Richard New Indicted

curious wrote:

<quoted text> he actually should be on administrative leave until it is resolved,but the county leaders made the choice to keep him operating. What is the difference if one person say a teacher is indicted and is removed from the job duty and a public servant as a coroner indicted and can keep working as a public servant? Why is one indictment any different then another indictment of individuals. Both are innocent until proven guilty and both worked in public service. Just for thought...If a bank teller is indicted for embezzlement, should they stay working as a bank teller until after the facts and verdict of peers? or would they be subject to removal of the position? bank teller vs coroner....if under the same scenerio are they treated equally in the situation as for job security and handling of their positions while approached with an indictment. Mr.New is a county official voted by the public to which he serves, he also was employed by a business to which criminal charges has been warranted...has there been an investigation on the book keeping of the Coroner's office as well during the same time frame that is in question? Have to remember he was operating out of the funeral home, so who was doing the accounting on both seperate daily operations of the two jobs he was working?

Rape and embezzlement are very different transactions.

Jesus, seems like some people can't wait to get their pound of flesh no matter if the poor bastard is guilty or not.

Could be that the people who work with him daily simply don't believe it. And they are waiting till he is proven guilty.

As for anything involving a minor you have no such leeway.

http://somerset-kentucky.com/newslive/x150170...

~~ "To my knowledge, there’s nothing against (New) serving,” said Pulaski County Attorney Martin Hatfield, whom the Commonwealth Journal contacted to gain clarity on whether or not New would be able to continue in the coroner’s office prior to a verdict.
“What would change all of that is if there’s a conviction,” added Hatfield,“but just being charged doesn’t change his status.”
New’s attorney, John Gillum, confirmed that New is expected to remain active as coroner throughout his legal proceedings.

~~ "Hatfield said that Kentucky statute prohibits “most any public official from serving the remainder of their term” if convicted of an offense such as New is alleged to have committed.
He pointed to KRS 61.040, which reads,“If any officer or deputy holding any office or post (such as county coroner)... is convicted of bribery, forgery, perjury or any felony, by a court of record in or out of this state, his office or post shall be vacated by such conviction, and if a pardon is afterward granted to him it shall not avoid the forfeiture.”
Hatfield also noted that according to the Kentucky Constitution,“All persons shall be excluded from office who have been or shall hereafter be, convicted of a felony.”
The county attorney added,“In fact, Kentucky holds that if you are convicted of a felony and are awaiting a ruling on appeal, there is still no statutory means of removal from office because the conviction has not yet been affirmed,” according to a precedent set in a 1943 case involving the City of Pineville.
“People are presumed innocent until proven guilty,” said Hatfield.“I think that’s why our forefathers and legislators have seen fit to make sure there’s a conviction of record before public officials are required to forfeit their office.”

(So the way I read it, until there is an actual conviction, he can continue his job duties. So far there are only charges, no guilt has been proven yet).

I don't recall as to when he has to run again for coroner. But it probably makes no difference. His name is ruined after all this BS and IMHO it will never be the same to anyone who doesn't know him.

His likely hood of winning another election even when proven innocent will be very very difficult. And if that is the case shameful.

As long as he doesn't have a felony conviction and as long as he wants it , he will be coroner, voters elect Barty Bullock again, Eddie Girdler again, some of those worthless magistrates again, they will vote for Richard, Richard is better than any of these guys, with all the indictments against him in my opinion.

Watching from a far wrote:

This will be interesting good thing they got the State police involved!! At least the truth will come out.

hE is not in jail for these charge,s and just as i and everone eles would like to know he,s not in jail if it was just someone off the streets wel you can bet your dear bottom we would be in JAIL over IT He should be put behind bars we call it STEALING

He'll get my vote - Unless he personally decides to not run -

From Somerset Ky wrote:

<quoted text> hE is not in jail for these charge,s and just as i and everone eles would like to know he,s not in jail if it was just someone off the streets wel you can bet your dear bottom we would be in JAIL over IT He should be put behind bars we call it STEALING

Everyone else would not be in jail. That is a total waste of space.(We call it embezzlement). Same thing as stealing but your smarter about doing it, well until you eventually get caught.

If you own a midsize home it will probably be worth 60k. Most people own one or know someone who does that will put it up for bond.

Even if he didn't you can wait a small amount of time and they 10% the bond so that the jails don't overfill. So who couldn't come up with a piece of property worth six thousand dollars? At least that is how it works to my understanding.

No one would be in jail long over this. He just happens to have more money than a lot of people here. Meaning he can put the bond up immediately and walk out the door without a hassle.

Sounds like people are just jealous to me. I don't have a lot of money either. But I don't hate on some of the people I know who do.

Eventually the truth will come out or it will be settled out of court with a plea deal and we will know then.

