Defrocked judge hopes to rise from ashes
In 1998, Elizabeth "Betsey" Hapner w as removed from the bench for dishonest y . On Nov. 7, voters might give her a second chance.
By COLLEEN JENKINS
Published October 16, 2006
TAMPA - The campaign slogan sounds innocuous, even expected in a judicial race.
"Proven to be a fair, efficient and effective judge."
But given the source - defrocked county judge Elizabeth "Betsey" Hapner - critics say the slogan is downright misleading.
It doesn't tell voters how Hapner's term was preceded by ethical misdeeds, then cut short when she resigned and was subsequently removed from office by the Florida Supreme Court.
Hapner, 49, counters that her problems are long in the past. But some argue that returning her to the bench will bring the same result: her ouster.
"She was removed before not because of inadequacy or misconduct in office but for repeated acts of fundamental dishonesty," said lawyer Joseph Varner III, who prosecuted Hapner for the Judicial Qualifications Commission. "They can never be erased."
Hapner's downfall played out in a public, embarrassing way.
In September 1997, less than a year after voters elected Hapner to the county bench, the JQC filed ethics charges against her. She was accused of abandoning her law practice and neglecting her clients to run for office; lying to get an injunction against her estranged husband, Tampa police Detective Paul Rockhill; and repeatedly missing court-imposed deadlines, then misrepresenting why she had.
Hapner initially denied the charges. During her February 1998 trial, she broke down in tears and blamed her mistakes on the stress of her ugly divorce, a judicial campaign and winding down her law practice.
JQC didn't believe her
The JQC hearing panel doubted Hapner's sincerity. In March 1998, the panel recommended Hapner's removal.
"The number and magnitude of discrepancies and conflicts in Judge Hapner's testimony far exceed what can be reasonably attributed to failed memory or the like," the panel wrote in its findings. "Throughout her testimony, Judge Hapner was evasive and made contradictory and inconsistent statements. The hearing panel concludes that Judge Hapner willfully and intentionally testified falsely during this proceeding."
Hapner resigned a month later but was retroactively removed by the Supreme Court. The Florida Bar also suspended Hapner from practicing law for 90 days and put her on a yearlong probation.
No authority prohibited Hapner from seeking office again.
Brooke Kennerly, executive director of the JQC, can't recall other ousted judges who made another run at the bench.
"Normally," she said, "that's all they want of the system."
Not Hapner. She says many of her past troubles resulted from untreated hypothyroidism, a condition that robbed her of her energy and left her mind foggy.
She also notes that the charges against her occurred during a brief and abnormally stressful period in her life.
"I'm not perfect," she said. "I've learned from mistakes I've made. I never repeat mistakes again. I've proven my resiliency."
Indeed, Hapner defied her critics in the primary election. She fell just 1,379 votes short of first-place finisher Bernard "Bernie" Silver, whom she'll face in the general election for the Group 32 race.
Some likely reasons for her success: She has name recognition, whether good or bad. She's female, which voters have proven to prefer in judges.
Her supporters think voters are ready to forgive a woman known to be articulate, personable and committed to her community.
"I think she has experienced a lot of positives, as well as a lot of negatives," said Olga-Villada Barnes, who taught both Hapner and her teenage son at Chamberlain High School. "And I think that kind of person can be a better judge. She can look at a case and say, 'I made some mistakes, too.' "
"No excuse for what she did, but I think she's paid her dues," said respected Tampa defense lawyer Ronald Cacciatore. "She's bright, and she's got a great judicial temperament."
Cacciatore is among fewer than a dozen local lawyers who have contributed to Hapner's campaign, which lags Silver's in funding. At the end of September, she had 51 contributors. Silver had 561 contributors, mostly people in the legal community as is typical for judicial candidates.
Hapner said she hasn't made fundraising a priority and isn't targeting attorneys.
Forgiven or forgotten?
The strategy may be one of avoidance. In a Hillsborough Bar poll answered by a tenth of the county's lawyers before the primary election, 85 percent of lawyers who knew Hapner disapproved of her candidacy. Silver received a 95 percent approval rating.
Though many of Hapner's detractors are criminal defense attorneys whose careers require them to believe in second chances, they are not convinced she is rehabilitated.
Varner, who represented the JQC against Hapner, said in 23 years as a trial lawyer, he has never encountered anyone who lied as consistently as Hapner. He thinks it's a flaw in the system that she is allowed to run or serve again. "She's no more fit today than she was then," said Varner, a contributor to Silver's campaign.
Hapner said the JQC can't pursue the same case twice. She said she is not a liar, noting that she passed two polygraph tests and was never criminally charged with perjury.
"Attorneys as advocates tend to have tunnel vision for what their side's opinion is," she said, referring to Varner's comments.
Even if she is rehabilitated, critics say that may not be good enough for a judge.
"It's hard to have a proven track record when you've been removed in less than two years," said Caroline Tesche, who lost to Silver and Hapner in the primary election. She now supports Silver. "We should have judges with sterling ethical track records."
Hapner's detractors guess that most voters are ignorant, not forgiving, of her past.
Thomas Scarritt Jr., a lawyer who chaired the local bar's former judicial campaign practices committee, is another Silver contributor who is closely watching the race. "It amazes me that people in Hillsborough County are not more concerned of electing someone who could be removed again by the JQC," Scarritt said.
That's democracy, said University of Florida law professor Joseph Little. "The matter is in the hands of the people to make the choice," Little said. "It's the right of the people to be foolish ... or to decide that somebody made a mistake, and we forgive them of that mistake."
Colleen Jenkins can be reached at cjenkins@sptimes.com or 813 226-3337.