- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -


« News Home

‘Did he just call me a drunk?’

Published: Sun, January 15, 2012 @ 12:00 a.m.

By Bertram de Souza (Contact)

During a recent candidate forum in Boardman hosted by the Fraternal Order of Police, Youngstown City Prosecutor Jay Macejko tossed out a comment about the man he hopes to unseat, county Prosecutor Paul Gains, which brought an audible gasp from the audience.

The comment was so inflammatory that it demands proof from Macejko. If the city prosecutor does not have the evidence, then he should publicly apologize to Gains.

It was while he was addressing the gathering at the FOP forum that Macejko apparently decided to go for broke. He was articulating the differences between him and Gains and detailing how he would operate the office differently when he said he would show up for work every day and that he would be “sober.”

Gains, who was in the audience, turned to Mahoning County Democratic Party Chairman David Betras and asked, “Did he just call me a drunk?”

Betras replied, “It sounded like it.”

The reaction of the crowd must have felt like a blast of cold air to Macejko, because he quickly dropped that line of attack.


But for Gains, Betras and others at the forum, it certainly came across as the challenger accusing the incumbent of showing up for work drunk.

It’s a serious allegation that cannot be dismissed as simply the give-and-take of campaigning. Even in hotly contested races, there are certain lines that must not be crossed — unless the attacker is willing to back up his attack.

The suggestion that the county’s lawyer shows up for work wobbly carries with it the idea of an elected official guilty of malfeasance and worse, of putting the criminal justice system in jeopardy.

Any weakness on the part of the county prosecutor can be used by those who intend to finesse the system. The late Prosecutor James Philomena opened the office up to the highest bidder and as a result justice in Mahoning County was up for sale.

Gains successfully ran against Philomena by accusing him of wheeling and dealing on criminal charges and plea agreements. Philomena ultimately became the target of a federal government corruption investigation and ended up in the penitentiary.

Gains is well aware that in politics, perception is reality, which is why the suggestion that he isn’t at the office every day and that sometimes he shows up looped has him fighting back.

The prosecutor noted that Macejko has the video of his speech to the FOP gathering on his web site, but that it has been edited. A review of the video shows that the inflammatory remarks have been deleted.

Why? Is it because the city prosecutor knows that while voters have strong opinions about the candidates they also demand fairness? Or, is it because he has no proof that Gains is a “drunk” and that continuing to focus on the issue would put him in jeopardy?

Lawyers must adhere to strict rules of conduct established by the Ohio Supreme Court. Has Macejko filed a complaint with the disciplinary council of the Supreme Court and with the Mahoning County Bar Association against Gains?

The city prosecutor has a responsibility as an officer of the court to explain his comments — in public. He made them in a public setting. Simply deleting them from a videotape is not enough.


Indeed, Macejko still owes this writer answers to a list of questions that were contained in a column in this space published July 31.

The most significant one was this:

“Have you had any social or business dealings with Anthony, John J. and/or Flora Cafaro, or with any other executives of the Cafaro Co.? If so, what was the nature of the dealings?”

Four years ago, the Cafaro clan spent a ton of money trying to defeat Gains in his re-election bid because he had taken them on in court in the Oakhill Renaissance Place controversy.

The column also posed this question: “Given that the FBI and U.S. attorney’s office in Cleveland have 2,000 hours of tapes from the surveillance [of the Cafaros and others], can you say unequivocally that your name will not appear on any related list? If it turns out that you were recorded in conversations or appear on videotape with any of the Cafaros or company executives, will you withdraw from the race next year and resign your position as city prosecutor?”


1kensgirl(571 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Gaines has proven his worth time and time again. Standing up to the mob was one of his greatest feats. Have we forgotten? He can't be bought and sold like previous county prosecutors. Jay is already running a dirty campaign. If he is starting out dirty he will finish dirty. No honor no shame. Just what we don't need in Mahoning County. No one wants to go back to the "old days"!