Still he should be put in JAIL He probly did do it and he,s not any better then anyone eles that goes to JAIL I say he should be put in JAIL What do you all think?

From Somerset Ky wrote:

Still he should be put in JAIL He probly did do it and he,s not any better then anyone eles that goes to JAIL I say he should be put in JAIL What do you all think?

Do you know the man? Do you feel that since he should be held to a higher standard than an average Joe off of the street?

Locking him up would be punishing someone who hasn't been proven guilty. And since he has no intentions of running off and has paid his bond, why should he be locked up?

Prove he's guilty and I will be the first one to say sorry Richard see ya when ya get out.

DaGasssMan wrote:

<quoted text>
Rape and embezzlement are very different transactions.
Jesus, seems like some people can't wait to get their pound of flesh no matter if the poor bastard is guilty or not.
Could be that the people who work with him daily simply don't believe it. And they are waiting till he is proven guilty.
As for anything involving a minor you have no such leeway.

Has the coronor's office been investigated as well? The office was ran in the same funeral home and if not mistaken around the same individuals at the funeral home.(where bookkeeping was done). I am curious what secretary/gf/Gina has to say or won't say. In the past was financial situations known by a few aquaintances that was "hanging around" the funeral home and the coroner make shift office/funeral home. The g/f of Richard's interest while his wife was seeking a divorce. When you look back at the time frame, it was during the era of his personal finances had a peek of interest in the divorce proceedings. Look at the Board members and those holding stock interest at the time. All this comes back to who Richard had a personal fling with at the time and how things worked out on paper. Still Curious what the financial gains/gifts the secretary recieved under the desk, on the desk and in the broom closet. Vendetta possibly?

Was not ran from any funeral home - Separate structure altogether - Separate business altogether - My goodness -

Knowitall9 wrote:

Was not ran from any funeral home - Separate structure altogether - Separate business altogether - My goodness -

are you 100% sure about that?

well wrote:

<quoted text>are you 100% sure about that?

Yep - House on west side of LCFH - No matter - Amazing team now separated - Lies flying all directions - Friendships destroyed - Trust flushed down the drain - All because of egos , control issues , and someone wanting to be the BOSS -
One good thing is , I've never heard a bad word spoken by either manager of S O or LCFH -Minions speaking their opinions , but the wheels have shown professionalism and just a bit of couth - Sad that it had to happen -(really didn't have to happen but it did)-

Knowitall9 wrote:

<quoted text>Yep - House on west side of LCFH - No matter - Amazing team now separated - Lies flying all directions - Friendships destroyed - Trust flushed down the drain - All because of egos , control issues , and someone wanting to be the BOSS -
One good thing is , I've never heard a bad word spoken by either manager of S O or LCFH -Minions speaking their opinions , but the wheels have shown professionalism and just a bit of couth - Sad that it had to happen -(really didn't have to happen but it did)-

free rent of tenants on the west side of LCFH for cleaning and maintaining funeral home for years, everyone knows who was living in the house and the freindship of side work to accomidate the friendship. Sad it all came to an end when he was fired and the tenants were told to move by the board of directors.

curious wrote:

<quoted text> Has the coronor's office been investigated as well? The office was ran in the same funeral home and if not mistaken around the same individuals at the funeral home.(where bookkeeping was done). I am curious what secretary/gf/Gina has to say or won't say. In the past was financial situations known by a few aquaintances that was "hanging around" the funeral home and the coroner make shift office/funeral home. The g/f of Richard's interest while his wife was seeking a divorce. When you look back at the time frame, it was during the era of his personal finances had a peek of interest in the divorce proceedings. Look at the Board members and those holding stock interest at the time. All this comes back to who Richard had a personal fling with at the time and how things worked out on paper. Still Curious what the financial gains/gifts the secretary recieved under the desk, on the desk and in the broom closet. Vendetta possibly?

Could someone please tell me what there would be to investigate with the Coroner's office? That is a county job and the payroll is signed by the County Judge Executive. Whatever the Coroner purchases or spends goes thru the County financial dept. If you are looking for romance and drama, go buy a book, I have heard that 50 Shades of Gray may be just what you are looking for. Everybody knows everything and nobody knows anything.

From Somerset Ky wrote:

Still he should be put in JAIL He probly did do it and he,s not any better then anyone eles that goes to JAIL I say he should be put in JAIL What do you all think?

Well technically he has been treated like everyone else. He has been charged. And he has made bond. That is the same process that anyone would have to go through. My problem would be I might have a small problem coming up with $60,000 cash. LOL But I can't blame him for being financially better off than me.

myGoodness wrote:

<quoted text>
Could someone please tell me what there would be to investigate with the Coroner's office? That is a county job and the payroll is signed by the County Judge Executive. Whatever the Coroner purchases or spends goes thru the County financial dept. If you are looking for romance and drama, go buy a book, I have heard that 50 Shades of Gray may be just what you are looking for. Everybody knows everything and nobody knows anything.

