Latest news with #ToddRokita
Chicago Tribune
18-07-2025
- Business
- Chicago Tribune
Indiana AG sues property management company over Hammond and East Chicago leases
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita said Friday his office sued a management company that runs at least three properties in Hammond and East Chicago, saying they put deceptive or illegal fine print in renters' leases. The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Lake Superior Court, accuses IBIN Management, LLC of breaking Indiana's consumer protection laws. The company runs three properties on the 4300 block of Baring Avenue in East Chicago, 200 block of Waltham Street in Hammond, and 900 block of 174th Street in Hammond. Various leases tried to stretch how long it would take to give back security deposits past the 45 days required by state law, had renters pay fees for repairs that landlords should cover, let landlords go into the units without notification, or tried to block renters from seeking damages allowed by state law, among other issues, Rokita said in a release. The lawsuit cites three people who rented in Hammond or East Chicago. Rokita said he is encouraging anyone affected to call his office. 'Hoosiers deserve fair and transparent treatment when renting their homes,' Rokita said in the release. 'This lawsuit sends a clear message: we will hold accountable those who exploit tenants with deceptive lease agreements that misrepresent their rights and obligations. Protecting Indiana consumers is a top priority for our office.' The company has received several one-star reviews dating back to at least 2022 on the Better Business Bureau's website. The agency gave it an F rating for not responding to complaints. A woman who answered a listed number Friday for the company declined comment. It lists a Crown Point post office box as its address in state records. The lawsuit wants a legal injunction to force the company to stop its practices, as well as fines and restitution. 'We are committed to ensuring that landlords and property managers play by the rules,' Rokita said. 'We will continue to stand up for Hoosiers and fight against deceptive practices that harm our communities.' Affected renters can call his office at 1-800-382-5516 or go to
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Yahoo
Attorney general seeks execution date for Southern Indiana murderer on death row
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita has asked the state's Supreme Court to set an execution date for a convicted Southern Indiana murderer who has sat on death row for more than 20 years. Rokita filed a motion Friday against Roy Lee Ward, the 52-year-old convicted in the 2001 rape and murder of Dale, Indiana, teenager Stacy Payne, a Heritage Hills High School cheerleader and honor roll student. A jury first convicted Ward in 2002. He successfully appealed that conviction before a second jury recommended the death penalty in 2007. His attorneys have since sought relief through appeals courts, lawsuits and the U.S. Supreme Court, all of which failed. As of now there's no court order preventing his execution, records state. In the filing Friday, which was uploaded to Indiana's electronic court records system Monday, Rokita presses the state Supreme Court to "perform its necessary 'administrative task' to set an execution date." If the motion is approved, Rokita's office would ask that Ward be killed within 30 days of the order. How that will be carried out, however, is uncertain. The motion comes just a few weeks after Gov. Mike Braun announced the state had exhausted its supply of pentobarbital, the drug it has used to carry out two executions since December. "We've got to address the broad issue of, what are other methods, the discussion of capital punishment in general," Braun told reporters at the Indiana Statehouse on June 3. "And then something that costs, I think, $300,000 a pop that has a 90-day shelf life, I'm not going to be for putting it on the shelf and then letting them expire." Rokita's motion doesn't address the lack of pentobarbital. Indiana law mandates that "the punishment of death shall be inflicted by intravenous injection of a lethal substance or substances." Ward knocked on the Payne's door on July 11, 2001 while 15-year-old Stacy and her younger sister were home alone. He reportedly lied to Stacy and told her he was looking for a lost dog. What followed was a horrific assault and stabbing. Despite suffering unspeakable injuries, Payne survived while medics airlifted her to a hospital in Louisville, where she later died. Police responded to the scene and found Ward inside, still holding the knife he used in the killing. Witnesses in the 2002 trial testified that the Clark County native had a long history of "exhibitionism." He would reportedly order pizza or flowers just so he could expose himself to the delivery person. He was charged with public indecency multiple times and was on probation at the time of Payne's killing for a burglary conviction in Missouri. According to Courier & Press reporting during his death penalty trial in 2002, authorities in Perry County and Hancock County, Kentucky, suspected Ward in multiple public indecency reports in the days before the murder. If charged, his probation could have been revoked – and "perhaps we wouldn't be here," his defense attorney said at the time. Before December, Indiana hadn't executed anyone since 2009. That's when authorities lethally injected former Evansville man Matthew Eric Wrinkles. He'd been convicted in the in the July 21, 1994 shooting deaths of his estranged wife, Debra Jean Wrinkles, 31; her brother, Mark "Tony" Fulkerson, 28; and Fulkerson's wife, Natalie Fulkerson, 26. There were the several reasons for the pause, but one was how difficult – and expensive – it became to obtain drugs for lethal injections. Ward sued the state when it named Brevital, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride as the new ingredients in its lethal injection cocktail. The Indiana Supreme Court eventually ruled against him. No executions were ever carried out using the drugs, however. And in June 2024, Rokita and then-Gov. Eric Holcomb announced the state had acquired an unknown amount of pentobarbital to restart the death penalty. After filing a lawsuit to obtain public records, the Indiana Capital Chronicle found the state paid $900,000 for the drug. How much officials bought, and from whom, was redacted. The lethal injection of Joseph Corcoran followed on Dec. 18, 2024. A jury convicted him of killing Robert Scott Turner, 32; Douglas A. Stillwell, 30; Timothy G. Bricker, 30, and his brother, James Corcoran, on July 26, 1997. And on May 20, officials lethally injected Benjamin Ritchie for the Sept. 29, 2000 murder of Beech Grove Police officer William Toney. Ritchie had stolen a car that night, and Toney was chasing him through the streets when Ritchie shot the officer four times, the fatal round striking him just above the lip of his bulletproof vest. Toney died one day before his 32nd birthday, leaving behind a wife and two young children. Ritchie's attorney argued he had "profound brain damage and developmental disabilities," and the execution should have never been carried out. If the court rules in favor of Rokita and the state obtains more drugs, Ward would apparently follow them. He's one of six men awaiting execution on Indiana's death row. According to her obituary, Stacy Payne made the most of her short time on Earth. In addition to cheerleading, she played in the Heritage Hills band, served on student council, and was named student of the month. In her off hours she worked at Jenks Pizza in Dale and was a member of the youth group at St. Joseph Catholic Church. Family called her caring, confident and loving. "She was determined to always do her personal best," her mother, Julia, said during Ward's first sentencing hearing in December 2002. "She had so much potential." This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: Indiana attorney general seeks execution date for Roy Lee Ward
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Yahoo
Court sets 'tentative' execution date for Southern Indiana murderer Roy Lee Ward
EVANSVILLE – The Indiana Supreme Court has set a "tentative" execution date for Roy Lee Ward: the Southern Indiana murderer who has sat on death row off and on for more than 20 years after killing Spencer County teenager Stacy Payne in 2001. In an order issued just after 11 a.m. Monday, Chief Justice Loretta Rush preliminarily scheduled Ward to die on Oct. 10. Whether that will happen is still up in the air. The preliminary order comes a little less than two weeks after Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita filed a motion on June 27 asking the state supreme court to set an execution date. Ward's death will only go forward if the court approves the motion. Rush and the other justices apparently issued the order Monday to remove an administration roadblock. Rush wrote they did so "out of respect for all parties with important responsibilities." The court was only performing its "administrative task." The actual execution will depend on both the court's ruling and what actions Ward's attorneys take to try to stop the lethal injection. Their options include everything from federal litigation to asking Gov. Mike Braun to commute Ward's sentence. "... Other state and federal officials must work backwards from that date to fulfill their own important duties related to an ordered execution," Rush wrote. "... The Department of Correction must carryout the execution, navigating all the logistics that entails." One of the biggest? Whether Indiana will actually have its new lethal injection drug on hand. In early June, Braun announced the state had exhausted its supply of pentobarbital, the drug it has used to carry out two executions since December: those of Joseph Corcoran and Benjamin Ritchie. "We've got to address the broad issue of, what are other methods, the discussion of capital punishment in general," Braun told reporters at the Indiana Statehouse on June 3. "And then something that costs, I think, $300,000 a pop that has a 90-day shelf life, I'm not going to be for putting it on the shelf and then letting them expire." Ward fatally stabbed Payne, a 15-year-old Heritage Hills cheerleader and honor roll student, while she was at home in Dale with her younger sister on July 11, 2001. He knocked on their door and lied to Stacy, claiming he was looking for a lost dog. Police responded to a 911 call from Stacy's sister and reportedly found Ward still holding the knife he used in the murder. Payne played in the high school band, attended youth group at St. Joseph Catholic Church, and had recently started a job at Jenk's Pizza. A jury sentenced Ward to death in 2002, only to have that overturned on appeal. In 2007, another jury came to same conclusion, and that conviction stuck. Ward's attorneys have spent the years since filing numerous motions and lawsuits to delay his execution. Indiana's lack of a consistent lethal injection drug supply has slowed things down as well. The executions of Corcoran and Ritchie were the first in the state since 2009. This article originally appeared on Evansville Courier & Press: When will Roy Lee Ward be executed?
