The Martin Chronicles isn't buying Todd McMurtry's bizarre excuse. His client, Villa Hills malfeasant Mayor Mike Martin, did not have what McMurtry oddly described as a "Mitt Romney moment". If the menacing Martin had any sort of "moment", it was a "Norwood gang banger moment". You see, gang bangers live-and die-by the motto, "if you snitch, I'll kill ya".
So what does this all mean? At Friday's hearing, the judge was none to pleased with Martin's October 3 Executive Order which stated that ". . . no employee . . . shall attend that hearing (Martin's removal hearing) . . . Any employee violating this order will be ordered arrested for trespassing by the Kenton County Sheriff's office".
No elected official-even one who routinely describes himself as "the CEO" and "the superior"-has the authority to suspend either the US Constitution or the Kentucky Revised Statutes. It certainly appears that Martin's unconstitutional executive order is designed to scare off the employees who are scheduled to testify at his October 22 removal hearing. And why wouldn't the employees be frightened? One employee has already been arrested while on the job.
Layer on to this the comments that have surfaced from Martin's heated exchange with Special Counsel Phil Taliaferro. Taliaferro was at the City Building to talk to the employees as part of the duly-authorized investigation into Mayor Martin's conduct. Remember what Martin said?
"No!!! If my employees do not go back to work, and you have told them that, then they will reap the consequences of disobeying a direct order from the superior. Do YOU understand that?
Let me just tell you, my employees had better get back to work. I have told one employee already to tell the others to go back to work. And if they do not then we are going to have a mayor issue.
No, I am giving them an ultimatum they listen to me and not to you, because you don't run the City."
Okay. We get it. Todd McMurtry has stepped in to a pile of dog (EXPLETIVE) taking on Martin as a client. He has to say and do everything he can to save his client. Why else do you think McMurtry and Martin tried so desperately to derail the looming removal hearing?
It seems Martin will do anything to keep the truth hidden away. Perhaps even witness intimidation. Let's take a look at the relevant parts of the governing Kentucky Revised Statute.
524.040 Intimidating a participant in a legal process.
(1) A person is guilty of intimidating a participant in a legal process when, by use of physical force or a threat directed to a person he believes a participant in the legal process, he or she:
(a) Influences, or attempts to influence, the testimony, vote, decision, or opinion of that person;
(b) Induces, or attempts to induce, that person to avoid legal process summoning him or her to testify;
(c) Induces, or attempts to induce, that person to absent himself or herself from an official proceeding to which he has been legally summoned;
(d) Induces, or attempts to induce, that person to withhold a record, document, or other object from an official proceeding;
(e) Induces, or attempts to induce, that person to alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with the intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding
McMurty and Martin might claim that-because of their failed attempt to get an injunction-there was no official proceeding set prior to Martin's unconstitutional executive order and phone threats. It matters not.
Why? Because 524.040 (2) (a) goes on to say an official proceeding need not be pending or about to be instituted at the time of the offense.
There is one other thing in the statute Martin should remember. 524.040 (3) states Intimidating a participant in the legal process is a Class D felony.
[PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Thank you to all of the readers who have called and written today to congratulate The Martin Chronicles on our FIRST ANNIVERSARY.]