Suggest removal:

2Maillis(8 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

If one were to look up the definition of sober in webster's dictionary you would see that of six definitions of the word only one involves abstention from alcohol. One definition is to be marked by earnestly thoughtful character or demeanor. Another is to be marked by temperance and seriousness. Yet, Bertram has assumed the most hurtful definition. I know jay Macejko and I know Paul gains. Honestly, I like them both. And I worked with jay and for Paul. I can assure you that at no time did jay or I ever question Paul or believe Paul to be a drunk. I also know my friend jay and I know the meaning he wished to convey by use of the word sober Is not as Bertram has decided to interpret. Perhaps the meaning taken by a word says more about the person hearing the word than the one saying it. Ask jay what he meant, don't assume it bertram.

Suggest removal:

3TheLadyRides(23 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

@ Maillis: Then I would suggest Jay use the word "somber," not "sober," which to most readers means only one thing. And it's a low and unforgivable thing to say, since as you say, neither you nor Macejko ever believed Gains to be "a drunk." Guess it's politically OK to suggest it, though.

Suggest removal:

4Maillis(8 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Lady rides. It is not ok to suggest anything without proof. Including involvement with the named family in the article. It is possible for two people to seek office, neither of them being bad people. This election should be about issues, not ad hominem attacks.

Suggest removal:

5kensgirl(571 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

WOW!!! Damage control went to work right away for Jay. I think he might be our next Joe Biden. Voters aren't stupid. They hate dirty pool and it looks like Jay is taking his starting mark. Play fair or get out of the game. You know the saying about giving someone too much rope!

Suggest removal:

6Maillis(8 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Kensgirl, damage control? I m not hiding behind anonymity. My identity is known.
Come out of the shadows.

Suggest removal:

7ytown1(392 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

I did not catch your name there Maillis.

After only 3 comments I don't have a clue who you are, so anonymity lives on, huh JJ, or is that you Anthony.

Any more envelopes with campaign contributions floating around.

Suggest removal:

8Maillis(8 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

The last name is maillis. And as you can see I worked with jay and for Paul. Maillis, attorney...hmmm? Who could I be?

Suggest removal:

9Tigerlily(476 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

I was just about to point out, after reading more of Bertram's tripe, that "sober" is an often used word to mean serious and honest and earnest, and that Bertram (and seemingly other semi-illiterate politicians) have only stored the one meaning (not drunk) in their vocabularies. Duh duh duh, as usual.

I love that someone like Maillis comes on here under their own name and is attacked for saying the things they had to say under an anonymous name, but in fact it was their real last name, and work with Jay and Paul. Ha! Goes to show the seedy nature of those who immediately used the argument of anonymity against Maillis are the true cowards, and probably also most likely to spread lies as truth.

Like Bertram, and his befuddled misconceptions of what "sober" means.

Suggest removal:

10ytown1(392 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Then you must be all that because I for one have never heard of you.

Not that you should feel all that important either, just because you may know someone does not really make you the authority on that person. Many of people have been duped by politicians in the valley over the years.

Suggest removal:

11jokerman(6 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Maillis.....????? So, you're saying you're an attorney? Let me ask you this, you would agree with me that Macejko's use of the word "sober" certainly implied that Gains drinks. At least, most people associate the word "sober" with being alcohol free. Why would Macejko have used that particular word?

It seems to me that Bertram is asking Jay what he meant. If it wasn't meant to imply that Gains drank, why would Macejko edit it out of his video. If he did make such a claim (that Gains showed up to work inebriated) and has no proof of that, doesn't that open Macejko up to possible ethical trouble?

And, if Macejko meant no offense, then why isn't he saying it. Why does he send you to say it?

Suggest removal:

12jokerman(6 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Tigerlilly, same questions to you as to the attorney. By the way, if Macejko meant some other, less used version of sober, then let him say it, under his own name.

How about all the Cafaro questions that Bertram has now posed on 2 different occasions. Macejko should have no problems answering a few questions, right?

Suggest removal:

13Maillis(8 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Did I not already say that while jay and I worked for Paul there was Never a time when I had any concern for his sobriety. Not one. Further did I not say that jay did not mean to imply that there was such a concern. Why would such a statement be assumed by anyone to imply what Bertram says? The word sober, to many, does NOT mean "not drunk". Look it up. There is no controversy here. I also said I liked Paul. You should read my post. However, in the end, Jay is a friend, who I know. I know his heart and I know him to be a good, honest and decent man. Thus, I, on my own, wrote my comments to Bertram's article. The comments are mine and mine alone. The myth however that Jay has an association with the Cafaro family merely because others running in the past did, deserves no response. Yet, I doubt there is any involvement. I expect any citizen could attend one of his appearances and ask. this election is between two men and ultimately the voters will decide. Bertram is obviously trying to create controversies where none exist.

