MURNER NOT A GOOD SPORT

After losing the battle to keep the name of the anonymous donor from becoming public Judge Murner still refused to obey the order of the court and hand over the name of the donor. Moreover, he continued to refuse to state the correct name of the donor. This all points to the fact that Murner is a sore loser. As a matter of fact, it must eat his stomach out to lose, especially to a young person like Magistrate Scott Davis.

Judge Murner told the Louisville Courier-Journal that he did not give up the name of the donor because county officials wanted approval from the Judge to give Davis a copy of the check. To me that is an outright lie. The Judge ordered Murner - not "county officials"- to give up the information on February 6, 2009. Murner just couldn't stand the thought of losing-he is a sore loser in the world of sports. Kids are taught to not be sore losers. Was Judge Murner ever a kid or is he still one that has not learned that lesson?

It took the filing of a "Motion for Contempt" for Judge Murner to get the message that Magistrate Scott Davis was serious. Murner has now lost. Perhaps the "kids" will start helping him get over this thing of being a sore loser.

As for there being no difference in George Rawlings being the donor or the Rawlings Foundation being the donor, that just just doesn't wash. Anybody who pays taxes to the government and discusses those taxes with their accountant knows better. A reading of the Rawlings Foundation Articles of Incorporation reflects that the foundation was allegedly set up to help build christian churches, and to help prevent cruelty to children and animals. Their articles make no mention of helping cities and counties. But that is another story for another time.

In the response County Attorney John Fendley submitted to the court he stated that "It is obvious that (Davis) is more interested in publicity of this dispute with Judge Murner than with communicating the identity of the donor". How absurd can Fendley be? As a lawyer, Fendley was well aware of what the order of the court said and he knew that to satisfy the order and put the entire issue to bed, all that he had to do was have his client comply with that order in February. If Fendley didn't give the proper advice to Murner, then shame on John Fendley. It seems like Judge Murner has gotten a lot of bad legal advice in the past year. Just remember the discrimination lawsuit that has been filed against the county by Bruce Gentry. When the county is forced to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to settle that case, let's see if they accuse him of just seeking publicity or accept responsibility for poor legal advice and poor decision making.