Commissioner Jeff Barton promoted Ramus in the Barton family’s newspaper, Hays Free Press, and suggested that Ramus sue the county in 2007
Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com, to Mr. O'Dell at codell@austin.rr.com, or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
By Charles O'Dell
Contributing Editor
Carolyn Logan had waited nearly two years for justice and now she believed that Nick Ramus was about to be sentenced for his conviction on a charge of deadly conduct stemming from an incident when he aimed a loaded shotgun at her. But Kelly Higgins, defense attorney for Ramus, pulled another delaying tactic in court Friday May 14, filing a motion for a new trial. Surprisingly, the prosecutor didn’t object to the spurious motion and Judge Linda Rodriquez didn’t deny it on the spot.
Nick Ramus/Statesman.com/November 2008
Nick Ramus was convicted of deadly conduct in a bench trial held in Hays County Court of Law before Judge Rodriquez on April 27, 2010, for an offense committed September 5, 2008. In Friday’s hearing, Ramus was sentenced to one year in jail (converted to two years probation), forty hours of community service, a fine of $700 plus $250 in court cost, and Ramus is required to attend anger management class. Judge Rodriquez ordered his sentence held in abeyance until she rules on whether to grant a new trial or deny the motion.Higgins filed his motion in the Clerk's office just thirteen minutes before the scheduled sentencing was to occur at 1:30 pm. Higgins claims in his motion that the State failed to provide the Defense with non-existing evidence and the expected testimony of two witnesses prior to trial. Never mind that cross-examination of the witness during trial is the job of the defense attorney. The prosecutor has only to identify possible state witnesses, not transcripts of expected testimony. Why Judge Rodriquez failed to deny the one paragraph bogus motion had courtroom spectators scratching their heads.
This is not the first time Higgins has played the delay game using misinformation. Months ago on the Friday afternoon just before Ramus was to have his jury trial, Higgins entered an oral motion asking that Judge Anna Boling and the prosecutors recuse themselves from the Ramus case. Judge Boling gave Higgins fourteen days to file his motion in writing. When Higgins finally filed his written motion it made no mention of recusal. Instead, Higgins asked that Ramus’ jury trial be changed to a bench trial before a judge because, “Ramus had become emaciated and a jury wouldn’t like him.” That was a false claim. There is no evidence of an emaciated Ramus but there are plenty of photographs showing an overweight Ramus, and that’s the Ramus who showed up in court for his April, 2010 trial. Is it acceptable for an attorney to provide the court with information known to be false?
An overweight Ramus entered the courtroom again Friday for his sentencing, limping and using a cane – just as he had at his April trial. This time he brought along a tall coffee mug and sat down with his attorney at the defendant’s table. Judge Rodriquez admonished Ramus, saying that she doesn’t permit drinks in her court. Ramus got up from the table and walked spritely over to the spectator seats without using his cane and gave the mug to his house mate who sat back down. Judge Rodriquez, now more than a bit put out, raised her voice and instructed Ramus’ friend to take the mug out of her court!
Judge Rodriguez
When the hearing ended, Ramus left the courtroom without the aid of his cane. The show was over and justice had been delayed once again with the aid of a willing attorney.Ramus is the same fellow who Commissioner Will Conley approved as the Republican candidate for Pct 1 county commissioner in 2008. Conley was reported to have called Ramus, “a great man and a great candidate.” Commissioner Jeff Barton promoted Ramus in the Barton family’s newspaper, Hays Free Press, and suggested that Ramus sue the county in 2007. Ramus did sue the county and that case is still awaiting an order to be prepared by Ramus’ attorney, Skip Newsom, for District Judge Robert Pfeuffer to sign.
Ramus is a pathological liar but he has friends in high places in Hays County government. This is why Ramus gets away with gaming our courts.
13 comments:
Interesting story, Charles. But I guess the law needs to play itself out in the tragi-comedy known as the American courts.
Courtroom is theatre in reality. It looks like Ramos' attorney knows it.
I would like to hear more about your implication that Barton and Conley are lurking behind this court jester play.
Please give more details and cite facts about Barton promoting Ramos. It doesn't make much sense since Barton and Ingalsbe are close friends.
Charles, I still would like to know what Ramus "has" over Jeff Barton, Will Conley and a few others who run the show here in Hays County.
