You will remember that one of the taters was the first to raise a question about our prosecuting attorney's credentials. That tater wondered what Stinkwell's reaction would be if he knew that she graduated from a law school that was only "conditionally" accredited.

We did some checking and found out that Donna had graduated from a school named John Marshall Law School in Atlanta George, a two-bit law school for commuters and part-time law school student. Apparently, this is was a factor that prevented them from getting ABA-accreditation. Law schools generally prefer students to dedicate full-time to law school.

Our tater was right in that Donna had graduated from a law school that was "provisionally" accredited but the tater was actually inaccurate in one respect. Donna did not graduate from a "provisionally" accredited law school. She actually graduated five (5) years BEFORE the law school was even provisionally accredited.

Graduates of provisionally accredited law schools are allowed to take the bar exam in most states. Actual accreditation has to follow in about five years.

Hence, Donna Meadows Price became a lawyer five years BEFORE she was eligible to take the bar exam. We wrote a FOIA to the state of Georgia because we guessed that she might actually have taken the Georgia Bar Exam and because a licensed lawyer in George. Had that been the case, she could have been allowed to "reciprocate" to WV. Reciprocity is the term for one state allowing the persons of another state to take their bar exam. Both states have to agree to accept each other's credentials.

So if Donna had passed the Georgia Bar Exam and become a lawyer there, she would have been able to use reciprosity for her WV license.

But here's the catch: We are including a copy of the letter from the state of George. Read it for yourself:

From County Buildings

Notice that Ms. Meadows filed an Application for Certification of Fitness to Practice Law as well as a Bar Examination Application with this office. BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT SHE PASSED THE GEORGIA BAR EXAM.

So here is the question: If she was eligible to be a lawyer in the state of Georgia, how did she become a lawyer in the state of West Virginia?

Like the Honorable James Rowe, the honorable Donna Meadows Price either falsified her application for her West Virginia license and some political chancanery is involved. She was not eligible to take the WV Bar exam until 2005. More technically, she could never have taken the bar exam BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T GRADUATE FROM AN ABA-ACCREDITED LAW SCHOOL IN EITHER GEORGIA OR WEST VIRGINIA.

There is some monkey business going on with the West Virginia Board of Bar Examiners. It is time to find out why these second-rate lawyers are being allowed into the legal system where they soon become public officials in charge of due process.

What say ye? Donna Meadows-Price?

P.S. We should note that we queried Ms. Meadows Price by email and she never availed herself of the opportunity to clear up this matter. Maybe she will now!

Donna, you don't like veiled threats so let me be perfectly blunt and straight forward. Explain this or I will raise the question in a court of law!

All I can say is WHOA!

Holy S**t! That is big! Donna better get to answerin' before this becomes a firestorm!

Every dopehead in the county is gonna jump on this!

If they're smart they will!

Like I said in an earlier post, good ole investigator Norman can and will get to the bottom of any questionable circumstance going on in our county. Sometimes he goes at it in a cockeyed way, but never the less he usually gets the job done. Stay with 'em Norman, you are one of a kind. Some folks give you down the road but it comes with the job!! You have my vote for Special Investigator of the Year.

We are contented to be the spoon that stirs the pot!

again you didn't ck out all the facts. NO Donna didn't take the bar exam in GA. She took it here in WV so she could practice in the State of WV not GA.

Yeah, what a hero Alderman is. Let’s review kiddies. Before the last general election we had a prosecutor with vast experience. He was unquestionably graduated from an accredited law school. By all accounts he was levelheaded, not afraid to try a case, and had the respect of the judges and the bar. But he had a problem in Alderman’s eyes. He refused to prosecute the school board officials for spending the golf money on the expenses of the golf team.

Alderman’s claim to journalistic excellence is his claim that minuscule amount of golf team money was misappropriated. This accusation has been repeatedly investigated resulting in the school officials being completely exonerated. Nevertheless, in a fit of pique because the administration was removing Alderman from his cushy central office job and returning him to the classroom, Alderman turned a proceeding that was intended to afford him an opportunity for hearing on the question of his transfer back to the classroom into wild accusations against school board officials, including calling officials thieves for spending golf money on the golf team. He also made off the wall accusations concerning the private sexual conduct of board members, information he claimed he gathered skulking around under people’s windows.

This lead to a win-win for Pocahontas County. Because the Board fired Alderman for his flagrant insubordination, we were no longer required to fund said cushy central office job, nor were our children inflicted upon by Alderman’s return to the classroom.

Alderman’s only hope for reprieve was a prosecution of the board officials for the golf money crime only he could see. Of course the sitting prosecutor refused to bring what would have been an unfounded prosecution, and Alderman set out to beat him in the election. He touted Ms. Price as a candidate and urged everyone to vote for her, even though she likely had never tried a jury case to verdict, and had only a smattering of experience.