Suggest removal:

14johnyoung(238 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Mr. Maillis:

If Mr. Macejko were to have called Mr. Gaines 'gay' , would you be posting here trying to justify the use of that term as implying that he actually meant that Mr. Gaines was "having or showing a very lively mood"?

For an attorney, you surely present an extremely weak argument in your justification of Mr. Macejko's use of the adjective "sober" to illustrate a contrast to his own demeanor as opposed to Mr. Gaines'. One of the basic concepts of verbal communication is that the message is supposed to conveyed in a manner that is clearly understandable by the intended recipient. I thought you guys learned stuff like that in law school?

I've just marked both of you off of my short list should I ever need legal counsel.

Suggest removal:

15kensgirl(571 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Good job Johnyoung! Atty. "Malice" is putting his courtroom maneuvers to work to try and dupe the public. Sorry pal, doesn't work here. Not all of us are uneducated fools who squirm under an attorney's gaze. Everyone knows what Jay meant. Why did he edit it out of his tape??? Hmmm? He meant drunk and YOU know it!! Is there something he can legally or morally pull out of his pocket in order to prove Paul is unfit as a county prosecutor? If there is then bring it. Until then quit thumping your chest and trying to intimidate us with your law school bravado. Mahoning county people have lived through the worst that can happen to a community. We're sure as hell not afraid of wolves who come parading in sheep's clothing.

Suggest removal:

16snydro0108(61 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Johnyoung, that was good!

Macejko meant "sober" referring to Gains being a drunk and there is no two ways to spin it. "Look up the word 'sober' and tell me what the REAL definition is." It doesn't mean "drunk". Actually, the Websters dictionary defines it as: "Not affected by alcohol; not drunk". So, Mr. Maillis, give me another English lesson, just AFTER you "sober up".

Suggest removal:

17Maillis(8 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

For people who claim to be so moral and offended by the use of words, you have had no problem bashing me in your posts without knowing me. Apparently, your ethical standards only apply to others. I cannot say it any more plainly than I have. I have never bashed Paul Gains in any of my posts. In fact, I have defended him. I have also defended Jay. I was simply pointing out that Bertram seems to be on a personal crusade to hurt Jay Macejko without any real knowledge of what transpired. You all hide behind anonymity and launch ad hominem attacks. I will not.

Suggest removal:

18johnyoung(238 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Mr. Maillis:

If you will note, I did not bash you, Mr. Macejko, or Mr. Gaines. I am merely pointing out the weakness of your original argument.

Let's face it, Jay got carried away and said something he shouldn't have. Much like his incident with Atty. Ally that cost him a written apology and the city of Youngstown $110,000. Anyone else seeing a pattern of behavior here that makes for a 'loose cannon'? Not a quality most people would find attractive in a County Prosecutor.

Suggest removal:

19jokerman(6 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

You're right Johnnyyoung. People really should question Macejko's temperment and behavior. From what I understand, Macejko said far worse things to Ally and members of his staff.

It took Ally filing a lawsuit to get an apology out of Macejko. Doubt if Gains will get one out of him. All Macejko has to do is say that he is sorry, but, he won't.

Suggest removal:

20Tigerlily(476 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

The question of whether Jay would have called Gaines "Gay" does not work in this argument as that word has only two meanings: homosexual or happy. In the the context of the speech, Macejko said that HE would be sober. If Macejko had say HE would be gay, then I would actually interpret this to mean the definition of happy and joyful while he is at work (which is what he was talking about). So the question of "gay" actually doesn't win you any arguments here, Johnyoung (really? so nice that you think you know the heart of the person who first had a stake in the city--self-aggrandizing much?)

I don't know either of these candidates. I'm a reader who simply thinks DeSouza is a mud slinger, trouble maker, and that his "opinions" are lower than slime. He makes me want to clean my house, launder my clothes, and shower in extreme heat whenever I encounter his "thoughts" if that is what they should be called.

