Constitutional Law

KingCast appeals Supreme Court decision not to ask Attorney Daniel Mullen if he received the shredded Troy Watts Bruce McKay ethics complaint.

By Christopher King

I hereby appeal your decision dismissing my grievance against Attorney Daniel Mullen for one simple, undeniable reason:

It only makes sense to ask him whether he received the Troy Watts Ethics Complaint against Bruce McKay.

* The court already said that the Defendant's search "lacked indicia of credibility;" told them to search again and they still allegedly found nothing.

* However, Attorney Mullen still has not denied receiving the document. Common sense would indicate that any reasonable police chief would have followed Attorney Watt's advice to send it to the insurance carrier/Mullen. Similarly, Common sense would dictate that you ask Mullen if he ever saw it before I sent him a copy of the one held by Grafton County Prosecutor Ricardo St. Hilaire with the U.S. Certified Mail tracking and town fax header on it.

Sir, there are enough issues that raise legal eyebrows in the Franconia shooting tragedy. If you want your name to be added to the list and sent off to the U.S. House for investigation instead of taking the time to send a two-sentence letter to clarify the situation that choice is yours but I must say it makes things appear as if you are not driven to investigate a reasonable claim. If Attorney Mullen had a copy then he did likely violate Rule 3.3 by not divulging the presence of the complaint to the Court and I'm sure you wouldn't want to ignore a violation.

And if he did not receive a copy then my inquiry is over. Why are you so obdurate in your position that you won't even ask him a simple question?

For more about asking a simple question, please read the comments.

Full post as published by Chris King's 1st Amendment Page on June 08, 2008 (boomark / email).