Report details allegations against Murphy

Comments

  1. mhg says:

    I have known Jim T Martin for many years and I dont believe he should be dragged into this nonsense!!!!

  2. bahecky says:

    Judge Jim T. Martin is an honest, kind, upstanding man. It is unfair for him to get dragged into this.

  3. altitude says:

    This might be a good reason not to make a political donation.

  4. JusticeP says:

    source1…Justice Edward L. Chavez and Chief Judge Charles W. Daniels of the Supreme Court were appointed by Bill Richardson (2 of 5) and Linda M. Vanzi, Michael E. Vigil, Robert E. Robles and Timothy L. Garcia of the Court of Appeals were all appointed by Richardson (4 of 10). Judge Murphy also stated that if he was guilty of buying a judgeship, then what does that make Chief Justice (Charlie) Daniels.
    Heath has done an excellent job in reporting this and the newspapers that have published the news have either used his writings and finds or copied them. He is to be commended–as if he did not pursue the truth in this matter it might not have gotten to the revelation of the true events.
    It really will be nice to see if all the participating parties are pursued. In my opinion it goes much deeper than the judiciary, Richardson and accessories to them. The attorney general’s office is also responsible for not being responsible. Matt Chandler would have been a great attorney general.

  5. source1 says:

    Wow. I am speechless, truly.

    I do have a few questions, why did the supreme court reject judicial standards request to remove Murphy from the bench with this type of information?

    How long will it take him to either step down or be removed?

    What liability does the Supreme Court have if, in the meantime, Judge Murphy hurts someone in the courthouse?

    Any citizen that comes before Michael Murphy and Jim T. Martin should be absolutely terrified that one will either rule against them for personal gain or benefit.

    Lisa Schultz should get the highest award given to a NM citizen for bravery and courage. Thank you Judge Schultz! Thank you Matt Chandler and thank you Heath for bringing this to the light. Don’t ever give up, please use this crack in the corruption veil to keep digging. We must rid this once and for all.

    Now I am going to go sit in my chair and deflate. I am shocked and so mad right now that this is what our justice system has become. I don’t even know what else to say!

  6. Dave says:

    I find it very interesting that the Las Cruces Sun news doesn’t seem to be publishing any articles that link to the court paperwork or give any details about the testimony that occurred at the grand jury. Are they trying to keep this major case of pervasive judicial corruption quiet so the public really doesn’t know about how bad our judicial system here in Las Cruces is???? I have been checking the Las Cruces sun news daily and they haven’t published anything like this article and I’m wondering why??? A few of us know to go to Heath’s web-site for the best information but most people probably wouldn’t know to go there.

    Also, why is it that our local news of all of this judicial corruption doesn’t get told on the Albuquerque news channels. Maybe if more of our news was passed along up there and throughout the state, these corrupt attorneys and judges wouldn’t keep getting away with this corrupt and unethical behavior????

  7. JusticeP says:

    qofdisks…I believe it correct to say there are three branches of government and they are to be independent of each other. In fact the judicial branch purpose is to determine if the legislative laws are constitutional and constitutional as applied. If the criteria for appointment are to support the executive branch, the purpose of the three branches is defeated. Further, the judicial commission is to recommend the BEST QUALIFIED CANDIDATE (not a contributor to the governor) which includes a non-biased, impartial person of upright integrity. Whether it is $1 or $4000.00 or $400,000.00 is not relevant, the exchange of value for favorable consideration regarding a state actor position does not fall within the definition of upright integrity on the part of either party. Likewise, a prosecutor and an attorney agreeing to give a favorable plea bargain and grant favor later in another cause is not any different that exchanging value for favorable consideration later. Neither is a Judge accepting value from an attorney for a favorable decision in a cause, upright. Neither should be considered acceptable in any manner. Murphy says he paid to be appointed. That action is wrong. It is not an innocent contribution in support of the governor.

  8. qofdisks says:

    That One says, “$4000 to buy a judgeship…absolutely disgusting!”
    Is it just me or does anybody else see this as a ludicrously small amount of money to pay for a judgeship? It is a nice political contribution but hardly constitutes a bribe. I don’t think it was so much as pay to play as pay to show loyalty. Richardson was all about loyalty you know. Why would Richardson appoint someone that does not support him? I am not convinced of wrong doing so much as lambesconando.

