Latest / WCHS Network Podcasts / 04/18/2024 Ask the Lawyer with Tom Peyton

Transcript

04/18/2024 Ask the Lawyer with Tom Peyton · WCHS Network Podcasts

0:00
Unlock your dream property with Meex Realty Group, where Rich the realtor makes real
0:04
estate dreams a reality, whether it's residential or commercial. We've got Charleston to
0:08
Huntington covered. Your key to exceptional real estate experience is start here Meeks Realty
0:12
Group. Contact us at Meeks dot us. The views and opinions expressed on
0:17
this program do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of five adwchs it's employees
0:23
or WVRC Media. Put the power of maybe on the side. We have
0:30
the courtroom experience. Such your need, we never give up. We're prepared
0:37
to fight for your rights. When you need action, count on us.
0:45
Put the power of pagon on your side, the power of here we can.
0:54
It's a twenty one and this is five ADWCCHS the Voice of Charleston.
0:58
It's a Thursday morning. Jeff Ja gets wake you, thanks for joining us.
1:00
And Tom Payton is here with the Peyton Law Firm in Nitro as they've
1:04
been for more than a quarter of a century. Right. I was just
1:10
thinking about this yesterday. Go do the radio again every Thursday like we do.
1:14
And I've been doing this radio show almost half my life now, you
1:18
are a young man when you started twenty four years Yeah, you're still young.
1:23
Although Dad done it primarily of course, in at least the early early
1:26
stages. But I really like doing it. I mean I like doing it
1:30
really because you know, at the office, once you get back there,
1:33
it's just go, go, go, and it is hard to uh.
1:37
I return a lot of calls of the evening just because I have other obligations
1:41
to current clients and things like that during the day. So I really like
1:44
coming here. And last week was a good show because we got multiple questions
1:48
and it's I think it was Ron that called in and that was kind of
1:51
a heat. Obviously didn't mind providing some details on the air, and so
1:55
that's basically a consultation when you conduct our office about a power of attorney and
2:00
it's pretty you know, it's as easy as that. And actually we've got
2:01
a few calls after the show last week, so hopefully we're helping some people
2:06
there in that regard. It's great, you know, well, the lines
2:07
are open. Me mentioned that three O four three four five fifty eight fifty
2:12
eight. Any questions about the law or you know, maybe some like power
2:15
of attorney issues those type of things. Tom can answer your questions and the
2:20
lines are open three or four, three, four, five, fifty eight
2:22
fifty eight. Yeah. So we've got some interesting legal developments this week.
2:25
Yeah, we have the fourth Circuit reversing Judge Goodwin about the middle school student
2:32
that was a transgender girl. So biological sex has defined in this newer West
2:40
Virginia statute she was a male, and so it absolutely precludes, as I
2:47
read it the statute, did somebody that's biologically a male at birth from participating
2:55
in sports that are on female teams basically, And so actually it was an
3:02
interesting procedural process down below, and it was with Judge Goodwin, who's the
3:07
district judge in Charleston, West Virginia, so it's kind of the trial court
3:12
level federal courts. And he actually entered up preliminary injunction saying that she could
3:16
continue to participate. And usually that's a pretty good indicator of how the judge
3:21
will ultimately rule, but obviously is an absolute because then Judge Goodwin, when
3:25
he heard all the evidence, issued a ruling saying the law was constitutional and
3:30
did not violate Title nine, which is a federal law based on getting equality
3:38
between the genders and extracurricular activities. But then it was appealed into the force
3:44
circuit, and the force circuit reversed Judge Goodwe and so there's been some talk
3:49
this week about what that means. Unfortunately, at least unfortunately in my viewpoint,
3:54
it's now then this whole statute and this litigation, and it's timing even
4:00
makes it even emphasized even more by political candidates, which is what I think
4:06
this statue was in the first place, was just a political tool. So
4:11
now that we're an election cycle, we can have some kind of commercials about
4:15
Patrick Morrisey and a pig snorting and I don't something about training, and I
4:18
didn't really understand the connection. It's just a bunch of buzzwords because it's a
4:24
marketing scheme obviously, to throw buzzwords and associate him with Patrick Morrisey, who
4:29
I don't see eye to eye probably on ninety percent of Patrick Morrisey's viewpoints,
4:34
at least on legal issues and probably social issues as well. But I mean,
4:39
that's just distasteful. But this ruling is interesting because it's got a lot
4:43
of different dynamics. It's it's interesting to me, and I think kind of
4:47
the underlying theme of the majority opinion there is there's three judges that handled this
4:54
case and heard it, and one of them dissented. I agreed in part
4:58
to a couple sections, but it was just Sigel Matters, so dissented on
5:00
the meaningful things I meaning did not agree with the other two. But I
5:05
thought it was interesting because they start off the body of their opinion talking about
5:10
WESTERNI this law, but here's here's what they had. And then they've been
5:14
able under the wv SSAC regulations to have separate sports for for boys and girls,
5:20
and and that's not impermissible. But in twenty twenty one, the wv
5:26
s SAC, which I understand, it's an appointed body, not an elected
5:30
body, and it then administers the primary high school sports throughout. I think
5:36
its principles, it's basically principles principles. But then but they have an executive
5:42
director and maybe the principles are the board they are, and so they make
5:46
with the idea being that the ideaing with being when you have government or quasi
5:50
government boards like that, is that they aren't elected, so they're free from
5:54
the political influence. And so they had had a rule already that was,
6:01
and it's recited at the very beginning of the opinion in twenty twenty one.
