Judicial Juggling in Carson City

Though seldom spoken in polite society— a lawyer in possession of good standing must be in want of a scandal. Enter Adam Lawson Woodrum, a man of learned pedigree and most unfortunate inclinations, whose present legal entanglements have left the Carson City courthouse in uncommon confusion.

Mr. Woodrum, formerly of the Carson City Public Defender’s Office and once an esteemed deputy attorney general of Nevada, now finds himself in the defendant’s chair, charged with the heinous crime of molesting a child. Naturally, such an affair is bound to turn the wheels of justice, though in this instance, said wheels appear to be running backward down a hill with a missing axle.

Upon his arrest on January 22, Mr. Woodrum, armed with means and legal acumen, promptly posted bail before the ink on his warrant had time to dry. Judge Thomas Armstrong, perceiving a conflict of interest, excused himself from the proceedings, thus handing the gavel to Judge Melanie Bruketta, who, in a most generous interpretation of justice, granted Mr. Woodrum’s release with nary a condition beyond the usual instruction to remain a law-abiding citizen.

One might assume that a man charged with such a crime would find himself subject to the full embrace of judicial oversight, like GPS monitoring, Department of Alternative Sentencing supervision, and, most curiously, a prohibition against contacting the victim were altogether absent.

So unobstructed was Mr. Woodrum’s path to freedom that he took to sending calendar notifications to the victim and their family—a modern twist on the old-fashioned practice of haunting one’s accuser. The day after his release, a Temporary Protective Order was issued. However, it was not until yesterday that the court decided to discuss the more traditional restrictions typically placed on such defendants.

The prosecution, perhaps belatedly realizing that the barn door had been left open, petitioned for an increase in bail and additional conditions, including GPS monitoring, weapon restrictions, and random searches. In its infinite wisdom, the court rejected the request to raise bail but did acknowledge that since Mr. Woodrum is currently in Northern Nevada, a tracking device might be advisable to ensure attendance at his trial.

Mr. Woodrum’s counsel, the indignant Mr. Orrin Johnson, took to the defendant’s defense with great flourish, declaring that his client was a most upstanding citizen whose life had been tragically “shattered” by these charges.

The criminal complaint, laid out in the plainest of legalese, accuses Mr. Woodrum of the despicable act of lewdness with a child under 16, a crime which, if proven, carries with it the promise of hard time rather than courtly pity. The court further learned that the victim was a relative of Mr. Woodrum and that he had been residing with the victim’s family at the time of the alleged crime—an arrangement since altered.

Standing before the court, the victim’s mother made it clear that she would not abide attempts to downplay the nature of the offense. She insisted that this was no mere misunderstanding nor a single, isolated lapse in judgment but rather something graver—though whether the justice system will treat it as such remains to be seen.

As Carson City awaits the next chapter of this grim tale, one cannot help but marvel at the peculiarities of our legal system—wherein an accused man’s comfort gets deliberated with greater urgency than a victim’s safety and where a lawyer, once esteemed, may find himself navigating the very machinery of justice he once operated, albeit from the wrong side of the bench.