Ask question WHY...The person of interest New, was the funeral director and Coroner with the convience of Operations at the same location for both offices, that being LCFH. The person in question had access to accounting and expenditures of both businesses. The key is Expenditures of both businesses operating at the same location which is a conflict of interest. Barty Bullock if not mistaken made it available a new office location would be given for the Coroner's Office "only after" the fact of many years operating at the convience of the Funeral Home,at which due to the conflict of interest of employment of Mr. New to the LCFH that the Coroners office was relocated. Now how many years was the Coroner's office located at/on the property of LCFH and when did it get moved to it's present location? And what is the dates of interest presently in the on going investigation of Mr.NEW. The conflict of interest questions many aspects of finances and expenditures of both business operations that was operating at the same location by the same individual(S). Narrow it down...expenditure of location as elec, water, cable, rental agreement at location, all payroll of coroner's office, all payroll of funeral home? is there discrepencies. Did the location of both have an impact of better business ethics to deeds and favors for one funeral home over another in daily business/clientele in the county? Now go back and ask...why should the Coroner's office be an audit.

maybe wrote:

<quoted text> Ask question WHY...The person of interest New, was the funeral director and Coroner with the convience of Operations at the same location for both offices, that being LCFH. The person in question had access to accounting and expenditures of both businesses. The key is Expenditures of both businesses operating at the same location which is a conflict of interest. Barty Bullock if not mistaken made it available a new office location would be given for the Coroner's Office "only after" the fact of many years operating at the convience of the Funeral Home,at which due to the conflict of interest of employment of Mr. New to the LCFH that the Coroners office was relocated. Now how many years was the Coroner's office located at/on the property of LCFH and when did it get moved to it's present location? And what is the dates of interest presently in the on going investigation of Mr.NEW. The conflict of interest questions many aspects of finances and expenditures of both business operations that was operating at the same location by the same individual(S). Narrow it down...expenditure of location as elec, water, cable, rental agreement at location, all payroll of coroner's office, all payroll of funeral home? is there discrepencies. Did the location of both have an impact of better business ethics to deeds and favors for one funeral home over another in daily business/clientele in the county? Now go back and ask...why should the Coroner's office be an audit.

I love wall comments it makes it so easy for us to understand and comprehend what you are saying.

From my understanding its a common thing to have a coroner's office run out of a funeral home. I read somewhere that its basically like that throughout KY.

Except for larger cities and the like.

DaGasssMan wrote:

<quoted text>
I love wall comments it makes it so easy for us to understand and comprehend what you are saying.
From my understanding its a common thing to have a coroner's office run out of a funeral home. I read somewhere that its basically like that throughout KY.
Except for larger cities and the like.

I challenge all of these smart people to look back into Pulaski County History and find when a coroner's office was not located at a funeral home. The last 2 Coroner's ran their office out of THEIR funeral homes. Until the Judicial Center was opened, all of those office spaces did not exist. Seems to me he has done a fine job as Coroner and the only crap that gets thrown at him is from people or should I say persons at LCFH.

maybe wrote:

<quoted text> Ask question WHY...The person of interest New, was the funeral director and Coroner with the convience of Operations at the same location for both offices, that being LCFH. The person in question had access to accounting and expenditures of both businesses. The key is Expenditures of both businesses operating at the same location which is a conflict of interest. Barty Bullock if not mistaken made it available a new office location would be given for the Coroner's Office "only after" the fact of many years operating at the convience of the Funeral Home,at which due to the conflict of interest of employment of Mr. New to the LCFH that the Coroners office was relocated. Now how many years was the Coroner's office located at/on the property of LCFH and when did it get moved to it's present location? And what is the dates of interest presently in the on going investigation of Mr.NEW. The conflict of interest questions many aspects of finances and expenditures of both business operations that was operating at the same location by the same individual(S). Narrow it down...expenditure of location as elec, water, cable, rental agreement at location, all payroll of coroner's office, all payroll of funeral home? is there discrepencies. Did the location of both have an impact of better business ethics to deeds and favors for one funeral home over another in daily business/clientele in the county? Now go back and ask...why should the Coroner's office be an audit.

Why should the Coroner's office be an audit? that was not my question. I recall a recent audit with a county dept where several flags were raised and that was pretty much it. Nothing changed, nothing fixed, the newspaper stopped writing about it and it was swept under a rug. The LCFH accommodating the coroner's office seemed to be all fine and dandy with BoSS HOGG and his cronies for quite a long time. I'm pretty sure if anyone benefited from that arrangement it was LCFH. But we won't see that in this railroad job now will we?