
Wethington announces resignation as circuit judge
Daviess Circuit Judge Jay Wethington, who was Commonwealth's Attorney before becoming a judge in 2007, resigned from the bench as of Friday.
With Wethington's retirement, the Administrative Office of the Courts can begin the process of filling the Division I seat for the rest of Wethington's term. The process calls for the Administrative Office of the Courts to appoint a nominating commission which will take applications and forward recommendations to the governor for an appointment.
Whoever is chosen will have to run for election in 2026.
Wethington suffered an injury from a fall in March of 2024, and Wethington's division has been covered by other judges since.
In a letter submitted to state Chief Justice Debra Hambree Lambert, Wethington said while he was hoping for full recovery, 'my expectations and hopes were too high,' and that he is currently 'unable to resume my duties as circuit judge to the extent I know the position requires ...'
While Wethington said Friday his health has improved since the accident, he is looking forward to traveling with his wife in the future.
The decision to resign was difficult, he said.
'Not because of my injury, but in my heart it was a hard decision to make, because I liked it, I was good at it, and people responded to things I wanted to do,' Wethington said.
'There's more to it than sitting on the bench,' Wethington said.
Wethington, a former Atlanta Constitution reporter, started his law career in private practice before being hired as an assistant commonwealth's attorney by then Commonwealth's Attorney Tom Castlen.
'We go way back. We were friends even in grade school,' Castlen, who is now a retired Circuit judge, said. Later, he said, 'Our careers have paralleled one another over the years.
'He's a good attorney and he's a good person,' Castlen said. When Castlen became Circuit Judge and Wethington became commonwealth's attorney, Wethington was an strong supporter of the creation of a drug court program, Castlen said.
'I'm not so sure, when I was Commonwealth's Attorney, if I would have been as receptive' to the idea of Drug Court, Castlen said. 'But Jay was very supportive and got on board ... He knew the alternatives that needed to be explored for people with substance abuse.'
Wethington said the prosecutor is an important part of Drug Court, because prosecutors have to agree to send a defendant to the court-monitored substance abuse program. People in drug court receive substance abuse treatment and services, with the court monitoring their progress.
Wethington, who later presided over Drug Court after becoming a circuit judge, said 'Drug Court has been good for me as a judge.'
'My first attitude was, 'if you miss up, you're going to prison,' ' Wethington said. But Wethington learned that addicts will relapse.
Drug Court, 'helped me understand about addiction,' Wethington said.
Wethington said some of the cases he handled as Commonwealth's Attorney that created new state law. For example, a local case that rose through the appeal process resulted in the justices ruling that a person could be found guilty of homicide if they supplied drugs to a person who died.
Another case, which Wethington handled as a special prosecutor, made law when the Supreme Court ruled commonwealth's attorneys also had a right to appeal in criminal cases. Wethington argued the case before the Supreme Court.
Wethington said his judicial philosophy was 'to stay out of the way.'
'(Judges) call balls and strikes,' Wethington said. Later, he said, 'The hardest thing for me was to shut up and let the lawyers win or lose their case. They know the case better than you, so stay out of it.'
State Court of Appeals Judge Lisa Payne Jones was hired by Wethington to be an assistant commonwealth's attorney when Wethington ran the CWA's office.
'He helped me get litigation experience under my belt,' Jones said.
'He took the mentor role,' Jones said, and that, 'he guided me on buying a house. He didn't just care about you as a lawyer, he cares about you as a person.'
Retired Daviess Circuit Judge Joe Castlen, who was Division II judge for years while Wethington was in Division I, said, 'I always liked Jay being on the other end of the hall' at the judicial center.
'I could always ask his opinion,' Joe Castlen said. 'We always confided on different matters, and it was great to have a good working relationship like that.'
Wethington said, as a prosecutor, 'I didn't care about wins and losses, because that's not the point of the job. The job is justice.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Unanimous Supreme Court Affirms That There Is No 'Good' Discrimination
On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that plaintiffs in "majority" groups cannot be forced to clear a higher bar to prove they were discriminated against than minority plaintiffs. The case originated from a heterosexual woman, Marlean Ames, who sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services, which runs the state's juvenile correctional system, after she was passed over for a promotion and subsequently significantly demoted in favor of two gay candidates with less education and experience than herself. Two lower courts ruled against her, arguing that she had failed to clear a higher bar to prove discrimination set for plaintiffs from majority groups. Both courts found that she had not provided "background circumstances" showing that "the agency was the rare employer who discriminates against members of a majority group," according to the Supreme Court Opinion. While the Supreme Court did not rule on the merits of Ames' discrimination claim, they did rule that the lower courts' "background circumstances" standard was unconstitutional and inconsistent with federal civil rights law, which protects all individuals equally, regardless of whether they belong to majority or minority groups. "As a textual matter, Title VII's disparate-treatment provision draws no distinctions between majority-group plaintiffs and minority-group plaintiffs," Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in the Court's opinion. "By establishing the same protections for every 'individual'—without regard to that individual's membership in a minority or majority group—Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone." In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas noted that he joined Jackson's opinion "in full," adding that he also wanted to "highlight the problems that arise when judges create atextual legal rules and frameworks." Thomas argued that, when courts come up with "atextual requirements," it creates confusion and difficulty enforcing those rules. After a series of high-profile split decisions on key culture war issues, this unanimous decision is a strident affirmation that—regardless of the justices' differences on what constitutes racial discrimination—civil rights laws protect all people equally from discrimination, regardless of what demographic traits they have. The post Unanimous Supreme Court Affirms That There Is No 'Good' Discrimination appeared first on


CNN
8 hours ago
- CNN
Death cap mushrooms: How a family meal in Australia turned deadly
An Australian mother of two stands accused of murdering three family members by poisoning them with deadly fungi. Erin Patterson is on trial for the killing of the parents of her husband, whom she's separated from, and his aunt. A fourth victim, the aunt's husband, was hospitalized, but survived. Patterson denies the charges. CNN's Will Ripley walks us through the case.


Fox News
10 hours ago
- Fox News
Trump suggests taking a step back from Ukraine peace talks
All times eastern FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: Testimony resumes in Karen Read retrial as defense builds case