Local Government TV

Wednesday, April 04, 2012

All Nine NorCo Judges Ban Deputy Sheriff

The entire Northampton County bench, consisting of nine judges, signed a Court Order on Monday, banning Deputy Sheriff Thomas Bachik from any courtrooms or any secured areas or mediation rooms. You can see the Order below.

Bachik is the Deputy who has accused judges of playing favorites . He's the Deputy who complained that the President Judge was endangering his own personal safety when she publicly ordered a convicted murderer moved to a state prison the next day.

Actually, the Judge was concerned about the prisoner's safety.

Unhappy that Sheriff Randy Miller listened to the President Judge over him, Bachik is trying to drum up support for replacing sheriffs appointed by the Executive and Court with sheriffs that are elected by the unions.

Sheriff Randy Miller stated he will abide by the Order. Deputy Bachik's primary duty had been the courtrooms, but he now will be screening courthouse visitors. Asked whether any disciplinary matters are pending, Miller declined comment. "We can't talk about internal matters," he said.

Efforts to reach Deputy Bachik were unsuccessful, and will be attempted again.

It's unprecedented. I'm unable to recall a single instance in which ALL nine judges have issued a Court Order concerning anything.

Usually, only one or two of them sign the Orders banning me.

Here's the Order:

31 comments:

  1. Bernie, I don't understand why the stakes had to be raised in this personnel matter.All the Sheriff had to do was assign this fellow elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow! This is major! NorCo never acts like this. This must have meant a lot to the Judges. Now there can't be anymore crying on behalf of the deputy in question. The Judges really sent their message loud and clear.

    Too bad, the deputies don't serve at the pleasure of the Court.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Any truth to the rumor that after the judges signed the order, they took the afternoon off and sent their tipstaffs home with pay?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Usually, only one or two of them sign the Orders banning me."

    Some of your one-liners are sincere, world-class stuff when you are in-form and on-song.

    LACHEN

    ReplyDelete
  5. Usually they only work a 20 Hour work week anyway. This means the only worked 16 Hours.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Deputy should be promoted and assigned to an administrative position.

    They need to get thick skin in the Courthouse.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "All the Sheriff had to do was assign this fellow elsewhere."

    And get hit with a grievance. This guy is a hothead whose antics embarrass his entire department.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Any truth to the rumor that after the judges signed the order, they took the afternoon off and sent their tipstaffs home with pay?"

    When I criticize the judges, and i have done so many times, I sign my name. Why don't you?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Don't you think this makes the judges look silly? So if they don't like you they abuse their power by writing a court order so you can't see them? What happens if there is a shooting in a courtroom now he can't respond? This is strange and embarrassing to be any part of.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Too bad, the deputies don't serve at the pleasure of the Court. "

    Excellent idea. It should be considered bc most of their work is for the court.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Don't you think this makes the judges look silly?"

    No, it makes them look very angry at a bad situation, and taking control.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Judges knocking off early and tipstaffs stealing full time compensation for part time work was first detailed on this blog. Most people do more by accident before lunch than this gang does in a week.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yes, it is detailed here, and I take responsibility for what I write. Why don't you?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Don't look at a judge the wrong way or you will get a court order with your name on it! LOL. Do they have jesters too!

    ReplyDelete
  15. The safety of the prisoner responsible for killing an innocent child outweighs the safety of the deputy sheriffs sworn to protect the judges. Makes logical sense to me. Barack O'Bachik for elected sheriff.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Norco, and all governments, for that matter - all drama, all the time.

    Why can't all of these feeders just go about the business of whatever it is they think they do and spare us the nonsense? This is what the boredom of non-working public "servants" yields: Peyton Place.

    -Clem

    ReplyDelete
  17. An elected Sheriff would not have to kiss any ass.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Sure he would. he'd have to kiss the asses of the public sector unions who elected him.

    ReplyDelete
  19. So all elected officials are public union ass kissers?, as per you Interesting. I am sure you will make some exceptions.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Many of them are, and an elected sheriff in NC would most definitely be subservient to a publci sector union full of bullies like Bachik.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Many or all, your criteria not mine.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kudos to the Judges. Its about time someone or a group like this shows that they are in charge and not the union worker. Mouthy union workers need to be told to do their jobs and shut up. Looks like someone around here is finally doing that.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Yes this makes the Judges look like little Children.

    And if the employees are not working a full day, this needs to be investigated.


    Improper use of emploees, just like the state legislators employees were used improperly.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Oh, I see. Bonusgate. Call the Otter!

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Its about time someone or a group like this shows that they are in charge and not the union worker. Mouthy union workers need to be told to do their jobs and shut up."

    Bingo.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Always have to make everything about the unions..There is no mention here whether the union supported his actions or not..As far as the judges go, the sheriffs are now under the Executive..Just because they are being babies doesn't mean the guy should be disciplined..He has the freedom of speech..Unless he violated some work rule there should be no discipline...Let the judges stamp their feet all they want..He is not under their jurisdiction..Sucks for them..

    ReplyDelete
  27. I heard that he's not allowed at DRS either because of allegations of sexual harassment and aggessive behavior. Why does this guy still have a job?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Because of the comments by anon 11:47AM, there should be a suit filed by the sheriff deputy. Since O'Hare moderates his blog and has allowed it to stand, he should be sued by the union. It is your right since O'Hare is allowing that defamatory statement to stand.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Actually, I don't moderate this blog and have no responsibility for what people post anonymously. Unlike Mezzacappa, who posted and published anonymous slurs on a moderated blog where comments are screened in advance.

    I have just seen the comment. It is a personal attack, but it is directed at the Deputy's official duties. Because it is anonymous, it does not mean much to me. Because it is directed at the Deputy's official duties, I will allow the comment to stand.

    Sue me.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Bernie, This court order really opened a Pandora's box.If an emergency arises in a court room this court order would prevent this Deputy Sheriff from responding because of fear of being held in contempt.If this fellow can not go into a court room he really can't do his job.He obviously can't be employed as a Deputy.How can the Deputy file an appeal ect. or must he go to Commonwealth Court. The judges made their opinion and now this is going to be a major legal black-hole. I suggest offering the Deputy a higher paying job at the County and save all the expensive legal wrangling. It will cost the tax-payers less in the end. Did the Judge that ignored the jury's decision in the D.U.I. case sign the order?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I think the Court would rather die than have to listen to Bachik. Let him sue.

    ReplyDelete

You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.