Indianapolis Star
27-06-2025
- Politics
- Indianapolis Star
What the Supreme Court's decision on porn age verification means for Indiana
The Supreme Court on June 27 upheld a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify a user's age, a ruling that could impact access in Indiana. Indiana lawmakers in 2024 approved a measure requiring porn website operators to enact age verification processes, and allowing parents to sue if their children get past them, following the example of several other states. Several of those operators and free-speech advocates immediately sued the state over this law, as they did in other states, but the Indiana lawsuit has been in a holding pattern pending this Supreme Court decision. The competing interests in all of these lawsuits are First Amendment rights to free speech and expression balanced against minors' exposure to sexually explicit material. In Indiana as in Texas, the plaintiffs argue these age restriction measures are overly burdensome and restrict free speech unnecessarily while placing privacy at risk. More: Supreme Court upholds Texas' age verification law for porn sites For example, they argue there are more effective options out there to address the same end without introducing a barrier to adults' access, such as content filtering at the browser or device level. Defenders like Attorney General Todd Rokita have said protecting children from "harmful" content overrides these concerns. The Supreme Court voted along ideological lines in arguing that Texas' law is not overly burdensome, saying it uses "established methods of providing government-issued identification and sharing transactional data." Indiana's law is similar: Acceptable age verification methods include a mobile identification credential issued by the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, an independent third-party age verification service, or "any commercially reasonable method that relies on public or private transactional data." From 2024: Porn website operators sue Indiana AG Todd Rokita to block age verification law After Pornhub and others sued Indiana in June, a federal judge granted their request to block the law, but then an appeals court rescinded that injunction in August, allowing the law to go into effect. Meanwhile, Pornhub has disabled access to its website for people surfing the web within Indiana. The plaintiffs later requested to pause the proceedings in Indiana until the Supreme Court made a decision on the Texas law, which a judge granted, acknowledging that the question of what standard to apply to these free speech concerns is similar in both cases, and the Supreme Court's answer may help streamline the discovery process in Indiana. According to a November filing in the case, the parties will reconvene within two weeks.
Yahoo
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Indiana taxpayers pay nearly $500K for Attorney General Todd Rokita's disciplinary defense
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita speaks to the media on Friday, March 21, 2025, at his office in Indianapolis. (Niki Kelly/Indiana Capital Chronicle) Indiana has used more than $491,000 in public funds to defend Attorney General Todd Rokita in multiple disciplinary investigations and formal ethics cases, according to new records obtained by the Indiana Capital Chronicle. The state paid four law firms a combined $491,508 between 2022 and 2025 to represent Rokita in at least six separate matters before the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission — investigations that the Republican describes as politically motivated and retaliatory. Only two of the investigations resulted in formal disciplinary charges. The Capital Chronicle previously reported partial figures showing dollars spent on Rokita's disciplinary defense, but new records provide a more complete accounting. We're paying four law firms close to half a million dollars so that Todd Rokita can keep his law license and stay in office. That's a campaign expense — not something the public should have to fund. – Rep. Ed DeLaney, D-Indianapolis The highest payment — more than $240,000 — went to Indianapolis-based Ammeen and Associates, which represents Rokita in the current ethics case still pending before the disciplinary commission. The state paid an additional $177,650 to Greenwood-based Patrick Olmstead Law; $57,995 to Washington, D.C.-based Schaerr Jaffe; and $15,560 to Indianapolis-based Lewis and Wilkins, according to information released by the attorney general's office. Indiana's Transparency Portal shows the legal firms have previously been contracted by Rokita's office and other state agencies to assist with separate litigation and legal matters. But Democrat Rep. Ed DeLaney, a longtime lawyer from Indianapolis, maintained that taxpayers 'shouldn't be footing the bill.' 'We're paying four law firms close to half a million dollars so that Todd Rokita can keep his law license and stay in office,' he said. 