August 10, 2007
Martie Jobe claims a government smear in the continuing attempt to force U.S. Judge Frank Montalvo to step down from hearing any portion of the FBI public corruption case that may involve her.
Jobe's claim can be read here. [link]
The government had responded to her initial motion, filed Aug. 3, 2007, by asserting that she lacked standing as she had not been charged with any crime.
The government's response stated that any "proposed harm is futuristic and hypothetical, thus lacks ripeness." [background]
Jobe's sharply worded retort begins by stating: "What the United States fails to recognize and address, however, is that Martie Jobe's motion is brought not under Section 144, but under Section 455."
The Aug. 10 reply states that a Section 455 disqualification or recusal may be used on appeal in the Fifth Circuit.
Jobe further argues that the government's references to "unidentified co-conspirators" in the Travis Ketner guilty plea. [ketner plea]
From the descriptions in the Ketner plea, it is fairly easy to surmise about whom the government is referring. Jobe argues that this is counter to the United States Attorney Manual, which states, in part, "it is not appropriate to identify (either by name or unnecessarily-specific description), or cause a defendant to identify, a third-party wrongdoer unless that party has been officially charged with the misconduct at issue."
Jobe also argues that the recusal issues she has identified, Judge Montalvo's role in hearing a contract dispute with El Paso Sheriff Officers, who were represented by Jobe, applies equally to Ketner and to former Commissioner Betti Flores.
In June, Ketner, former chief of staff for County Judge Anthony Cobos, pleaded guilty to four counts of conspiracy involving public corruption. Count Three of the plea was the allegation that Ketner, a lawyer, represented former County Commissioner Betti Flores in a personal legal matter, in order to secure Flores' vote on a contract dispute with El Paso Sheriff Officers, who were represented by Jobe. In addition, Count Four of Flores' guilty plea to charges of taking bribes involved the same issue. [flores plea]
Among the arguments made by Jobe are that the timing of the Sheriff Officers negotiation and Flores' lawsuit make a deal by Flores regarding Sheriff Officers negotiation unlikely, and that the settlement reached between the Sheriff Officers and County was not unreasonable.
"In addition to a myriad of witnesses who would testify regarding the dearth of any factual support for these allegations, and the factual and legal impossibility associated with them, Jobe would also argue that no bribe was necessary because the settlement of the lawsuit was fair and reasonable, a conclusion that Judge Montalvo himself reached in his capacity as presiding judge over the class action lawsuit."