6:04
That was based on various factors, including competitiveness and some of the things that
6:12
common sense. I mean, it's hard. I think it would be hard
6:15
to find a person who would agree with the concept that a person born biologically
6:23
male that has a lot of the physical attributes of a pubescent male, which
6:30
gives them a competitive advantage over biologically born females. I mean, that's that
6:34
shouldn't happen. I mean, that's that's kind of a common sense thing.
6:39
I believe. Now when you have females that were biological females that are much
6:45
better than the other females at sports, I mean, some of them tremendously
6:47
better, so I think that all evens out. But they they we already
6:51
had that in West Virginia, and then we had the legislature come in and
6:55
stick their nose in high school sports. It's a it's a political hot button.
6:59
I mean, it's it's important and there's nothing wrong with that. When
7:01
my son was in playing soccer, my daughter's swimming, I mean, it
7:04
was the most important thing to us at the time, and it's and it's
7:10
got constituents throughout the state. But you've got this statute past that I think
7:15
was solving a problem that didn't exist in West Virginia. Even if you think
7:20
about displacement, perhaps somebody is allowed to participate in a sport they wouldn't otherwise,
7:27
That meaning some of the biological girls. You know, obviously, if
7:30
somebody finishes higher than anyone, then they potentially displaced somebody from a higher finish
7:34
if they were otherwise ineligible for the sport. But even those numbers are so
7:39
small, it's just not I can't imagine why this is such a It's hard
7:43
for me to imagine why this is such a political hot button issue in West
7:46
Virginia when we have so many other what I view is material things going on
7:50
that we need to address, and the list is numerous. But anyway,
7:59
so it's interesting how they recite that. Now, what they don't do is
8:03
they they there's an equal protection argument under the Constitution, and then there's a
8:07
Title nine argument, and so what the majority did was said, well,
8:13
there's conflicting evidence between experts on the equal protection argument, and what they're saying
8:18
is and I don't believe even the attorneys for for the transgender girl, are
8:26
even arguing otherwise, but it is a facial it's not a facial argument.
8:35
It's a it's an as applied argument, which is different. So that's why
8:37
you're getting into all these facts. So that the statute was not voided saying
8:41
it was invalid constitutionally and even on the as meaning as applied, you got
8:48
to go into the particular facts of this particular situation. They didn't rule in
8:50
that. They send it back down to Judge Goodwin if he wants, I
8:54
mean, if the parties want him to address it for another factual analysis.
8:58
Between these competing exps. It's about, you know, pre pewvescent and whether
9:03
biological born males have an advantage even prepewvescent and that kind of thing. So
9:09
that part was just sent back no ruling Title nine. They feel conclusively that
9:15
this situation violated her rights under Title nine, but they're very specific to say
9:20
it's a factual analysis. Essentially, each case has to be addressed when its
9:26
own merits, basically, and in this situation with these particular sports, I
9:31
think it was cross country and track, although I think she's been doing shot
9:35
put, which is more of a I mean does that require more core strength
9:41
than running or sprinting or hurdles. I don't. I don't know about all
9:45
that, but uh, but it's it's a fact based analysis, which is
9:50
not different than if you have an Americans with Disabilities Act situation. I've done
9:54
a good bit of work over that on accessibility issues over the years for those
9:58
physical or mental disabilities. It's it's always a what an employer or a premise
10:05
center has to do. It's always a factual analysis. You have to just
10:09
it's hard when they're the ADA to just give blank examples, and so you
10:13
have to say, well, what's the hypothetical here or what is the real
10:16
situation? And can we accommodate that? And it has to be a factual
10:18
analysis. And it seems to be what the Fourth Circuit was saying is that
10:24
even under Title nine, we're not going to say that the statute is it's
10:28
illegal, but we're going to say, as applied to this situation, they
10:33
cannot prevent her from participating in these particular sports, and that's it's very careful
10:39
to limit that. Then the descent has much more broad claiming. This is
10:43
going to essentially be a slippery slope for other cases and things. But it's
10:48
it's pretty careful about So it didn't strike it down, did not strike.