Why does Ramus have the support of these people? It really makes no sense unless he know something he shouldn't or perhaps they are all involved in some major schene for profit or power & control.
Something is missing for me.
Could you or someone fill in the dots???
Anonymous,
First, it’s Ramus, not Ramos. Ramus has claimed on various official documents to be Caucasian, Native American and Hispanic. He speaks the truth only when it suits him.
You are wrong about Jeff and Debbie being close friends. They are not. They do have a political symbiotic relationship but they are not close friends. Barton delivers public funding for the Southside Community Center and developer road projects in Pct 1. Debbie delivers her vote at commissioners’ court, while Debbie’s father, Ralph Gonzales who works for Rueben Garza, Director of Southside, deliver Hispanic votes for both Debbie and for Barton in primary and general elections.
Commissioner Conley and Barton tag team to keep Debbie in line. For example, in the 2008 election the Barton’s ran Celestino Mendez against Debbie in the Democrat Primary and Conley ran Ramus against her in the general election. That was to keep Debbie’s attention. After all, Debbie’s husband is the highest paid county employee working under Jerry Borcherding, P.E., and Jerry does the bidding of Barton and Conley.
As for details of the Barton/Conley/Ramus triangle---stay tuned.
We do know this, Ramus became an issue in the early days of Liz Sumter's administration. His OSSF (septic) permit was revoked, and there's a long and shady back story to that. A power play over the revoked permit ensued, led by Barton and Conley that resulted in a lawsuit against the county. Barton and Conley pushed back hard to show Sumter who was in control, and they've stuck with Ramus all along to no real good end. "Sucked in" would be a better way to describe it. We're keeping our eyes peeled for any evidence that the DA's office is somehow playing politics with this case, and who is financing Ramus's defense. The dots are pretty closely spaced.
Quicker and more honest responses to public information requests would help the effort along in finding some of these answers.
Sorry, it still makes no sense to me. If it was only because of that septic permit, they would have dropped Ramus afterward like a hot potato.
And as for pitting this loser against Ingalsbe? That's a joke. Doing that actually helped her get reelected. Conley and Barton could get a more viable character to run for them, one that could beat Ingalsbe.
There is more to this incredulous relationship than we are seeing or than is being openly discussed.
Documented details of how and why elected officials came to be associated with Ramus provide the content of an upcoming Roundup article. It exposes in clear detail the culture of corruption that exists in Hays County government.
Stay tuned.
Peter Stern is correct in questioning this whole mess of hogwash. There is no conspiracy here.
Just what does Charles O’Dell do for a living? This guy seems to be butting into everything that goes on in this County. Why are we so ‘lucky’? His stuff is so predictable that it is boring. Is he running for office or is he just trying to be a white trash version of ‘Geraldo Rivera’? He appears to be a liberal hack that blames everything on, Conley, Barton, Rose, Wentworth, and thinks Liz Sumter parted the Red Sea.
I don't doubt the coruption in government, I'm just questioning the "relationship" Barton and Conley appear to have with Ramus.
No one discussed the push for that useless taxpayer funded road past Ramus' house, the one that basically led to nowhere.
There is something here behind the curtains.
And then we have the last Anonymous who compulsively defends all the potential corruption of the powers that be while making O'Dell out to be either a conspiracy theorist or a man with too much time on his hands.
Any intelligent person of any political persuasion knows there is some degree of special interest corruption in Hays County.
The only question is how does one prove it, how much dark shadows wheeling and dealing has there been and what should the consequences be once exposed with evidence?
O'Dell has a thick enough skin after all these years to ignore the blind naysayers and keep on investigating and writing about the shady "coincidences."
The first line of defense: Attack the messenger.
That Anonymous ridiculing and "questioning" about O'Dell is also pretty "predictable" and sounds like the version of Rivera he or she seems to detest.
What exactly are you trying to do with your antics bad-mouthing O'Dell for his interest in what goes on in our county? I may not always agree with O'Dell, but at least he provides an ongoing view of what is happening here.
What do you do besides complain and bad mouth O'Dell, who obviously, for whatever reason rubs you the wrong way?
This is Paul Watkins and I used to think Charles was an idiot. I still do, but he is generally right about these things. He knew that Heatherwood got through because of my business relationship with Jim Powers, then county judge. So, he may be right here too. Nothing in Hays County happens without a few of us agreeing that it can happen. I'm just glad, I'm on the inside!
Post a Comment