Suggest removal:

21Tigerlily(476 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

For a man who just gave his employees raises in times of recession, Gains isn't sober. This does not mean "not drunk". It means his thinking is immoderate--go back to high school for vocabulary tests, suckers.

Suggest removal:

22johnyoung(238 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago


I hope you too are not an attorney, for your rebuttal is even more anemic than Mr. Maillis' original argument. (since you are apparently a vocabulary champion, I'll assume you know what 'anemic' implies in this context). The point here is what did Mr. Macejko mean to imply about Mr. Gaines when he said he himself would come to work 'sober'? The analogy to calling someone 'gay' is that it is also a word replete with multiple meanings. I used the analogy to illustrate that someone of Mr. Macejko's standing should be able to deliver verbal communication that is clearly understandable by the intended recipients. Come on, he's a lawyer for goodness sake! In view of his current dilemma,he clearly failed at that. Further, I stated that it appears that Mr. Macejko exhibits a pattern of speaking before he thinks, in view of the Basil Ally dilemma which required him to issue a written apology and caused the city of Youngstown to pay Atty. Ally $110,000 in damages. Now please tell me tigerlilly, where are the flaws in my argument ?

PS: I'd be interested to know where you attended school. Where I attended, vocabulary was taught and studied in grades 1-8. By the time you got to high school, the expectation was that a student's vocabulary was already well-developed, and then naturally augmented in high school through the study of literature. So sorry yours' was not.

Suggest removal:

23kensgirl(571 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

The point stands that Jay came out swinging with a low blow and fell on his ass. I give this round to Gaines.

Suggest removal:

24walter_sobchak(1840 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Have to agree with johnyoung on this one. Mr. Macejko apparently felt he could be cute with a smug quip and, when he fell flat on is face, he is trying to backtrack and cover his misstep. Sort of like Bill Clinton saying it depends on what your definition of "is" is. But, it is apparent to me that Mr. Macejko suffers from foot in mouth disease when you factor in the Atty. Ally settlement. I'm not sure this is a good trait in the man wanting to be the chief law enforcement official in the county!

Suggest removal:

25crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

If Jay is so innocent, why was the comment edited OUT? Why is he stalling in answering Bert's questions regarding the Cafaro's? This man is NOT fit to be the chief law enforcement official in the county. He has a LOT of skeletons in his closet. Let's get them out there for the public to know, maybe his name can be ruined, of course, he is doing a mighty fine job by himself without others commenting on his 'past practices'. haha, keep up the good work Jay!

Suggest removal:

26grand4dad(193 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Have to agree with johnyoung, walter and crlbk1052 on this. This remark just ruined any credibility he had.

Suggest removal:

27paulparks(235 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

So much baloney! Neither of these individuals is worthy of the job. But that's the typical crap you get in Mahoning County!

Suggest removal:

28dancinmoses(66 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Does Jay have a relative who is practicing law in mahoning cty? Any relation? Any collusion happening there? "Sober" or otherwise? this might be a subject to check out

Suggest removal:

29crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Hey Bertram,
Jay Macejko has a track record here: the Ally Settlement, the Paul Gaines incident and then there is a situation with the PAST treasurer of the classified union at YSU who embezzled money, Jay Macejko’s wife, represented this woman in Federal Bankruptcy Court. Jay subpoenaed the records, how come the Grand Jury came back with a no bill? Did Jay jump the gun on subpoenaing the records? Who presented this case to the Grand Jury? Why was no action taken in this case? There are documents to support these allegations; they are on the Mahoning County Justice Website and Federal Bankruptcy Courts website. Why not report on the apparent cover-up of this misappropriation of funds?

Suggest removal:

30mrblue(968 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Mahoning County politics. A real joke. It will get worse as election day gets closer.

Suggest removal:

31VINDYAK(1799 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Amen, Mr. Blue, Amen.

Suggest removal:

32YSUretired(25 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Is it time for another candidate? It seems that there are a lot of questions out there about fitness for duty. Bertram, I sure hope you do a little investigative reporting on some of these questions. And Jay better start explaining himself a little better than he has done through these various postings. Words have meaning and in the Mahoning Valley my guess is that 99% of the population would think that Jay meant abstaining from alcohol as opposed to any of the other possible definitions. Now how about some real investigative work? I will pay to read that report in the Vindy.

