An honest judge in the Varlo Davenport case!?

I know what you might be thinking. You’re wondering if there is anything else on my collective radar for writing other than the Varlo Davenport case. To the degree that I am in concurrence with you that it sure seems like it, I will tell you that I wish it were otherwise.

And I would wager that so do the people who are involved in the case. Surely they would prefer for their misdeeds to go unpublished — and for that matter, unpunished.

And there is the rub, right? These folks have tried relentlessly to foster an environment where they control the message and are able to cast their actions in a noble light.

My response to that is well known and yours should be as well: “Bastards beware, I do not have your best interest at heart.”

On June 1, the newly appointed judge in the case, Karlin S. Myers, issued a sua sponte order to the City of St. George — and by default, Dixie State University and Assistant Attorney General Michael Carter.

Sua sponte describes an act of authority taken without formal prompting from another party. It refers to actions taken by a judge without a prior motion or request from the parties.

In other words, without a motion being filed or any other provocation, Myers is ordering the college to produce documents, recordings, and emails secured by DSU campus police and other DSU departments and personnel that were used in the administrative process against Davenport. The documents are to be reviewed by the city as well as parts in camera by the judge. Consequently, the defense will also be able to review the documents. In the order, Myers cites State of Utah v. Lew Ison as precedent for the current preceding.

On June 3, Carter submitted a notice of delivery stating that the order had been complied with as of 2:45 p.m. that day.

It is a little confusing that Carter is so actively engaged in this case and that the city is so curiously silent when in fact it is actually the city, on behalf of DSU, who is bringing the criminal action against Davenport. The semblance of collusion has not waned, however. The questionability of the city’s involvement in this case needs to be addressed.

Something of interest is what took place last week when Carter failed to appear at the hearing for a motion to hold DSU President Biff Williams in contempt of court for failure to produce the evidence. His questionable absence along with the lame attempts of DSU attorney Doaja Hicks and Saint George City attorney Robert Cosson to sweep it under the rug by saying he simply did not know he was supposed to be there, was as telling as any of the other numerous nefarious actions taken by the school and the city thus far. No one on the business end of either of those two entities would be granted the leeway Carter or by default, Williams was were they to do the same. Furthermore, the idea that Biff is off the hook now that the college is ordered to produce the documents and allegedly has done so in full confidence and honesty would be tantamount to a thief saying that because he returned the stolen goods, the crime is null.

If the motion to find Biff in contempt is granted — as it likely should be based on the shenanigans of Carter, Judge Ron Reid, and by default the City of St. George — perhaps then justice will appear to have opened her eyes in the case.

Let’s hope so.

According to a witness at last week’s “contempt of court” hearing, Myers assured Davenport that they would get through this. It could be taken to mean that this judge, a former criminal defense attorney, sees full well that the manner in which this case has been handled not only violates Davenport’s right to a fair and speedy process but that perhaps the previous proceedings have steered far from anything that resembles a legitimate court of law. He appears to be taking steps to amend that.

Permit me to digress a moment here and offer a rebuttal to those people who comment that religion has nothing to do with this.

The people who have perpetuated this fiction against Davenport, for the most part, are all members in good standing with their respective church. Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps this is a poor representation of said church and that what baffles people here is that no one in said church will lift a finger to rein it in by disciplining or even removing these people from elected and appointed power and replacing them with people who model the tenants of their faith, the least of which being telling the damn truth?

Think about it.

In the mean time, let’s remain relentless in holding these people accountable in the press to that curious little thing known as the law.

And pay attention, because it is not too far fetched to say that the powers that be have no problem engaging in First Amendment retaliation — a federal offense, mind you. Just ask Kate Dalley.

See you out there.