'That's a campaign expense — not something the public should have to fund.' Indiana has in the past covered legal costs for public attorneys, judges, and prosecutors facing complaints that arise from actions taken in the course of their official duties, as long as those actions aren't criminal or personal in nature. One section in Indiana Code specifically requires the state to indemnify prosecutors for expenses incurred in lawsuits or disciplinary proceedings related to a 'decision, a duty, an obligation, a privilege, or a responsibility of the prosecuting attorney's office.' The ongoing complaint stems from Rokita's nationally televised comments in June 2022 about Indianapolis OB-GYN Dr. Caitlin Bernard, who oversaw a medication abortion for a 10-year-old rape victim from Ohio that summer. In an interview with Fox News commentator Jesse Watters, Rokita called Bernard an 'activist acting as a doctor' and suggested that she violated patient privacy and state reporting laws. He said his office was investigating her conduct and would be 'looking at her licensure.' The Indiana Medical Licensing Board ultimately found that Bernard had violated patient privacy laws — resulting in a reprimand and a fine — but she was cleared of failing to report the abortion. Rokita's office settled an initial complaint about his comments in November 2023. In a sworn affidavit, Rokita admitted to violating two professional conduct rules in exchange for a public reprimand. A third count was dismissed. Story continues below. Exhibit B – Affidavit Although he agreed not to contest the charges, the commission found that Rokita recanted almost immediately, suggesting in a public press release — issued just hours after the reprimand — that he had done nothing wrong. The commission said Rokita acted with 'a deliberate or reckless disregard for the truth' and has since opposed his request to dismiss the new charges. But he maintains the taxpayer expense is the result of a politically charged and unaccountable disciplinary process. 'These investigations require time away from the job Hoosiers elected me to do,' Rokita said in a written statement. 'Regardless of their false, politically motivated nature, each grievance, investigation and complaint requires time, attention and office resources to combat.' 'The Commission has caused hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money to be wasted and there is no end in sight,' he added. Disciplinary commission rejects Indiana AG Todd Rokita's call to dismiss latest ethics complaint James Ammeen, one of Rokita's defense attorneys, said 'the Commission has caused this expensive situation by entertaining politically motivated grievances and by drawing out these investigations as long as legally possible only to not file anything in several cases.' Three of the six investigations into the attorney general's conduct originated from a single source, Indianapolis attorney Bill Groth. The labor lawyer was named the Indiana Democratic Party's 'Activist of the Year' in 2018 and has advocated for labor unions, employees and other progressive causes. The disciplinary commission does not name complainants unless a case becomes public, but Groth and another Indianapolis attorney, Paula Cardoza-Jones, have openly revealed the grievances they filed. Republican State Sen. Liz Brown just last month also said she filed a complaint against Rokita. 'This whole thing still stems from 16 accurate words that I said on a Fox News interview over three years ago,' Rokita said. 'Every complaint after has just been a follow-up to try and get me for something because they hate the issues I fight for on behalf of Hoosiers.' 'I accepted responsibility for the timing of my initial comments and indicated at the time that I could always do better,' he added. 'Now, the Commission wants to waste time and money claiming I wasn't 'sorry' enough, and wants a new punishment for 16 words said over three years ago.' While defending himself, Rokita has also offered up proposed changes to how the disciplinary commission operates. He holds that the members shouldn't be able to give political donations, and also called for commission meetings involving elected officials to be open to press and public scrutiny. Rokita and his legal team have accused current and former members of the disciplinary commission of partisan bias. The attorney general specifically took aim at former Chair Bernie Carter, a Democrat who previously served as Lake County prosecutor. Carter endorsed Rokita's 2020 election opponent, Destiny Wells. Although he did not vote on Rokita's current disciplinary complaint, Carter oversaw the commission when multiple earlier investigations into the attorney general's conduct were opened. Rokita's office also pointed to current commission Chair Peter Rusthoven, a Republican lawyer who previously worked within former President Ronald Reagan's administration. Amid a GOP split by those who support President Donald Trump — and those who don't — Rusthoven endorsed Kamala Harris in 2024. Although a longtime GOP donor, he also made contributions to her campaign, and to those for Joe Biden and Liz Cheney — all prominent Democrats or vocal Trump critics. Rusthoven also believed Trump should be removed from the ballot while Rokita's office was involved in litigation defending Trump's candidacy before the U.S. Supreme Court. 