Suggest removal:

33crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

I think Mr. Jay should be made to answer the questions, let's put him on the hot seat as he has failed to put criminals, proven guilty individuals, on trial to be held accountable for their wrong doings.
The potential punishments for an embezzlement conviction include prison time and significant fines. Why has NOTHING been done to the former treasurer, BTW, who was represented by Jay's wife in bankruptcy court? Where is Lady Justice? Hiding? or is Jay keeping her quiet all the while hoping that this WRONGDOING NEVER comes to light? Let's turn the light on Jay!

Suggest removal:

34Bman(151 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Everyone working in the County Prosecutor's office knows Gains is a notorious drunkard but all are too afraid of the inner-political retribution if they would come forward. Furthermore, anyone within a downtown saloon (i.e Youngstown Club, Anthony's, etc) could easily verify Gain's regular drunken demeanor.

A bullet? Gains originally identified a janitor at the courthouse as his assailant. Then, miraculously a "hit man" admits trying to kill Gains but that his gun supposedly jammed.......gun jamming mobsters? Or was it really the janitor?

Bertram is truly a person who perpetuates the system in Mahoning County because he backs incumbants, without question. Bertram's buddy, Gains, is finally in a real political race with a viable and qualified opponent, after 15 long years..... Bye Paul!

FYI...about being a notorious drunkard...Gains is a public official and normal defamation laws do not apply to him. Gains needs to deal with the attacks or quit.

Suggest removal:

35dancinmoses(66 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Let's stick to the questions asked in a previous post. Bertram needs to ask the city prosecutor WHY a woman who stole money from HER union was NEVER brought to trial? There is proof that she took several thousand dollars, hired Jay's wife to be her attorney and NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE TO HER. How is this doing the job and yet aspiring to do an even bigger job as the county prosecutor? SOMEONE needs to investigate this and bring justice to the citizens of the valley.

What Gains does after hours is NO business of yours or mine, he is doing his job. Jay seems to have the ability to pick and choose when to apply justice. Fair? I DO NOT THINK SO!!!!

How can he run for another office when he didn't do his job. Are there more cases where he has turned a blind eye to justice? Let's call a spade a spade .....

Investigate this, ask him about this cover-up, let's get it out in the open. Or will he try to edit this out too?

Suggest removal:

36foghorn(9 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

can you give some more details on this situation you're talking about where someone stole money from the union? is the case still pending or was it dismissed?

Suggest removal:

37briant(57 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

Was Gains at the Mooney party after the State Championship??

Suggest removal:

38crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago


Files seem to have been edited and not many archives are available. Here is the only reference to the theft in office, it is on the vindy website titled:
YSU Union files lawsuit against its ex-treasurer - May 18, 2011

Suggest removal:

39southsidedave(4777 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

We could use this as a skit for a sitcom show...

Suggest removal:

40nutz666(3 comments)posted 2 years, 6 months ago

I have lived here for 55 years and I am repulsed by the stupidity of our so called leaders. Paul Gains is a glory seeking moron. Too many criminals have been left to ruin this city and the out lying communities. Mr.Gains has out lived his usefulness. His time has come. All public servants should be tested for drug and alchohol abuse constantly. No exceptions. If they test positive ,lifetime ban them from holding any public office or position.

Suggest removal:

41crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Here are the facts:
Jay Macejko was behind subpoenaing the financial records from YSU – ACE Union. He did this with the help of his long time friend Robert Bush, who is now working in the Jobs and Family Services. State Highway Patrol Trooper Halligan and Lt. Cretella from YSU Police tried to strong arm the current treasurer for the financial records of the union. When the treasurer refused to comply, the state trooper handed the current treasurer the business card of Jay Macejko and his phone number hand written on the back. This happened May 4th of 2010. Her instructions were to call Jay, he wanted to talk to her privately. She refused so they went to the Grand Jury. The subpoena can be found on line.
Jay Macejko’s wife represented Carol, the former treasurer, in Federal Bankruptcy court, where she claimed some of the embezzled money as a loan from the union. The Bankruptcy case was closed in May of 2010. The Grand Jury subpoena came out on June 8th. On June 11th the criminal forensic audit was released and it was clearly stated that Carol embezzled the money. In a number of emails, Carol admitted to taking the money and that if anyone had any questions they should contact Jay Macejko’s wife, her attorney, at her law office. The county has these records. I am sure a public records request can subpoena them. The two involved in the cover-up were Jay Macejko and Robert Bush, let’s not forget there were colleagues when they both worked for the city.
FYI: the amount taken was $17,000.00
If you look at similar cases that have been in the news over the last 18 months, ALL were sentenced to jail, probation and had to make restitution.
Alright Vindy, let’s do the story BEFORE the March primary.

