Is Judge Mathews a criminal?
Superior Court Judge Thomas Mathews is in possession of a report with recommendations written by a Kenai Grand Jury that investigated judicial corruption in Alaska and he refuses to release it to the public even though he has no authority to do so, and this act is contrary to the Alaska Constitution.
Alaska judges take an oath to obey and defend the constitution yet they knowingly and willingly dismiss this oath and disregard it when doing so is in their interest or ideology.
Alaska’s Grand Jury system was established in Article I of the Constitution prior to the creation of the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government. The Grand Jury is not a division of the judicial branch but it works with the judiciary, as it should. If the Framers of the Constitution intended the Grand Jury to be subject to or subordinate to the Courts they would have specifically included it under Article 4, they did not. The Framers wanted an independent Grand Jury that could protect the people against misconduct, mischief, crimes, and corruption from government officials, including judges.
In most all matters presented before the Grand Jury, there are procedures and rules that are good and proper that facilitate the interaction between the Courts and Grand Jury. However, the 55 delegates who wrote Alaska’s Constitution made it clear that any rule or procedure that would impede the Grand Jury to be presented with evidence, or it’s desire to investigate matters of public interest or general welfare that involves government actions or officials, especially the Judiciary, are not valid. This is just common sense, a law degree is not required to be able to read and understand that “The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended” means what it says.
The Alaska Supreme Court knowingly and intentionally violated this provision of the Constitution by issuing Supreme Court Order (SCO) 1993 which partially suspended the power of the Grand Jury. Later SCO 2000 was issued which modifies the effect of SCO1993 somewhat, but the Court’s desire to impede a Grand Jury’s ability to investigate government and judicial corruption is clear. Any judge that knowingly or intentionally violates their oath or the Constitution is not worthy of the public trust or a position on the bench.
When SCO 1993 was issued, the Supreme Court Judges were Winfree, Carney, Massen, Borghesan, and Henderson.
Judge Thomas Mathews has possession of a report with recommendations, that the Kenai Grand Jury reported regarding judicial corruption in Alaska, and he refuses to release it to the public. This report was written by an independent body, not part of the judiciary, so by what authority does Judge Mathews keep this hidden?
Is it a crime for a private person to keep and hide public property? What about a judge? This report is not the personal property of Mathews, so who or what might he be protecting by hiding the report?
So, the question remains, by hiding this public report, is Judge Thomas Mathews a criminal?
Jim Caswell
Anchorage, Alaska
Please note that this judge is the same one who allowed the perjury charges to be dismissed against Judge Margaret Murphy. It was not dismissed because she is innocent but because the appointed prosecutor Clint Campion failed to adequately instruct the grand jury who indicted her on proper instructions for writing the indictment. This raises more questions. You should also not this same judge is now weaponizing the court system in his continued failure to review not one but three cases involving Lora Reinbold. The expense and length of these cases raises concerns about equal access to ethical justice. Mrs. Reinbold is clearly being held hostage by this court system and this judge with an apparent political axe to grind. One has to wonder if Reinbold will ever recover from her legal challenges when one judge has been handed all her cases. This does not seem to be impartial and neither does Judge Matthews.
Join Alaska Grand Jurors Association in seeking solutions to the ehtical challenges in our court system.
