EQUAL JUSTICE

The Utah Attorney General's Office is right to pledge publicly that the
drug case of 4th District Judge Ray Harding will be handled no differently
than any other. That will be difficult, as it is anything but a routine
case, but essential to the integrity of the state's justice system.

The unusual case involves a sitting judge charged with two felony drug
offenses -- possession and use of heroin and cocaine. Harding is free on
bail and scheduled to enter a plea at his arraignment on Monday.

The fact the AG is prosecuting is normal in such cases. The Utah County
Attorney's Office, which otherwise would handle the case, properly deferred
it to the attorney general because the district court has a close
professional relationship with the defendant. The case will be heard in 3rd
District Court for the same reason.

The Harding case already has had an impact on the 4th District Court bench.
The Utah Supreme Court has suspended Harding pending the outcome of his
case, and the cases before him have been reassigned to the other judges on
this bench. Although that has added to the judges' already heavy caseload,
that result is almost incidental given what might happen if Harding
ultimately is judged guilty.

A pair of attorneys representing defendants who have appeared before
Harding have filed requests for reviews of criminal cases the judge was
overseeing in the months before his arrest last July. They claim that
Harding's decisions in their clients' cases and others could have been
affected by the alleged drug-induced impairment of the judge.

If the lawyers are successful and can successfuly make their case, fine.
They are doing their jobs. Understandably, the prospect of cases being
overturned for such a reason is a nightmare for prosecutors and the judiciary.

But at this stage that should not be their chief concern. They should worry
about just one thing: Ensuring that Harding receives a fair trial and is
presumed innocent unless fairly proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. No
less is asked for other defendants. No less is demanded in this case.