get on the wrong side of the police, the police will start flooding them with defendants charged under the local statute out of spite, especially if they were short-changed on raises until the city finds money for a "COLA"

[stjames1_53]

first off, laws are mainly written for revenue generation. Outside of felonies, everything else is about the almighty dollar.