10:54
No, it did not strike I would say that if if it didn't strike
11:01
it down in your Title nine on its face. Now, if you have
11:03
a case that has analogous facts very very close, then you know, and
11:09
you're into fourth circuit flowing down to know what North Carolina, West Virginia,
11:15
South Carolina, then you're going to have a really good argument that it you
11:20
know, this type of law violates the Title nine as to that particular student.
11:26
But other than that, if you can't find a case that's on point
11:31
factually same type facts, then it doesn't really answer the question about what it
11:39
doesn't say it's illegal under Title nine. So you still do that factual analysis.
11:43
But going back to what I said at the beginning, it's almost like
11:46
they started with what the WVSSAC had in place initially before the legislature meddled with
11:52
it, and by the time you get to the end of the majority opinion,
11:56
they're saying, well, that's basically what you have to do to comply
12:00
with Title nine is do with this balancing type test, you know, to
12:03
weigh the governmental interest for and they go into mundane and different standards of review
12:09
and things like that, what kind of government interest is it and compared to
12:13
the student's interests. So it's it's a it's an interesting ruling. And now
12:20
we'll see what happens here. I mean, there'll be appeals. There could
12:22
be a petition to have it heard. What they call enbank, which is
12:26
entire everybody on the four seat. Yeah, yeah, I mean I think
12:28
everybody's active, right thirteen or fourteen. Maybe they can ask for that and
12:35
that may change things, or they just take it right up to the US
12:41
Supreme Court and see what happens there. So interesting ruling, interesting timing.
12:48
But yeah, it doesn't strike it down, but it strikes it down as
12:52
to this particular person. I guess you would say, right, all right,
12:54
yes, and yeah, very interesting. Three or four three four five
12:58
fifty eight fifty number. Tom Payton, the Peyton Law Firm in Nitro is
13:03
here with us. Any questions about the law three oh four three four five
13:07
fifty eight fifty You can ask a question, or if you just want to
13:09
leave a question with our producer Jeff Petty, then he can give it to
13:13
me and then I'll give it to Tom three O four three four five fifty
13:18
eight fifty eight three oh four three four five fifty eight fifty ticker one and
13:20
only break back in the moment of five eight WCCHS. Attention, West Virginians.
13:26
Patrick Morrissey is the one proven conservative running for governor with an unmatched record
13:33
of delivering victories for our state. Conservative Republican Patrick Morrissey has been endorsed by
13:37
the NRA, stood up against federal overreach, fought and sued Joe Biden to
13:43
protect West Virginia jobs, and defended our values against the far left agenda.
13:50
When Biden screws West Virginia, I sue Biden and West Virginia wins a lot.
13:56
I'm Attorney General Patrick Morrison against the deep state and one to protect our
14:03
jobs, defended our Second Amendment rights, upheld the sanctity of life, protected
14:09
our kids from the wop left and the radical agenda. I'm the only proven
14:13
conservative running. I was the first to endorse Trump in this race. Paid
14:18
for by Morrissey twenty twenty four. Patrick Morrissey is the one proven conservative running
14:24
for governor. This update is brought to you by Fourth Avenue Financial, a
14:28
good retirement takes planning. Let's get started today. Put the power of Peyton
14:35
on the side. We have the courtroom experience, said you need, we
14:41
never give up. We're prepared to fight for your rights when you need action.
14:48
Count on us. Put the power of Payson on your side. Thirty
14:58
six on five to eighty. That would you see as the voice of Charleston
15:01
Jeff Jenkins with you, Tom Peyton at the Peyton Law Firm in Nitro and
15:03
the lines you're open three four, three four, five fifty eight fifty eight
15:07
three oh four three four or five fifty fifty. It's been intrigued Tom about
15:13
I know it's just getting started, this this trial of President Trump, former
15:18
President Trump. And the judge pretty pretty I mean he's pretty firm on how
15:26
yeah, where they're picking a jury right now? Yeah yeah, well how
15:28
he has to stay in the courtroom and how he can't that's a criminal case.
15:31
It's a criminal case again, yeah, it's it's it's a criminal case.
