ADMINISTRATIVE COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
CITATION: In re DavidLClarke,
2022 RSC 757
DATE OF JUDGEMENT:
November 22, 2022
BETWEEN:
Ridgeway Department of Justice
Applicant
and
DavidLClarke
Respondent
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION
UNDER SECTION 1.3 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT
I. Introduction
[1] Attorney General Techiey applied for an administrative hearing under s. 1.3 of
the Administrative Procedure Act on November 18, 2022.
[2] The application named DavidLClarke, an employee of the Ridgeway
Department of Justice as the respondent.
[3] The application sought to dishonourably discharge DavidLClarke for two
violations of department policy enumerated at s. 1 and 3 of the Department of Justice
handbook entitled “ethical standards” and “preparedness standards”.
[4] Applicant Techiey empanelled insertreality and jyoungbird to the tribunal.
[5] Findings of fact are made by the tribunal-at-large of impanelled officers
insertreality and jyoungbird and presiding judge koalaMedvedeva.
[6] Findings of law and policy are made by presiding judge koalaMedvedeva.
[7] Respondent DavidLClarke appeared on time before the tribunal on November
18, 2022.
[8] Respondent DavidLClarke submitted no contest to the allegations against him
late before the tribunal on November 21, 2022.
[9] There was no administrative hearing; the alleged facts filed by applicant
Techiey were brought directly for adjudication before the tribunal.
II. Findings of Fact
[10] On or about November 11th, 2022, State Attorney DavidLClarke posted a
proposed indictment against at the time Lieutenant BattalionGavin alleging he
committed murder and various other felonious crimes.
[11] BattalionGavin being a public-official enjoys the right per law to have a Grand
Jury indictment instead of the ordinary indictment.
[12] When the Grand Jury assembled in this matter, they were given a thread within
the Courts Discord and the ability to speak in such a thread.
[13] The thread is used to vote on the indictment & charges, question witnesses, and
debate with fellow jurors and whatnot.
[14] Throughout the indictment process, DavidLClarke made it apparent that the
jurors must move quickly due to the Defendant being a “senate candidate” and that
DavidLClarke was concerned that “[defendant] can't be removed if he is indicted after
elections end”.
[15] The Grand Jury eventually completed their indictment and returned a true bill
charging the defendant with voluntary and involuntary manslaughter alongside
aggravated battery and official misconduct.
[16] The indictment was added to the docket shortly thereafter and proceedings
began.
[17] Shortly after the trial began and before insertreality was brought on as co-
counsel, the judge entered a discovery order & date.
[18] DavidLClarke was absent throughout most of the short-lived trial.
[19] Upon the defense observing the various comments regarding David’s motives
for prosecuting the matter, they filed a motion to dismiss upon that reason.
[20] Co-counsel responded to that motion in a pleading and was victorious.
[21] Shortly thereafter, the issue of discovery was addressed, and unbeknownst to
co-counsel insertreality, the discovery period ended.
[22] As a result of that, and the failure of DavidLClarke to file his discovery in time,
the matter was dismissed with prejudice.
[23] Shortly after issuance of the dismissal, DavidLClarke went to public chat rooms
and explained the reasoning for the lack of submission was due to him prematurely
filing the case and lack of availability throughout the trial.
[24] By David’s own admission he stated that he should have “waited” to file, and
that the pressure from the Governor and Lt. Governor made him file prematurely.
[25] The Department of Justice Attorney Handbook regulates that in Section 2,
Subsection 2.1, Rule B states that “All staff should make each decision in observance
of furthering the interest of the State and of the People and not based on any personally
held prejudices or reservations.”
[26] Rule B also applies to any political prejudices or reservations, and as such any
behaviors that are prejudicial or hold reservations are prohibited.
[27] The Department of Justice Attorney Handbook regulates that in Section 2,
Subsection 2.1, Rule E states that, “Staff should generally conduct themselves in a way
that does not contravene general principles of ethics.”
[28] Rule E regulates conduct which is unethical. Unethical behaviors include
deception, doing political favors, and acting on ill-intended influence.
[29] Upon seeing this, AAG insertreality made Attorney General Techiey aware,
who ordered that DavidLClarke be terminated.
[30] Shortly thereafter, DavidLClarke was placed on administrative leave.
III. Findings of Law and Policy
[31] It is a contravention of Department of Justice policies to conduct oneself
contrary to the interests of the state or in pursuit of personal prejudices or reservations.
[32] It is an expectation stipulated in the Department of Justice policies that staff to
conduct themselves in a manner that does not contravene the general ethical principles.
[33] It is an obligation stipulated in the Department of Justice policies that staff duly
prepare for cases for which they are counsel.
[34] Respondent DavidLClarke is subject to Department of Justice policies.
[35] I find that the conduct of respondent DavidLClarke was in violation of
Department of Justice policy at paras. 31-33.
[36] I find that respondent DavidLClarke knowingly and intentionally acted in
contravention of Department of Justice policy at paras. 32-33.
[37] I find that respondent DavidLClarke deliberately disregarded his obligations
under Department of Justice policy at para. 33.
IV. Recommendations
[38] The tribunal recommends that DavidLClarke be dishonourably discharged.
[39] The employer is entitled to take any action up to and including, but not
exceeding, a dishonourable discharge.
V. Certification
[40] We, the tribunal, duly impaneled, do hereby certify the findings of this hearing,
and have forthwith put our recommendations as part of this report. These findings are
findings of our own, and purely our own without any outside interference or coercion.
We make this recommendation in good faith, under pains and penalties of perjury, and
that it is not the result of bias, prejudice, or other unlawful influence on our own
judgment.
Dated at the City of Palmer, in the State of Ridgeway this 22nd day of November, 2022.
“koalaMedvedeva”
Judge koalaMedvedeva
“insertreality”
Empanelled Officer insertreality
“jyoungbird”
Empanelled Officer jyoungbird