Many of us posted our opinion that it was folly to turn Walt out of office in favor of an inexperienced lawyer from a less than stellar law school. Alderman went all out for Price. I predicted he would turn against her as soon as she refused to carry his water.

What turned Alderman against Price? Well, it seems that she refused to prosecute school board officials for embezzling golf money. Alderman repeatedly posted complaints about it. It was only then that Alderman started his campaign against Price.

What a muckraker Alderman is. Hasn’t he done a wonderful job for us? All for the best interest of Pocahontas County of course.

So now what? Now that we know she has lied?

You miss the point; she wasn't eligible to take the bar exam in WV.

Please keep in mind that I wouldn't have known Donna's secret had it not been for someone on etater. Blame etater! That ole gossip rag gets too close the bone!

I have been accused of not checking my sources. When I do then someone won't believe my evidence. Can't win either way. But at least I dropped my dime (44Cents) on Donna and found out why she wouldn't answer my questions.

What secret? As far as I can tell, Ms. Price has told the truth about everything. The law school she attended was publicly known during the campaign. The information appeared on E-tater. Any knowledgeable person could have advised that Ms. Price’s law school was not top tier. My point, and I guess Alderman missed it, is that we can’t believe Alderman because his judgment and accuracy have been wildly erroneous in the past. Alderman will say whatever enhances his personal agenda, regardless of where the public interest lies. As proof of this see my previous post.

Here again, Alderman is making accusations that simply do not hold up. He would have us believe that Ms. Price must have fraudulently achieved admittance to the bar, or, alternatively, the bar mistakenly admitted her. Neither is the case. What follows is the pertinent part of the actual rule that governs the eligibility of a candidate to sit for the bar exam:

“RULE 3.0 Admission by Examination

(a) Course of Study. Unless otherwise specified herein, any person who wishes to take the bar examination in the State of West Virginia shall satisfy the Board that he or she has completed a full course of study in a law school accredited by the American Bar Association, or its equivalent, and has been granted and holds a degree of L.L.B. or J.D., or their equivalents, and a degree of A.B. or B.S., or higher degree, from an accredited college or university, or its equivalent.


(b) Policy on Equivalency. The Board of Law Examiners will consider the following circumstances to be the equivalent of completion of a full course of study in a law school accredited by the American Bar Association, and an applicant meeting the standards set forth herein shall be presumed to be eligible to take the West Virginia Bar Examination; providing that all other requirements set forth in Rule 3.0, et seq., for admission to the bar examination are met; provided, however, that graduates of correspondence law courses shall not be eligible to take the West Virginia Bar Examination.


(1) The applicant is a graduate of a non-ABA accredited law school who has successfully passed the bar examination of another state, the District of Columbia, or commonwealth or territory of the United States, and has been admitted to practice in such state, district, commonwealth, or territory, or


(2)(a) The applicant is a graduate of a non-ABA accredited law school, which school is of such stature that its graduates are eligible to take the bar examination of the state, District of Columbia, commonwealth or territory of the United States in which such law school is located, and


(b) The applicant has completed three (3) years of law office study and work in this state as a legal assistant or paralegal, under the supervision of an attorney or attorneys admitted to practice in West Virginia, and


(c) Two attorneys admitted to practice in West Virginia, at least one of whom shall have actively supervised the applicant for a period of not less than six months, certify to the Board that they believe that the applicant is knowledgeable in the law, competent to practice law, and of good moral character, or


(3)(a) The applicant is a graduate of a reputable law school which, although not accredited by the ABA, has been determined by the Board of Law Examiners to be substantially the equivalent of an ABA-accredited school.”

Evidently, Ms. Price was able to sit for the bar exam under Rule (3)(a) because the Board of Law Examiners has determined that Ms. Price’s school is “substantially the equivalent of an ABA-accredited school.” I expect the Board has made this determination about John Marshall in part because its graduates have practiced in large numbers with much success throughout West Virginia for years. In any event, the Board of Law Examiners is entrusted to make determinations about the question of whether or not a school is the “substantial equivalent” of an ABA accredited school. Alderman is not entrusted with that function.

So let’s put this one to bed. Ms. Price is duly and properly admitted to the bar. Ms. Price did not achieve that admission through fraud or mistake. With Mr. Alderman’s fervent assistance, she won the election. She’s the duly elected and qualified prosecuting attorney in Pocahontas County.

Let’s hope she does a wonderful job.

It appears from the letter from the Supreme Court Of Appeals in Georiga that she sat for the exam but is not on the pass list. If you didn't pass the bar exam than how can you be a legit lawyer? I'd say Norman has a valid point until proven otherwise.

Here is the legal definition of the bar exam, you decide.

A written test that an individual must pass before becoming licensed to practice law as an attorney.