15:35
So there's very like in West Virginia that you can follow it. So
15:39
you're on bond in a criminal case requiring you to appear, you can ask
15:43
for a relief from that. In particular, hearings in West Virginia, actually
15:46
in magistrate court for mister Meanors. It's it's rarely utilized. I don't think
15:50
the matter is like it, but you can. There's a rule that allows
15:52
your client not to appear, and you can appear on their behalf on certain
15:56
types of charges, but that's not the rule in any felony cases or anything.
15:58
It gets beyond the maged at court levels. So they've got to be
16:03
present at every critical stage unless there's some extraordinary circumstance where they file a particular
16:10
most so he's yet he's requiring him to show up at every critical stage,
16:11
and that's you know, if not, then who knows what arguments we made
16:17
on a peat? Lee could argue his lawyer told him he didn't need to
16:19
be there and then he missed something that was important. He's definitely there because
16:23
the judge already scolded him on Tuesday, because I guess you know they're in.
16:27
They're doing what there which is a chance for the judge and usually the
16:32
lawyers depend on the judge's preference to ask prospective jurors questions to figure out whether
16:37
they have biases that would warn them to be challenged for cause, meaning they
16:41
have a bias. It's so inherent they can't provide a fair trial as a
16:45
juror, or where they want to do peremptory strikes, which is where you
16:48
don't give any reason, You just mark their name off a sheet and they're
16:52
not your journeymore. I think in this case, they were going to give
16:55
each side like ten, which is which is a lot. But they're going
16:57
to have multiple alternates because the trial will take quite some time. Alternates are
17:03
picked, don't They don't usually know who they are, and then they get
17:06
discharged right when the other jurors get ready to go back and deliberate, So
17:08
they sit through the whole trial and then don't get to deliberate at the end.
17:11
But yeah, he's gonna have to be there unless there's some extraordinary circumstance
17:15
for him not to be. The judge's gonna want him there. I mean,
17:18
you you notice that, because like sometimes you're reading the paper, you
17:22
have the criminal defense that are just disorderly. They won't behave I mean,
17:26
they're they're they're obstructing the process, et cetera. Well, you you've probably
17:30
seen it though. Either Sometimes they'll well, first of all, they'll secure
17:33
room. Sometimes they'll put something over their mouth so they can't talk, but
17:38
they keep trying and keep them in the courtroom for that constitutional right to be
17:41
there all the time. And I've seen some of them where they're so bad
17:45
badly behave they do like close circuit TV, where it's live TV, but
17:48
the defendant might be in the other room. I don't hopefully doesn't get that
17:52
way with mister Trump, but if he keeps what he was doing alligedly,
17:55
I read it was only one incident and then his behavior didn't lost that line
18:00
again. But it was when they were individually pointed jurry out to ask questions.
18:03
He was motioning or you know, probably doing with these under the breath
18:07
like well that's not true, or something like that, which you're absolutely not
18:11
allowed to do to perspective jurors, for sure, even witnesses. You really
18:15
shouldn't be saying things out loud about a witness's testimony in a courtroom, especially
18:22
if you have a jury triggling on which but so he got scolded for motioning
18:26
or something so the prospective jury could hear him, because of course they're diving
18:32
into you know, I understand maybe they didn't give the all the names of
18:37
perspective jurors until this week, right before they started to pick jury's. So
18:40
you've got assume armies of staff members doing scorre SERFCE reviews of social media.
18:48
And that's what some of the questions have been asked by the Trump side is
18:52
you know, what about this post and that post. And they've been successful,
18:56
they can getting a few jurors excluded for cause because they're political postings on
19:00
their social media posts. And then the you know, really reading what the
19:07
prosecutor's asking, they're kind of arguing their case and their questions, like you
19:12
know, just because for example, Michael Cone, the lawyer for Trump,
19:18
he's been convicted of I think flying to Congress or either did or was convicted
19:22
of it. Said, the prosecutor is asking these prospective jurors, hey,
19:26
you know, there's gonna be a witness here that's been convicted of felony lying
19:30
to Congress. Now he's going to testify. Now are you willing to listen
19:36
to his testimony and then assess his credibility based on all factors, not just
19:40
that one factor. So it's and then seeing if any of the jurors will
19:45
you know, raise their hand or say no. Once I know he's lied
19:48
to Congress, then I'm not going to believe anything he says. Well,
19:49
then you can't be a juror because that information will come into the trial.
19:55
But you can't. You have to have an open mind and consider the totality
20:00
of circumstances as a juror to determine whether to believe a particular witness or not.
