Herman Thomas trial set Oct. 29
By Chip Drago
Mobile Bay Times
The Alabama Court of the Judiciary has set Oct. 29 for the trial of suspended Mobile County Circuit Judge Herman Thomas on swelling charges that the veteran jurist violated the state's Canon of Judicial Ethics.
Thomas had been set for trial July 25, but the sudden withdrawal of the Attorney General's office from the prosecution delayed the case.
Birmingham attorney Doug Jones, a former U.S. attorney in Birmingham during the Clinton administration, recently joined the state Judicial Inquiry Commission's investigation of Thomas, replacing Attorney General Troy King's underlings who cited a "conflict of interest" in leaving the prosecution.
The allegations against Thomas originally included 15 charges of favoritism according to personal, political and social status. The complaint doubled when 15 new counts were added a month ago. And apparently, it may expand yet further so that the COJ has reportedly set aside three full days to hear the case, according to sources close to the proceedings.
The setting and three-day projection, if accurate, suggests a Halloween verdict. An earlier attempt to mediate the charges collapsed on Friday, July 13 after assistant attorneys general asserted a conflict of interest in participating in the JIC proceedings while also performing their duties in the office of the attorney general.
Even so, according to a separate source, Thomas' legal counsel may choose to "stipulate," or concede, to many of the charges, an occasional defense tactic employed to defuse the impact of a lengthy public grappling over incendiary allegations in which the prosecution's witnesses and evidence were likely to burn the defense. Such a maneuver would shorten the trial.
Many of Thomas' judicial brethren in Mobile clearly remain miffed at their colleague who allegedly without their knowledge poached cases from their dockets and imposed in several instances startlingly lighter sentences than those originally handed down.
In a letter to authorities, the circuit bench in Mobile, excepting fellow Democratic Circuit Judge John Lockett, reportedly urged that the charges against Thomas be aired publicly to preserve confidence in the system here. Whether Lockett disagreed with the contents of the letter or did not sign on merely because he wasn't available, was not immediately known. Citing the Canons of Judicial Ethics, Lockett declined comment.
Canon 3A(6) states, “A judge should abstain from public comment about a pending or impending proceeding in any court….”
The prospect of a private, mediated settlement of the charges through the the state's Judicial Inquiry Commission has been a point of contention in the process of resolving the Thomas matter.
Thomas and his attorneys have had little or no public comment about the allegations, although the judge denied committing any ethical violations in his official answer to the COJ. Essentially, Thomas admitted the activities and conduct for which he was charged, but denied that it amounted to a breach of the Canons of Judicial Ethics.
Thomas' formal response to the complaint addressed only the initial 15 counts. Subsequently, another 15 counts were added and the judge has not yet spoken to them.
Previous reports in the saga of Thomas's alleged ethical missteps appeared in the Mobile Bay Times as follows, beginning with the more recent articles:
Former Clinton U.S. attorney joins probe of Mobile judge.
Prosecutors/JIC hit snag, Thomas trial delayed.
Mediation of Thomas complaint fails.
Proceedings advance in Thomas matter.
Thomas, JIC set to confer again.
JIC lodges complaint against Thomas.
