Judges issue a frequent reminder during courtroom sentencings: Contrition is an imperative step toward rehabilitation. It indicates personal responsibility for the actions that landed the defendant in court in the first place.
We're still waiting for public remorse from Pasco-Pinellas Circuit Judge John Renke III. Last week, the Judicial Qualifications Commission said Renke should be suspended from the bench for a month, fined $20,000 and given a public reprimand for violating judicial election rules and misrepresenting his experience and that of his opponent, Declan Mansfield, in the 2002 campaign.
The electoral result was a victory for an inexperienced attorney guided by a politically active father, former state Rep. John Renke II, who was no stranger to cut-throat campaign tactics. But the partisan activities and outright lies disgraced Renke III and undermined public confidence in the judiciary. The punishment is not harsh. The younger Renke is fortunate the JQC is recommending he be allowed to continue on the bench. The Florida Supreme Court, which must review the suggested penalties, would be justified in tossing him from office.
In documents released last week, the JQC said Renke acknowledged his misdeeds and expressed remorse during his testimony. Fine. But throwing himself on the mercy of the state agency recommending his punishment is a matter of political expedience. So, too, is his post-announcement spin that he didn't dispute the JQC's findings because it would have meant more time away from his work on the bench.
Bunk. The younger Renke is misleading the public still, and his actions continue to be guided by political considerations. More accurately, he wants a quick resolution in hopes it will lead to a fading public memory before he faces re-election in 2008.
Renke declined to speak specifically about his actions because the Florida Supreme Court ruling is pending. But he made a vague promise that changes will be made in his next campaign.
Like what? Budgeting $31,000 for anticipated fines and lost income if he gets caught cheating? The lack of remorse does little to remedy his past conduct or establish public trust in his future performance as a judge.
If the Supreme Court doesn't remove him from office, voters should remind him of this at the earliest opportunity.