  9. JusticeP says:

    Woman Power…do you really believe that with all the talk Murphy did to other judges that Judge Driggers either did not know about this or that Bridgeforth or Robles did not have discussions with him? I believe that if you believe Driggers did not know this you are mistaken. I believe Ms. Schulz should be commended, but Driggers????????????

  10. WomanPower says:

    Thanks Heath for the detailed information regarding this case.

    I want to say that we need to thank Judge Schultz for being so brave and to have the courage to bring this out despite being out numbered by nothing but male judges. She is a hero and a role model for all women.

    Chief Judge Driggers should be thanking Judge Schultz for her speaking up because of her his job as Chief Judge will be so much easier now that he may not have judges like Murphy and Martin no longer being under his tenure and reign as Chief Judge. Judge Driggers now owes it to Judge Schultz to be as respectful with her and honor her for her courage effort.

    WAY TO GO JUDGE SCHULTZ!!! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!!!

  11. MJM says:

    Who gets stuck with the tab for all this stuff. Why the tax payer…both coming and going. Ched your right. Let the light shine in and lets see what or who is behind this. Where are the feds, and again I ask where is our Attorney General?

  12. GFA says:

    Great reporting Heath! Unlike the Journal rag that is a day late and a dollar short. This has notched up another political scandal for New Mexico, already infamous for its back room wheeling and dealing at the highest levels. My question is, if all the Murphy contributions reported show just $410, what happened to the rest? It was in cash, so maybe pocket money for the recipient or the courier? Like MJM says, where is our attorney general? Who is he now, by the way?

  13. That One says:

    $4000 to buy a judgeship…absolutely disgusting! To hell with the needs of the people! Change parties but nothing changes. Case in point Richardson and Boehner (the D.C. Speaker/Madam). Two slugs–leaving a trail of slime wherever the go. It is so damn discouraging!

  14. JusticeP says:

    Quote from C. J. McElhinney April 5, 2011 • 7:02 am “So, Mr. Chandler, if you’re reading this, why not bring your case out into the public eye? This is a case involving a public figure and involving a substantial public interest. Put your evidence out there and let the voting public decide if this is a real case of corruption or whether it’s a political witch hunt which most likely reaches the highest perches of state government.”
    I believe the evidence speaks for itself…this is a real case of corruption and reaches the highest perches of present and past state government officials and it should not be tolerated any longer.

  15. Raiderguy says:

    Ha !!! Looks like Manny Aragon going to ace a cellmate.

  16. ched macquigg says:

    Since this was such common knowledge amongst the local judges, shouldn’t all of the Judges at the third judicial courthouse that were appointed by Richardson during his tenure from 2003-2010 be investigated?

    It is alarming that guilty knowledge was apparently so widespread, and so widely at least, tacitly acceptable to so many who we trust to remain above this kind of thing.

  17. Dave says:

    Heath, thank you for such diligent coverage. We are lucky to have you in our area. I read your article and the court paperwork regarding the indictment charges. Although I have never met Judge Schultz and know nothing about her, I have to thank her and I truly respect her for her integrity, ethics, and for having the audacity to bring this to the DA’s office in light of a very valid potential for retaliation against her by the other judges and Richardson. I am not surprised about the Richardson/Lopez process for judicial appointment but I am appalled at how it was such common knowledge amongst the local judges and many of the local attorneys who participate on the judicial nomination committee. I am even further appalled by the complaisance of so many of the judges that Judge Schultz approached for guidance in this matter. After reading this information, several things come to my mind:
    -Why would Judge J.C. Robinson be allowed to preside over this grand Jury when Mr. Osborn had personal knowledge that he and Murphy knew each other and when by Murphy’s own admission to Mr. Norm Osborn, he was glad it was Judge Robinson and that Robinson’s appointment was a “good thing” for him??

    -Why were Judge Martin and Edgar Lopez discussing the case when they were both witnesses waiting to testify? The picture is very telling and looking at the body posture of Mr. Lopez and the facial expression on Judge Martin’s face, they weren’t talking about the weather.