'Some Commissioners undoubtedly disapprove of what the attorney general does and says in office,' said Rokita attorney Paul Mullin, 'and (are) willing to impose the minority's view despite (him) being elected by the largest number of Hoosiers in Indiana history.' Although most disciplinary commission members donate to political candidates, Rokita said such contributions further undermine the body's impartiality. 'The Attorney General has been nothing but transparent,' Mullin continued. 'Instead, this process is being misused by political enemies and those working against the duly-elected AG's policies. The strategy is to punish his own truthful speech, causing unneeded public expense and distraction.' The disciplinary commission operates largely in secret under rules designed to protect reputations during the initial investigation phases. Rokita said that amounts to a lack of transparency, which leaves taxpayers in the dark. But Rokita's critics said the attorney general has blurred ethical lines by leveraging his public office for political messaging. DeLaney, the state lawmaker, argued that Rokita's conduct, especially his public comments about Bernard, had little to do with his official duties and instead reflected personal political choices. 'We didn't say he had to go on national TV, and we certainly didn't tell him to say what he said,' DeLaney added. 'This isn't about serving the public. It's about preserving his own political standing.' Former Attorney General Curtis Hill funded his own disciplinary defense, but his actions were after hours at a bar and were not work-related. DeLaney also questioned why four outside law firms were needed. 'He doesn't need four law firms,' DeLaney said. 'He needs one person — to look in the mirror and ask if he's solving problems or just being one.' 'Rokita brags every time he brings in a nickel for the state,' he continued. 'But if we're going to keep an accounting, we need to count what he's spending, too. And I've never seen another official rack up this kind of bill to protect his own law license.' Anja Matwijkiw, a professor of professional ethics and human rights at Indiana University Northwest, agreed that there are questions about whether Rokita was acting in his personal or official capacity. 'If he spoke as a private citizen, then his First Amendment rights to free speech are protected — but he should pay for his own legal defense,' Matwijkiw said. 'However, if he intended to act in a public capacity, then arguably, the taxpayers' money can be used. But that requires substantiation: documentation, legal references, citations. Otherwise, we risk entering a conflict of interest.' She emphasized that the 'appearance of a conflict is as important as the reality,' especially when public funds are involved. 'He can't have it both ways,' she said. 'That's why clarity on his role and intent matters.' Matwijkiw cautioned, too, against the way the disciplinary process itself is being framed by Rokita and his legal team. She pointed to the attorney general's use of the term 'lawfare,' a label Rokita has used to describe the commission's actions, as an example of politicizing the legal process. ''Lawfare' is becoming a trend. It's when legal arguments are turned into a weapon to undermine the other side rather than promote justice,' Matwijkiw said. 'That politicizes the process and risks eroding the rule of law.' She added that public officials invoking distinctions between law and ethics — such as Rokita's previous suggestion that attorney ethics rules aren't statutory law — only deepen the problem. 'If you're introducing a distinction between ethics and law, then there's an even greater need to protect the law itself,' she said. 'What should come first is preserving the integrity of the law — not protecting political narratives.' The commission has declined public comment on the pending complaint against Rokita, and the case remains before the Indiana Supreme Court. A decision on the dismissal motion and the disciplinary commission's new complaint is ultimately up to the high court justices. If the charges aren't dismissed — or if the disciplinary commission and Rokita can't reach a settlement agreement — the justices will appoint a hearing officer to hold a public hearing on the case and hear evidence. It would be up to the hearing officer to then issue findings and recommendations to the court, which has final say over the outcome of the case. Sanctions depend on the seriousness of the case. Possible sanctions include a private or public reprimand; suspension from practice for a set period of time; suspension from practice with reinstatement only after the lawyer proves fitness; and permanent disbarment. The vast majority of grievances filed with the commission are dismissed, however. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
