Illinois Co. (ECWd) –
We first brought the Aaron Shock article to light back in November in this article. It is amazing what is taking place as this case moves forward.
“The Court hereby recuses from further proceedings in this case. This Court specifically denies any bias in this case.”
Denies any bias in the case? Of course, she denies it. Admitting it would be very problematic at this stage in the case.
According to Ronald D. Rotunda, Doy & Dee Henley Chair and Distinguished Professor of Law;
“Mr. Schock’s actions made sure that Judge Myerscough would never become Chief Judge and that Judge Shadid would become Chief Judge. Judge Shadid owed Mr. Schock a debt of gratitude and Judge Myerscough has a debt of ingratitude.”
A complete read of the record appears to point to grounds for recusal from the case. Just a few points raised by Shock’s attorney are as follows.
“The documents discussed above are a set of emails (attached to this letter) the government produced to us on December 7, 2016.1 These emails demonstrate that Mr. Schock, in his capacity as a Member of Congress for the 18th Congressional District of Illinois and in conjunction with then-Senator Kirk, took steps to ensure that Chief Judge Shadid’s commission would be signed by the President before Your Honor’s. The effect of this intervention was that Judge Shadid obtained seniority and became chief judge for the Central District of Illinois rather than Your Honor. Had the President signed Your Honor’s commission first, you would have been Chief Judge. Because a reasonable observer could objectively and reasonably view the position of Chief Judge as a benefit, Mr. Schock’s role in these events could raise a question about Your Honor’s impartiality in a matter before Your Honor to which Mr. Schock is a party. Such reasonable questioning would exist regardless of whether Your Honor harbored any actual bias against Mr. Schock.”
“According to public record information, you were under consideration to be the Democratic nominee and met with representatives of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in furtherance of your potential bid for the office. That record also discloses that you later declared that you would not run for the open seat. These circumstances also are a basis upon which Your Honor’s impartiality in this matter might reasonably be questioned.”
“Your Honor also informed Mr. Schock at his arraignment on December 12, 2016 that your daughter was engaged to be married to a McGuireWoods attorney. As you indicated at the time, the undersigned counsel are partners with McGuireWoods. Because of Your Honor’s familial relationship to a McGuireWoods attorney, a reasonable observer could reasonably question your impartiality, including on the basis that Your Honor may preside and act so as to counteract any perception that you are favoring Mr. Schock’s attorneys.”
We only have one question for the Judge who recused herself.
Why didn’t you recuse yourself in advance of such a request from Counsel?
We ask that question because after reading all the information, it appears she had knowledge of key information that at a minimum, appears to point to a potential bias.
To review the order, letter from counsel and all attachments, to include a legal opinion on the legal and ethical problems for this judge, simply click below accordingly.
- Letter from Counsel
- MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MR. SCHOCK’S LETTER TO JUDGE MYERSCOUGH SUGGESTING RECUSAL
- Legal and Ethics opinion letter from Ronald D. Rotunda
- Emails pertaining to Judicial Appointment
- Myerscough takes herself out of 18th District race
- US Attorney letter to deny recusal
- US Attorney Exhibit A
- Shock’s Attorney response to US Attorney letter
- Recusal Order
Please consider a donation to the Edgar County Watchdogs.
janniePosted at 16:32h, 23 January