People can be fired, without being charged with a crime. Since he was charged, after only a one week investigation. The evidence is probably really strong. He SHOULD have been fired instead of being placed on leave. Oh yea, then prosecute him!

I thought Americans were supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Historically there have been problems in the Dog Warden's office, that goes way back through several different wardens. Why? I think Mr. Davis has already been tried and convicted though the local gossip circuts. Who are his accusers and what is their motive? Why isn't the deputy warden being prosecuted? They say his case will be handeled differntly? That seems to be a common theme here, very different punishments for the same crimes, one person gets a little probation, someone else gets several years hard jail time?

The dog warden could not legally be fired before a having a trial. Steve had a vested property right in his job as dog warden. Thus, the U.S. Constitution requires that he be given some sort of hearing before the government deprives him of "live, liberty, or property" (Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution). The hearing in this case is a criminal trial. After the trial, if he is found guilty, the local government may then fire him because he was given due process and the Constitution is therefore satisfied.

since when does the hardin county court give a sh*t about the bill of rights or constitition?

You can be fired from a job without being prosecuted. If what I hear is true he should have been fired & probably would have been, if he were not a public official. As for the asst. dog warden, I am assuming he will be getting a deal, for his cooperation.

CLambert wrote:

I thought Americans were supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Historically there have been problems in the Dog Warden's office, that goes way back through several different wardens. Why? I think Mr. Davis has already been tried and convicted though the local gossip circuts. Who are his accusers and what is their motive? Why isn't the deputy warden being prosecuted? They say his case will be handeled differntly? That seems to be a common theme here, very different punishments for the same crimes, one person gets a little probation, someone else gets several years hard jail time?

Bullshit! Violating the obligation of ones employment IS a terminable offense. Regardless of ones integrity or lack of.

Guest wrote:

The dog warden could not legally be fired before a having a trial. Steve had a vested property right in his job as dog warden. Thus, the U.S. Constitution requires that he be given some sort of hearing before the government deprives him of "live, liberty, or property" (Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution). The hearing in this case is a criminal trial. After the trial, if he is found guilty, the local government may then fire him because he was given due process and the Constitution is therefore satisfied.

First of all, i don't know who this person is that keeps commenting negative things but if you don't personally know steve-shut up! I worked out at the dog pound and got to know Steve-he's not something terrible like everyone is making him out to be! And if you don't know the whole story quit runnig your mouth. Hmm, let's see do any of you know what Steve is being charged with and what the charges are going back to?

He should be fired! Damn, karma is a crazy thing.

guest wrote:

First of all, i don't know who this person is that keeps commenting negative things but if you don't personally know steve-shut up! I worked out at the dog pound and got to know Steve-he's not something terrible like everyone is making him out to be! And if you don't know the whole story quit runnig your mouth. Hmm, let's see do any of you know what Steve is being charged with and what the charges are going back to?

I don't know Steve, and you want me to shut up?
LOL.
It IS a public forum after all.
If Steve is found guilty, yes he should be fired. His character has nothing to do with his "alleged" theft in office.
He should have known better, Deedee Polan also said she was innocent as well.("Hey, I didn't do it")
We have plenty of time to see how this plays out and hopefully not another long drawn out court affair as the last.
Just another blackeye for Ktown.

Well I think Steve has already been trialed in the public eye, and it is another sad case of who have you pissed off in Hardin county. The few with the power always get even. and as far as voilating the obligation of ones employment, I too agree, but it never seems to matter if it is the sheriff or a county prosecutor who use their offices for private vendetta against someone who has stood up to them, or who had enough nerve to disagree with them, because of course these men are never wrong.. or have done any wrong and are of fine upstanding moral character, and as the sheriff himself has said "I don't answer to the commissioners." and the prosecutor "can make things much worse than what they are".. Hardin County has continued to put themselves in these messes. Oh and yes I too do know Steve and what he is charged with and know when someone is being used. and yes local gossip and some messed up papers have done a wonderful job of convicting him well before he goes to trial. Due process my ass... it is due as we say.

has anybody been "forced to a plea bargin in this county? take this deal or you will be charged with......fill in the blanks.......just curious if it has happend to anyone else. a friend of mine was put in that position and interestingly enough his lawyer (the best in Kenton)was more worried about upsetting the judge than getting him a fair deal. just push people through the system. They have no soul or conscious. it is about money and power. IT IS TIME TO PUT AN END TO THE KRONNIE CLUB.

velcro-fly wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know Steve, and you want me to shut up?
LOL.
It IS a public forum after all.
If Steve is found guilty, yes he should be fired. His character has nothing to do with his "alleged" theft in office.
He should have known better, Deedee Polan also said she was innocent as well.("Hey, I didn't do it")
We have plenty of time to see how this plays out and hopefully not another long drawn out court affair as the last.
Just another blackeye for Ktown.

What I'm asking is do you know what it's all going back to? Do you know why he's being charged with those charges. I wish the newspaper and everyone else would get things right before they start pointing fingers. Umm, and Steve's case and that other women's case are way different.

gues wrote:

<quoted text>
What I'm asking is do you know what it's all going back to? Do you know why he's being charged with those charges.

To answer your two questions:
No, I do not...What does it go back to?

Yes, I do know why he is being charged, theft in office and tampering.
Why do you ask?