20:03
But that prosecutor's warming those jurors up to, Hey, you're going to
20:07
hear some stuff that hurts the credibility of our position or our witnesses, but
20:15
that doesn't mean you have to disbelieve them. And that's essentially the prosecutor is
20:18
plugging that into those perspective jurors minds through his questioning. A lot of judges
20:25
will I mean, they're title that they won't let you do much. I
20:29
know that the jury trial had with Judge Howard and Cabal County. He ran
20:33
a really good trial. By the way, he has a great law clerk,
20:36
the one with where the deputies were shot and attempted murder charge some too.
20:41
Judge Howard was pretty He made us submit our questions we wanted to ask
20:45
jeurism voidare ahead of time, and he kind of took both sides and pared
20:49
them down a hybrid and then he asked all those questions and let us ask
20:55
a few follow up questions, but he was very we weren't going to be
20:57
able to get up there and do what right this judge has allowed both sides
21:03
to do, which is pretty much get free, free reign, and what
21:07
questions they want to ask of the prospect of jurors, And that is certainly
21:11
done in a way to trying to eliminate jurors that have biases they wouldn't give
21:15
you a fair trial. But there's also a strategy underlying what questions lawyers ask
21:19
sometimes because you want jurors to note certain things right in the outset. I
21:26
mean, he's softening the blow of witnesses that are going to have problems.
21:30
And this also proves a point again lines are open Tom Peyton and the Peyton
21:33
law for Mi Nitre and the questions about the law three oh four three four
21:36
five fifty eight fifty eight three h four three four five fifty eight fiftyeh.
21:40
It's also proves a point that just mean, obviously everyone knows President Trump right,
21:44
I mean, there's no one that doesn't know him. I wouldn't think,
21:47
I mean so, but that doesn't mean just because you know something,
21:49
sure, And that's what people think to you, Well, I know that
21:52
person round that witness, so I can't be on the jury. And a
21:53
lot of people are giddy about not being on the jury because they'd better be
21:56
at work or having family time. But yeah, that's that's so true,
22:02
and I'll tell you that. And they're picking a jury and they've already got
22:04
a good many of them on one day of work, and so you know,
22:08
I had the probably the most. I thought we might have some difficulty
22:12
with the one in Cavell County where the deputies were shot because it made the
22:17
media, but it happened four and a half years before we had our trial,
22:21
which makes a difference. But we didn't have any trouble picking a jury
22:25
the first day. And now I had a case against Jackie Whitaker, the
22:27
power ball winner, back when he was consistently in the headlines, and we
22:32
had to do individual void air of the jurors and that was that took a
22:34
few days, but we were almost everybody knew who he was, and it
22:38
was a Putnam County case and he bought the I mean the lottery ticket two
22:41
years before in Putnham County. So, uh, we picked a jury in
22:45
that case, but it was it was more difficult, but everybody knew him.
22:48
It's just can you still I mean, he's your relationship so close that
22:53
you cannot be unbiased just by implication or you know, do you just say
23:00
something that shows your biases? Yeah? Hey, all right, yeah,
23:03
John from South Charleston's on with Tom Payton. John, thanks for calling,
23:06
go ahead, Good morning morning. You mentioned at the opening of the show
23:11
that you had had a previous discussion about powers of attorney. I think I
23:15
know what a durable power of attorney is, but I've heard about something called
23:19
a springing power of attorney, and I wonder if you could help me understand
23:25
sure what difference is on Yeah, so I don't really draft springing power of
23:30
attorneys any longer Probay. Last one I did was five six years ago because
23:32
the client demanded it. So a durable power of attorney, durable general power
23:37
attorney, which we do regularly, is something that like if I appointed Jeff
23:42
Jenkins as my power of attorney, I'm traveling the world for a year,
23:48
Like I say, here, Jeff, use this power of attorney. You
23:49
can talk to utility companies, you know, whatever, deal with take care
23:52
of my business. I'll pay you to do it. Okay, great,
23:57
he can use it. Now if I become incapacitated and he has my power
24:03
of attorney, I've appointed him, he can continue to handle my affairs and
24:07
not have to go. There's a court process. You generally have to be
24:08
bonded, there has to be a lawyer appointed to and then you usually have
24:11
to hire your own law You've got judges, you got accountings, all this
24:15
stuff that was avoided by a durable power attorney. Now take that same situation.
