Vt. A.G. Won’t Persue

Charge Against Pease

Barre Atty. Oreste Valsangiacomo will have to follow other channels to seek redress for what he considers to be a serious matter: "perjury allegations against a sitting judge."

The Vermont Attorney General's office, citing "very limited investigatory resources," has declined to pursue allegations of criminal wrongdoing by Judge Prudence Pease.

Valsangiacomo, representing Court Clerk Emily Newman, had requested that Atty. Gen. William Sorrell further investigate the matter of Pease's claim that she was assaulted in her office on Dec. 20 by Newman.

Those accusations were investigated by the Vermont State Police; based upon that report, the AG’s office declined to press charges against Newman.

Valsangiacomo, referring to inconsistencies between Pease's sworn statement and those of other witnesses, then alleged that she is guilty of filing a false report with a law enforcement officer. Because Pease’s statement was under oath, Valsangiacomo said he believes that Pease has also committed perjury.

However, the AG’s office apparently will not consider charges against Pease. Asst. Atty. Gen. John Treadwell made reference to "other mechanisms" for addressing the allegations, specifically noting the Rules of the Supreme Court for the Disciplinary Control of Judges. The constitutional mechanism for this system is the Judicial Conduct Board.

The Judicial Conduct Board, made up of three judges, three attorneys, and three lay people, investigates complaints against judges in Vermont. If warranted, they hold a public hearing, deliberate privately, and then rule on the case. The board has the authority to impose various punishments, up to and including suspension. However, Judicial Conduct Board findings are of professional misconduct, not criminal wrongdoing.