Press-Republican

Letters To The Editor

October 14, 2013

Letters to the Editor: Oct. 14, 2013

Disputes inference

TO THE EDITOR: A flyer being circulated by persons opposed to the dissolution of one justice position for the Town of Jay contains misleading/inaccurate information.

The author claims one of the reasons for changing from two justices to one was “the fact that Judge Minogue has been spending several winter months in Florida” and “Judge Minogue’s decision to spend winters in Florida is disturbing.”

These statements infer that I am derelict in my duties. The facts:

One board member indicated that a resident had complained that Judge Minogue was not available (motive and time unstated). That discussion was not a stated reason for the decision for one justice, a fact that was made abundantly clear at the meeting. Had the author of the flyer done his due diligence, he would’ve found that I returned routinely to Jay to perform my court duties, at my expense.

All cases before me are current; I keep abreast of all issues via phone, text or Internet. There is no mandate that a town justice be present 24/7. I have regular contact with court staff and my co-judge, and we routinely cover for each other to accommodate any conflicts of judicial duties or scheduling.

There have been no issues cited by the District Attorney’s Office or any defendant’s attorneys relative to timeliness. I routinely assist my co-judge and have done so for nearly four years on his court nights. I do this in order to make his job a little easier but primarily to further educate myself about the judicial system and learn from him.

The flyer is a specious attempt to enrage or incite voters, and it is fraught with half-truths and inaccuracies in an attempt to promote their agenda.

ROBERT J. MINOGUE

Jay town justice

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Letters To The Editor