24:18
A springing power of attorney has language in it that says it does not
24:25
become effective unless you are incapacitated. Now I don't use those because my theory
24:36
is, I mean, why would you appoint somebody as your power of attorney
24:40
if you trust them when you're incapacitated and can't monitor what they do. But
24:45
you wouldn't trust them to use it as a matter of convenience when you can
24:48
see here and understand what they're doing. So I don't see and the springing,
24:52
durable or springing power of attorneys. You have that extra factual Hurle,
24:57
you've got to get over because it's not effective until you're incapacitated. And I
25:02
can tell you that quote incapacitated or incompetent is it's a spectrum. It's a
25:08
gray area. I mean, you don't, you don't. Somebody could be
25:11
incapacitated to handle a math equation, but they understand, you know who they
25:15
want to get their property when they die, for example. So there's all
25:18
kinds of So I don't like the springing power of attorneys, but what they
25:22
are, which was your question, is a power of attorney that has no
25:23
effect because the until you become incapacitated, because it has language in the document
25:30
that says that. But I think if that makes sense, so I just
25:33
don't do them anymore because I don't think it makes any sense to do them.
25:37
I mean, if you're somebody cannot And then the common misconception is if
25:41
you do a private document that appoints I point, Jeff Jenkins is my private
25:45
attorney. First, I don't even have to tell you. I could just
25:47
put it in my safe and be done. And if there's an emergency,
25:48
I'm incapacitated somebody'll get it and see, oh, well Jeff can handle Tom
25:52
Payton's affairs. So I just don't know why you would would want a springing
26:00
power of attorney where somebody's got to go prove you're incapacitated than to handle yourf
26:04
fairs because they cannot take over your affairs. I mean, you you,
26:07
you can always revoke a power of attorney if you're if you have capacity,
26:11
but me appoint Jeff Jenkins doesn't let him override what I want to have done.
26:15
Period. Now, if Jeff Jenkins is a crook and goes and you
26:18
know, drains my bank account, well I'm gonna call the police. He's
26:21
gonna be charged with embezzlement. And you can't stop people from committing crimes.
26:25
And we say, well can they use that to do this? Well yeah,
26:27
but I mean I'm not gonna just don't appoint anybody. I mean,
26:30
don't appoint Jeff Jenkins if you have any concern that he's going to steal your
26:36
money, and just leave it alone and then make everybody go through a court
26:38
process if you've become incapacitated. But you've got to have somebody a trust and
26:41
if you do in my opinion unless there's some particular circumstance that are in fact
26:47
I'm not aware of. You're better off doing a durable general power of attorney
26:51
versus a springing power of attorney. Does that help you, John? It
26:55
does? Indeed, Thanks, Tom, appreciate it, right, Thanks?
26:56
Three or four three four five fifty eight fifty that's the number to call Tom
27:00
Payton, Peyton Law Firm in Nitro. Three oh four three four five fifty
27:04
eight fifty eight. Yeah. So let's try not to get too political here.
27:08
But you know, and and opinions are like noses. Everybody's got one,
27:15
I do for sure. But there are are some local races. I
27:18
think maybe Dad and I as attorney practicing attorneys have some some extra knowledge about.
27:22
And there's there's a couple of judicial races in Putnam Kenny, actually Puttnham.
27:26
We don't have a whole there's a lot of unopposed. So you know,
27:29
Judge Reader's unopposed. I think maybe a couple of the two or three
27:33
matstates are maybe unopposed. So we got a couple of races. When we
27:37
got a match at race, it's it's interesting and it comes about. It's
27:42
it's an empty spot in essence because Collien Brown, who was a really good
27:47
manstrate remember of the community. Actually her brother was the system of football Steve.
27:52
Yeah, Ste've been that Collieen Dunlap Brown. But she retired after gosh,
27:57
she's been a master since I've been proxson of law, so at least
28:00
probably twenty five years retired, and I think we went to work for the
28:04
pro board of one hundred percent sure, but we have an empty slot.
28:07
So we have a temporary magisterate now and then that's why I'll be filled by
28:11
this election. So there's no incumbent in this particular race, and you've got
28:14
three candidates. You got one fella who's probably perfectly fine. I just don't
28:18
know him. I think maybe ex law enforcement or something from the Hurricane area.
28:22
Then you have one of the former law enforcement but works as a deputy
28:26
in the courthouse in Putnam County. Really good candidate too. I know him,
28:33
not as an acquaintance, but she's perfectly fine. Been around the courthouse
28:37
as a bailiff. So seeing what happens now, then we have another candidate,
28:41
and this is the one I think probably is best qualified. Nothing against
28:44
the other people, but they're Sarah Weaver's running. She's from She lived down
28:48
the Buffalo area now north of the river in Putnam, but she operated as
28:52
an assistant mash at court in Knall County for I think a number of years
28:56
and then she's or came up with I think with Judge Tabot, Circuit Judge
29:02
Tabot, who unfortunate has passed away. Oh I know Sarah. Yeah,
29:04
so she's Sarah's assistant there. She's not a law clerk. She's not a
29:08
lawyer. But but I like that dynamic because when you are in both those
29:14
positions master court and circuit court, you've been dealing with the general public a
29:18
lot. You've been dealing with lawyers a lot, which is you got to
29:22
deal with and they're just a different animal. I think sometimes when you're dealing
29:26
with lawyers and what's really happened in the courtroom and then pro say people.
