Who is “Shielding” Isaac Shields?
Recommendations for Prosecutor's Misconduct
Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse...
Unless You Are an Oklahoma Prosecutor!
Ignorantia Juris Non Excusat!
Latin for "ignorance of the law excuses not" is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely by being unaware of its content.
Surely, the Professional Responsibility Tribunal should be aware of this legal principle?! After all, their job is to “determine the disposition of grievances or direct the instituting of a formal complaint for alleged misconduct or personal incapacity of an attorney with the Oklahoma Supreme Court.” [according to the Oklahoma Bar Association].
These are the lawyers charged with, not only knowing the law and governing principles behind it, but applying the law to the legal proceedings governing ALL other attorneys in Oklahoma. Their job is to give disciplinary recommendation reports to the Oklahoma Supreme Court on their fellow bar members.
Two of the Three women who minimized a Prosecutor’s Crime…
Meet Jennifer Irish & Melinda S. Matlock. These are two attorneys who, together with lay member Susan Reiger, filed their recommendation report in the disciplinary proceedings of Isaac Shields and George Gibbs.
Jennifer Irish is a Mediator at Mediation Works. Online she boasts of her ability to “craft an agreeable resolution”. She apparently believes a public finger wag is the “agreeable” sanction for felonious prosecutorial misconduct.
Malinda Matlock is a Partner with Rhodes Hieronymus, where she practices areas of professional liability, and other civil litigation. A large portion of such work likely includes finding immunity and defenses for “professionals”. In this context turning previous employment into a “mitigating factor”.
Susan Reiger is a “Lay Member” of the Professional Responsibility Tribunal. There is little if any credible information available about her online to indicate what, if any, credentials she may or may not have that would qualify her any more than a local retail clerk at deciding the professional fate of an Oklahoma prosecutor. She may be an accountant, but Shields, nor Gibbs, are implicated in any financial misconduct at this time.
Oklahoma Statutes Title 21 - Crimes and Punishment
EVERY prosecutor in Oklahoma IS familiar with this statute. It is literally their blueprint for charging defendants with crimes. A document that each of them should have a nearly intimate knowledge of, as it is quoted by them, every time they claim to enforce the law, when filing charges [daily] to part Oklahomans from freedom and liberties.
It is the #1 tool for reference, and is readily available in their pocket every day from a smart phone [see for yourself]. So why is it acceptable to these two professional members of the Professional Responsibility Tribunal [Jennifer Irish and Malinda Matlock] for a prosecutor to utilize ignorance of the law as a defense to an admitted felony?!
For those unfamiliar, we are speaking about the long awaited outcome of the disciplinary proceedings [SCBD-7480] of Isaac Shields for spying on jury deliberations. A story we covered via video on our YouTube Channel. Shields and his co-counsel George Gibbs, were caught spying on the jury via courthouse security cameras back in 2022. Both are facing disciplinary proceedings following their misconduct [criminal activity], but in this article we are going to focus on Shields for two reasons.
First, records indicate Shields initiated the misconduct.
Second, he had previously been informed of the ethical violation from similar conduct years earlier in Tulsa County.
Yet these three woman have filed nearly 36 pages, apparently to make excuses for him. Some of their “mitigating factors” include:
Shields never denied guilt and “cooperated” with the Bar Association’s investigation.
Shields entered into a “deferred prosecution agreement that admitted his violation of 21 O.S. § 588”
When has admitting guilt ever helped regular Oklahoman’s avoid punishment? The answer… It doesn’t… UNLESS your part of the DAC cult!
Shields has voluntarily entered into Lawyers Helping Lawyers, a peer support program.
The real kicker is #5… The PRT [Professional Responsibility Tribunal] states that out of “all” the attorneys who testified, except one, were not “aware” of 21 O.S. § 588.
Yes, that’s right folks… The logic is that because many Oklahoma prosecutors are inept, and did not bother to learn the law… Shields should not face the statutory discipline for committing a felony.
Do you believe that the District Attorney in your district would afford you the same courtesy if you “unknowingly” committed a felony? Or would they scour Title 21 to find something to charge you with?
But… But… He’s a Veteran!
These ladies were also quick to point out that Shields is a veteran of the Oklahoma National Guard and “volunteers” for the benefit of veterans.
Does that mean that military veterans are incapable of committing misconduct?
Lets take a look at two other National Guard Veterans who’s misconduct has recently been exposed… There is the Sheriff who has an extensive list for himself and his deputies [including aiding and abetting a Domestic Abuser]. And then there is the Gypsy Cop who was only decertified after years of misconduct.
BOTH are also Oklahoma National Guard Veterans. Maybe this should not be considered a mitigating factor. The possibility that the guard is not instilling proper values could be explored separately.
The Recommendation:
The panel recommended that Isaac Shields receive only a “PUBLIC CENSURE” for acts that regular folks would be deprived of our liberties and facing years in a brick cell if we had spent even a fraction of the time Shield did spying on a jury.
Public Censure is the LOWEST form of public discipline an attorney many be sanctioned for. Generally speaking, when the violation of the ethics rules are de minimus or technical in nature. That is not what occurred here. Shields Actions prejudiced the Defendant when he viewed the jury deliberations, then met with the Judge regarding a question the Jury had. Shields had “insider” information that put him in a position of advantage that was not disclosed to defense.
We have these laws for a reason. What is the point if they are not enforced equally among everyone, especially those who hold a greater responsibility to enforce the law and seek justice for the rest of us?
This is evidence that the Oklahoma Bar Association is unable to adequately hold their own members accountable when they break the law. One should keep in mind, this is not a simple aggrieved client complaint. This is a prosecutor, who’s job is to seek justice and enforce the laws of our state, breaking the law! This is the epitome of a two-tiered justice system. Where a man’s political affiliation [The District Attorney’s Association] absolves him from accountability. The ODAA is a private association used to lobby politically [and out of reach of the public records act] on behalf of all Prosecutors [District Attorneys].
Will He Protect Oklahoman’s or His Fellow Bar Member?
The Chief Justice has recently signed an order outlining the scheduling for the briefing of Isaac Shields & George Gibb’s disciplinary proceedings that indicates there will be ruling made some time after the end of November.
Will he rule with the excuses given by a “lay” person and two corporate attorneys, or will he stand up for ALL Oklahomans, and ensure that these two rouge prosecutors are no longer in the position to rob defendants of their constitutional right to fair trials?
We will just need to wait and see if Chief Justice Kane stands with the people he has a duty to protect, or if he will turn a blind eye to prosecutorial misconduct, and perpetuate Oklahoma’s history of corruption.
Still no response from the OK Supreme Court. Strategy is to wait and see who forgets the abuse of power then let them go.
Still waiting