    -How do we know that Murphy’s statement to Judge Schultz about Judge Arrietta’s appointment is truthful and wasn’t just something he said to appease her and lead her to believe that he and the other judges were no longer engaging in this corrupt behavior??

    -The statement that retired appeals Judge Apadoca made to Judge Schultz about “the system working this way” implies that this corruption with judicial appointment is long-standing and pervasive throughout this state. However, it seems to have been extremely rampant during Richardson’s tenure as governor.

    -Since this was such common knowledge amongst the local judges, shouldn’t all of the Judges at the third judicial courthouse that were appointed by Richardson during his tenure from 2003-2010 be investigated?

    -I find it rather strange that Judge Driggers and Judge Macias are not mentioned anywhere at all in these documents when they were both appointed by Richardson. Furthermore, I find it even harder to believe that they weren’t recipients, at some level, of the “Richardson/Lopez judicial appointment process when this was such common knowledge amongst the judges. Are they being investigated????

    -It is frightening to think that the Supreme Court did not suspend Murphy from the bench in light of all of this evidence? How can that be??????

    -I can tell you that these corrupt judges have carried their corruption into their courtrooms and have frequently abused their judicial power. Their corruption and dishonesty exhibits itself by their inability to be impartial in their courtrooms. They clearly make rulings in favor of attorneys they are partial to. They do this because they know that due to the corrupt system, they can get away with this. Even Judge Schultz was worried about retaliation for telling the truth. This should not be happening.
    We need judicial reform immediately!

  18. MJM says:

    Has our Attorney General gone missing? Has there been any pay for play scandals that he has lfound out about? Wake up.

  19. Thinker says:

    So many questions…Three come to mind:

    1. Why was this not referred to the FBI? This is clearly bigger than “Mike Murphy fell in line and coughed up some bucks”–this is a HUGE criminal corruption case. And it obviously goes all the way up the ladder to the big man on top–Richardson.

    2.Is this initial prosecution of minor character Murphy a way to leverage testimonies in a bigger case somewhere down the line?

    3. How will Susanna manage to stay above the fray in all this? She had to know something all these years.

    What really jumps out at one here is what a hero we have in Judge Lisa Schultz. She deserves an award for her courage and integrity. Hopefully that’s what she’ll get, instead of the fate of so many other whistle blowers we hear about today.

    Sadly, what I fear will happen is that one doofus who pretty much spoke the truth and did what he needed to do to swim with the sharks will get pinned on this–and all the rest of the rats will just scurry away into the cracks.

  20. JusticeP says:

    The broad scope of persons in the judiciary with knowledge of the admitted actions as stated herein raises some substantial questions. One being, why would the Supreme Court return this kind of information to the Judicial Standards Commission and not suspend Murphy (the allegations are serious enough that the judge could compromise the judiciary’s integrity)? Two being, ““Lopez told investigators that he had been involved in judicial appointments, and said Martin was appointed instead of Murphy in 2003 because Murphy “did not pay Edgar homage.””, sounds like Lopez feels he is untouchable. Three being, I believe it was correct procedure to appoint an outside the district, district attorney (and I commend Ms. Martinez for appointing an honest one) although it could be said that if Ms. Martinez started revealing wrongdoings on the part of one or more judges in her district, the district judges in return might start revealing some shortcomings of Ms. Martinez. In Ms. Martinez knowing her future plans this could be considered a very safe move on her part. Four being, when “Stout said. “His selection as a judge several years ago was an easy pick and followed the same nominating process that produced all judges in the state and in Las Cruces”—if true, should those facts lead to the investigation of all judges that Richardson appointed? Five being, are we finally going to break the Richardson veil of corruption and his Lopez types of accessories. Being an assessor to a crime is also a crime.
    It is wonderful that all this information has finally come to light. It will be more wonderful if this case would go to a jury, instead of a trial by judge that could lead to a judge judging one of their own. It seems that we have had enough of that in what the facts are revealing. It is good that truth is coming to light, although the factual events are enough to make a maggot puke.