After revealing on its first three pages a Boone County divorce decree in which most family assets ended up in McHenry County Judge Maureen McIntyre’s name despite her lawyer husband’s owing big money, today the Chicago Sun-Times lit into her with an editorial.
Entitled, “Judge pulls fast one,” the opinion piece implies there is an “appearance of impropriety.”
The February 19, 2013, editorial critical of Judge Maureen McIntyre.
Attorney Robert T. Hanlon came to McIntyre’s defense in a comment under yesterday’s McHenry County Blog story, which would not have been written had she not been assigned the Richard J. Vanecko “heater” case after Cook County judgeds refused to try it.
“As an attorney, I have been before Judge McIntyre on numerous occasions and she has administered the law as I believe she thought proper, even when deciding arguments against my positions.
“The papers and this blog should realize that she will make difficult judgments which is her job. She is not corrupt.
“She is a fair judge.
“In short, Judge McIntyre is not deserving of being the subject of a Chicago witchhunt.
“I’m sure, in the end, her rulings in this very public case will be based on what she believes is right, just and equitable.”
This morning Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass was critical of McIntyre, but I didn’t switch to WLS Radio until he was finishing the topic.
This is no different than any bankruptcy case. “Some” may not like it, but the plain fact is, the law allows for it.
Just as in this case, “Some” may not like it, but again, the laws allows it.
This was nothing more than a maneuvering of assets, or protection if you will.
Just like many corporations do then continue to operate for years under the protections the law provides.
Why should Judge McIntyre lose her life’s assets because she married an idiot.
Conversely, why would Judge McIntyre continue to ‘house’ such an idiot?
This is akin to a bankruptcy fraud.
The law does not provide for this, at least not the intent of the law.
So, the question is, “What was Judge McIntyre’s intent when she and her husband divorced?”
I believe Judge McIntyre should be asked the question, at the very least. I do not believe this is a ‘witchhunt.’ This is a question of integrity.
Way too many words, Spotted.
Why is it that some very nasty and very sealed divorces of some elected officials get a pass while some people with a media target on their backs get front page attention?
Once again the media and the Illinois powerful few control who gets a pass and who does not.
Just watch who gets a pass in the next Governor’s race and who does not. It is already happening if anyone is paying any attention.
Obviously, SZ has no clue as to what fraud is!
Big Mac is one tough cookie and is also very smart.
She will be just fine.
I’d be proud to have Judge McIntyre and Rob Hanlon on my team any time.
Precisely why I used so many words in my first comment.
I gave her a pass in my first comment because the law provides for such behavior as I “Tried” to express.
“Watching” didn’t like my ‘complete’ explanation of how thing’s work.
So, legally, no fraud, I agree.
In the eyes of public opinion, ‘fraud’ appears to be in play.
I have taken down a post by SpottedZebra that was defamatory.
Am flying up to Chi. soon, to meet with my accountant, to do my yearly corporate and personal taxes.
Will print these articles and review this McIntyre strategy with him, to see what my net gain would be, with this apparently simple manuevering.
Just kidding folks, only a pair of scoundrels would go down this path.
I guess that $182 K per year subsidy from taxpayers, didn’t fit in any possible repayment plan for those creditors.
Got to keep up those three vacation retreats though, collection calls must be stressful.
Rediculous!
Spotted,
Ummm, no. I said too many words because you made an explanation of the law, then you did a backwards somersault and said that the judge should be questioned. You could have made your post much shorter.
Shorter posts tend to make their points. Longer posts tend to lose the audience and soften the point being made. When commenting on a blog, better to be short and pithy than to stretch the explanation of how you came to a particular position and lose the punch if you know what I mean.
Also you were really long compared to how little you delved into the material. For example: How would public opinion come to the opinion that fraud was involved. Aren’t there other innocent explanations as to why the facts revealed in the newspaper came about? What does it take for public opinion to arrive at an accusation of fraud. Does the fact that this involves a McHenry County Judge change that analysis? Does it make it less likely?
You used 158 words (the word idiot twice). That’ not really a lot of words. I think the point that I was trying to make was that you could have written the post like this:
“It might be legal, but it smells.”
and you would have stated the same thing. Your words were neither precise nor succinct. But, I am waiting for Cal to tell us whether we missed this issue before or after a retention election.
In another post (somewhere) someone calls this judge “Big Mac” and says she is tough. A better query would be, is she so self absorbed that she felt that this move would not hurt her chances at retention, or said a different way is she so tough that she didn’t even care what the voters might think. I wonder if this may be the turn that topples the circuit judge racket? Maybe, maybe not.
The information was not known during her campaign for retention last year.
“Watching,” you just used 314 words to tell me that my 158 words was too much?
We must meet!!! We can both go get our Lithium refills together!
All in fun!!
Spotted, it’s a date!
What go’s around, comes around. I hope you get what you deserve.