29:30
I mean, she's had to deal with people on various legal issues, trying
29:34
to handle cases themselves, and she's done that from I don't want to see
29:38
the lowest level, but the deepest trench, the magistrate court level. And
29:42
then she's done at the highest level as far as trial courts go, where
29:45
you're dealing with regular people filing cases and having trials with Judge Tabot. And
29:49
if she worked with just Tabot for a while, then she's in Judge Tabot
29:53
thought highly enough to have her employed there, I think her entire time.
29:57
Then that gets uh high ranks with me. So anyway, Yeah, you
30:03
know, as far as judicial, you know the matters here, small claims
30:07
here, misdemeanor criminal cases. I think Sarah is just the best qualified for
30:14
that job. And it's nothing against any of the other candidates. So I
30:17
think that's that's one if you're thinking about you might think about Sarah Weaver,
30:21
and everybody knows everybody, and there's nothing wrong with those other candidates that I've
30:25
found, But I just think she's the best candid. Yeah. I dealt
30:27
with just media has dealt with her a lot with during COVID with you know,
30:33
because just Tabitt had very active docket, so there was a lot of
30:37
zoom meetings in those type of things, and so she was just very efficient,
30:41
Yeah, efficient in helping us speaks well here at the court, professional
30:45
you know, all those active So I just think those are things that for
30:49
a magistrate in my years of doing this are important and will help her do
30:53
that job effectively without a whole lot of you know, if you haven't done
31:00
the type of work she's done, then it takes because she and she even
31:04
knows what's going on in the background, because she's been back with just the
31:07
judge or just the magistrate, you know, which is different. And so
31:10
I think to see how decisions are made and things like that, and I
31:14
think that that's particularly important. I think we're lucky actually in Putnham County,
31:18
I have that type candidate wanting to run for that job because she I have
31:22
no idea what her pay is in Charleston, but it's probably pretty good.
31:25
I suspect the changing of jobs is mostly for a commute issue and then maybe
31:30
just wanting to help the community where where she lives and has her children.
31:33
But yeah, she'd be a good, good candidate, and she is a
31:37
good candidate, and if she gets elected, I think she'll do a good
31:40
job. So we got that one. Then we have another judicial race.
31:44
It's contested in Putnam County. That's the circuit court case, and that's Judge
31:48
Stowers. It's Stowers is I think he's already served two terms, so sixteen
31:52
years and he's trying to serve another term. Judge Dowurs is really smart,
31:59
really smart. I mean, I've appeared in front of a lot of judges.
32:02
He can be deliberate, meaning he will take things under consideration or advisement
32:08
frequently when they're important issues to the clients or important issues to the public.
32:15
I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Sometimes it means his dock.
32:19
It might be a little slower than others, but I don't see a problem
32:22
with that. Plus, I also, you know, in my years of
32:24
doing this, is how do judges treat lawyers? You know, because you're
32:28
in your when you're in a position of power, whether you're a lawyer,
32:30
doctor, policeman, you know, you have the ability to quite easily be
32:37
a jerk, you know, or rude or or or that kind of thing.
32:40
And so I think when you have judges that you know, treat lawyers
32:46
decent and are fair to everyone. And remember what it was like to practice
32:52
law when you might have five different alarms going on on a Monday that you
32:57
didn't know was going to be happening. And so I think it's is attuned
33:00
to that. And really both Judge Towers and Judge reader in Putnam County.
33:05
We have kind of a nice I wouldn't call it a two headed monster,
33:07
but they are very good about divving up. You know, one of them
33:09
handles abuse neglect and one of them handles juveniles and star Wars has really been
33:15
able to concentrate on that half of the equation do a really good job.