Suggest removal:

42Bman(151 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

If these are "the facts," why didn't Gains' crew do anything with this case?

Gains had everyone involved in the '08 election indicted for BS; surely he could handle a simple embezzlement case?

PROBLEM is that there is nothing to prosecute and the story is just being spun for political trash. Nice try, but very, very unimaginative and lazy. Scandals are old news...just like Gains.

Suggest removal:

43crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Guess it takes one to know one. Unimaginative and lazy, this is about the FACTS Bman!

Suggest removal:

44crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

This ISSUE will NOT go away. The people of the valley deserve to know the TRUTH, even when you try to bury it, this will surface AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN.

Suggest removal:

45YSUretired(25 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

I posted this earlier, but it seems to fit here as well. I would love to see a follow-up on that story. Is there any such thing as investigative reporting these days? If these facts are true, it smells a bit like a cover-up to me. How is the average person supposed to trust a legal system that is this corrupt? Hand washing and hand wringing at its best. I would really like to see the answers to the questions posted. I believe the public deserves the truth before election day.

I also think after they test the employees for drugs and alcohol, they should have to take a lie detector test. Would anyone in Youngstown run for political office then?

Suggest removal:

46Bman(151 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

"I also think after they test the employees for drugs and alcohol, they should have to take a lie detector test. Would anyone in Youngstown run for political office then?..."

Macejko would.

Suggest removal:

47whit1980(10 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

Sure Macejko would run for office because he's a narcissist. He has 6 employees, 2 of which filed discrimination suits against him, 1 which has already been resolved in favor of the employee and he still decided to run. He just cost the city thousands of dollars bc of his actions and still he decides to run. He hurt an innocent man with his discriminatory, malicious and racist actions and still he decides to run. He's just banking on the hopes that other people in the county either don't know or don't care that he's discriminates against nonwhite employees.

Suggest removal:

48Bman(151 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago

"...He hurt an innocent man with his discriminatory, malicious and racist actions and still he decides to run..."

Not innocent. Just not that good of a lawyer and should be fired. However, the political Left is keeping this man's job. As a City Prosecutor one HAS the ability to staff assistant prosecutors at-will (unless you fall into a category which gets special protections the majority does not enjoy).

"... He's just banking on the hopes that other people in the county either don't know or don't care that he's discriminates against nonwhite employees..."

lol RACE BAITING???? Try again.

How about Gains' record when it comes to "nonwhite" folks? Specifically, how about all the people of color who are victims of crimes in cases that Gains loses or gets tossed from court because of his incompetence?...Gains really looks out of them, huh?

Suggest removal:

49crlbk1052(99 comments)posted 2 years, 5 months ago



(A) A lawyer shall not:


(3) Engage in illegal conduct involving moral turpitude.

(4) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

(5) Engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

(6) Engage in any other conduct that adversely reflects on the lawyer's fitness to practice law.

A Lawyer Should Assist in Improving the Legal System


EC 8-8 Lawyers often serve as legislators or as holders of other public offices. This is highly desirable, as lawyers are uniquely qualified to make significant contributions to the improvement of the legal system. A lawyer who is a public officer, whether full or part-time, should not engage in activities in which his personal or professional interests are or foreseeably may be in conflict with his official duties.



(A) A lawyer who holds public office shall not:

(1) Use his public position to obtain, or attempt to obtain, a special advantage in legislative matters for himself or for a client under circumstances where he knows or it is obvious that such action is not in the public interest.

(2) Use his public position to influence, or attempt to influence, a tribunal to act in favor of himself or of a client.

(3) Accept any thing of value from any person when the lawyer knows or it is obvious that the offer is for the purpose of influencing his action as a public official.

Someone got some explaining to do Lucy!

Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport