It concerned us recently when Columbus municipal judge Marc Amos was called before the city council and asked to explain a bond he set on April 13.
On that day, Amos set the bond for a man accused of leaving the scene of a deadly accident at $7,500. The suspect, police say, struck a 50-year-old woman walking along Seventh Avenue North, stopped his vehicle, looked at the woman’s body and then drove away. The victim’s family felt the bond Amos set for the suspect was too low. Amos — before the council and the victim’s family — had to explain the reasoning behind the bond amount last week.
The judge’s explanation indicated his decision was carefully considered and embodied the spirit and purpose of the law. But that is hardly the point.
What is egregious here and what we take issue with is a municipal judge was hauled in front of the mayor, city council and public and forced to explain himself, not because he behaved improperly, but because someone in the community didn’t like it.
The primary purpose of a bond is to ensure an accused person’s presence to answer charges. A judge can consider several factors in making a determination on the bond amount — prior criminal record of the accused, flight risk, danger to community, the accused’s ties to the community — but he only should make the decision. Every person accused of a crime has a right to a reasonable bail. Also, a bond is not a form of punishment and cannot be used as such.
Every person in this country has the right to be treated fairly in a courtroom, even if the public believes they do not deserve it. Judges must be insulated from political pressure like Amos was subjected to. School children learn about it. It’s called the separation of powers.
Mayor Robert Smith said, “When people call and complain about an issue going on in the city, then it’s my job to address those issues.”
And while we can’t disagree with the mayor’s wish to get answers for disgruntled residents, requiring a judge to stand in front of the public and explain his actions (and then face a dressing-down in executive session), is not the way to go about it.
It’s worth noting that municipal judges in Columbus are appointed to their positions by the city council. They can be accurately described as city employees because their salaries — roughly $23,000 a year — are paid by taxpayers.
But they are most certainly not an arm of prosecuting authorities.
Their role in a criminal proceeding is to exercise independent judgment in applying the law to the facts.
Bond amounts — and nearly all courtroom actions — are legal issues and not political ones.
For Amos to be questioned in public about his judgment undermines his and other judges as neutral arbiters in our judicial system and is grossly inappropriate. Frankly, it questions our municipal judges’ independence.
Our elected officials should let our judges do their jobs.
The Dispatch Editorial Board is made up of publisher Peter Imes, columnist Slim Smith, managing editor Zack Plair and senior newsroom staff.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 43 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.