33:17
I mean, statistics have improved tremendously with the Truancy program and Drug Court and
33:22
things like that, as far as kids getting in school and graduating and trying
33:25
to keep them off drugs, and I think the Stowers has gone above and
33:30
beyond, you know, just regular trial judge of work to help get those
33:34
programs going. Now, the other candidate that's run there's one candidate running against
33:38
him. It's a non partisan race, but I do see problems with that
33:45
candidate, and I think unfortunately, if he's elected, then we're gonna have
33:50
we could have half a judge. Because he's put out some statements I think
33:54
that are inappropriate for a judicial candidate. I think not many people would argue
34:00
that, for example, saying things like, if he gets elected judge,
34:05
what you will or can't expect is that he will give maximum sentencing for all
34:08
crimes. Well that's is that rhetoric. I don't know, but you can't
34:12
as a judicial candidate. People are more familiar with kind of the confirmation type
34:17
hearings of the US Supreme Court. Well, you know that the justices or
34:21
perspective justices are always jocking trying not to you know, they can't really say
34:24
and they're not supposed to say how they will rule on a particular issue.
34:28
So you get these kind of unsatisfactory responses, at least to the members of
34:31
commerce poking at them, because you're not supposed to say how you'll rule in
34:38
particular cases, because every case is different. And so here we have maximum
34:43
sentencing for all crimes. So if I'm representing a criminal defendant, I will
34:46
immediately move for a recusal of that particular person if they're a judge, because
34:52
there's all kinds of factors you're supposed to consider in sentencing. You're not just
34:54
supposed to give maxim sentencing for all crimes. We have entire probation departments that
35:00
that do analysis to see whether you can get an alternative sentence or something.
35:04
I mean, everybody's different. I'll give you an example. So let's say
35:07
take Bob Huggins case. For example, let's say it was in West Virginia.
35:10
Well, deep first defense dui is up to six months in jail in
35:14
West Virginia. Now, if nobody's hurt, you blew under point one five,
35:19
so it's the less serious one. You're not going to get six months
35:24
in jail in West Virginia on a first defense dui even if you have a
35:29
bad history, most likely for a lot of different reasons, costs being one
35:34
of them. But just the proportionality of the crime committed versus the potential sentences
35:40
seems to outweigh in this situation. So I guess if you take this particular
35:45
judicial candidate, they win. Well, Bob Huggins will be sitting in jail
35:49
for six months because he also doesn't like alternative sentences, this candidate, and
35:52
we'll give the maximum sentence for all crimes. So there, you know,
35:55
if he's going to do what he tells us to expect, then you're gonna
36:00
have somebody sitting in jail for six months. They shouldn't be there. Take
36:01
the same petty larceny that's basically anything that's stolen under one thousand dollars if it's
36:07
not in a shoplifting type scheme, then that can be pretty minor. I
36:10
mean, I've seen people all twenty year old took a pocket knife, gets
36:15
charged with petty larsnil's you know, go do a fine or something and move
36:17
on. If they have no prior record, well you can get up to
36:21
a year. In West Virginia it's up to a year, so mayustrict could
36:22
pick anything up to a year for example. So if I guess, if
36:25
you get this particular candidate, just bank on going to jail for a year
36:30
because that's what he says he's going to do. So you know, I
36:35
don't have any particular problem with this person other than if you're making these statements.
36:39
And judicial candidates are different than normal political candidates. They have a separate
36:45
set of cannons they have to follow too, So you know, a lot
36:49
of what I've said here wouldn't really be a problem with a normal political candidate.
36:53
But when you're talking about being a judical candidate, I mean there's a
36:55
whole handbook that you know, has advisory opinions that, et cetera on what
37:00
you can do as a judicial candidate because you've got to be careful. So
37:05
those folks in Putnam County. You know, if you if you heed what
37:10
I'm saying, you know, I'm certainly endorse Judge Towers and then Sarah Weaver
37:16
and h And I really worry if Judge Towers doesn't win because of what I've
37:21
seen come out of the opposing candidate, and I just, you know,
37:28
statements that are so blatantly inappropriate in my opinion, that I don't know how
37:35
that person could ever rehabilitate themselves to hear certain cases that will appear before him.
37:42
They're elected, all right, Peyton Law Firm in Night. Yeah,
37:45
they can stop by a twenty to one first Avenue, or give us a
37:47
call at the office three oh four seven five five five five five six,
37:52
or submit a question through our website Peyton Lawfirm dot com. That comes right
37:55
to Dad and I want our emails, and we try and get back with
37:59
his day or next day. And if you don't hear from us, just
38:01
give us a callback. We are extremely busy. We do take pride in
38:05
returning our calls and respond to our emails. But if we miss you,
38:08
just give us a callback. All right, Thanks Tom, Good seeing you,
38:12
Tom Payton to the Payton Law firm in Nitro State. Tuned ABC News
38:15
is on the way next here on five eight WCHS the voice to Charleston local
38:21
news with Carrie Hooter six. This is five eighty at six point five,
38:25
then Charleston one O four point five Cross Lanes, WUVRC Media Station. We
38:31
are proud to live here too,