Back in the 70's when Carter was in office you had to have a license to use a CB radio. There was a parade and Roselyn Carter used the CB without a license.

We no longer have to have a license to use a CB because the FCC decided to do away with licensing rather than prosecute the first lady.

Maybe we ought to do the same things with lawyers. Do away with bar exams and let everyone who wants to be a lawyer be a lawyer!

Donna, I am waiting for an explantion!

I have contacted the WV State bar to see what is going on here! We need answers and we need answers now!

Since alderman is so set aganist anything and everything in Pocahontas Co.would it be possible to get a petition to ask alderman to leave this beautiful county.it is amazing how far he has went to make this county look bad.for myself i think this is a great county to live in

What’s hard about this? In order for Price to take the bar exam here in West Virginia it was only necessary that Board of Law Examiners rule that her law school was the substantial equivalent of an ABA accredited law school. See Rule 3(a) in my last post. Many graduates of John Marshall (Ms. Price’s law school) practice in West Virginia and have for many years. Evidently the Board of Law Examiners has recognized that John Marshall is the substantial equivalent of an ABA accredited law school. Accordingly, as a graduate of John Marshall, Ms. Price was qualified to take the bar here in West Virginia, whether or not she took it and passed in some other state. We know that Price passed the bar exam here in West Virginia. Therefore, Ms. Price has been duly admitted to practice law in West Virginia and was eligible to run for prosecutor here in Pocahontas County.

There’s simply no mystery to any of this. It’s all above board. There’s no cover-up, no conspiracy.

Yet Alderman acts like none of this has been said. He doesn’t argue with what I’ve said about this. He just ignores it. Why doesn’t Alderman want to establish the truth about this? Why does he continue to call Price out, asking for an explanation when there’s nothing to explain?

Now that Alderman knows the truth, he can’t pretend there’s some mystery here. Any further questioning of Ms. Price’s qualifications to practice law is simply a libel, and a malicious libel at that, because he knows what he’s saying is simply not true, and can only be being said with the intent to damage Ms. Price.

We have an outstanding email request to Donna for her version of this mystery! We are waiting on Donna's explanation!

What say ye Donna?

What does it say to you when you can't pass the bar exam in the state you graduated from law school?

What does it say about the WV Bar exam when someone who couldn't pass their own state's bar exam can pass the WV Bar Exam?

She is out of her office again this week! How do the taxpayers like paying her $90,000 dollars a year to stay at home sick or on vacation all the time?

Is this a trip to the Caribbean?

ABA accreditation is a mark of equivalency. Donna went to law school and graduated years before the ABA would even admit her school provisionally. One is to take the bar exam when they are properly prepared to take it. The fact that they eventually achieved provisional status indicates that the ABA did not consider them to be equivalent to other schools that were ABA.

She was allowed to take the Georgia Bar exam during when she graduated. Georgia didn't mind the fact that there law school was not up to par; they would let her become a lawyer there. But then she didn't pass that exam.

So she finds a state (in this case, WV) which will allow her to take its bar exam. (We are currently trying to find out exactly "when" and "if" she took the bar exam.) and bingo "instant lawyer."

So you have to ask yourself if you would trust someone to operate on you who became a doctor through an unaccredited medical school or what if you had a "flying" school that was unaccredited?

I for one would have my doubts about the quality of that person's education.

he Purpose and Process of Accreditation

The Purpose and Process Accreditation in the United States is a voluntary and self-regulatory
of Accreditation mechanism of the higher education community. It plays a significant role in fostering public confidence in the educational enterprise, in maintaining standards, in enhancing institutional effectiveness, and in improving higher education. It also provides the basis on which colleges and universities can be assured that institutions that have achieved accreditation have complied with a common set of requirements and standards.

------------------------------------------------

What is Accreditation?

Accreditation ensures a basic level of quality in the education you receive from an institution. It also ensures your degrees will be recognized for the true achievements they are.

To ensure that your academic experience is of the highest quality, many degree programs listed on WorldWideLearn are associated with universities and colleges that have approved accreditation. We also partner with a wide variety of renowned career schools which offer technical and professional training.

Students must understand the importance of accreditation and the risks of receiving a degree from a school without accreditation.

---------------------------------------

I find it difficult to read the initial letter from the Georgia Bar. But I don’t read it to say that Ms. Price failed the Georgia Bar. I think it says they have no record of Ms. Price passing the Georgia Bar. As FYI points out, we don’t know whether or not Ms. Price actually took the Georgia Bar. But whether she never took the Georgia bar exam, or, she took the Georgia Bar and failed, matters not on the question of the validity of her law licence. She graduated from a law school that our Board of Law Examiners has found to be substantially equivalent to an ABA accredited school, and she passed the West Virginia Bar Exam. Those two things entitle her to be a duly licensed attorney who may run for, and be elected to, the office of prosecuting attorney.

It may be Ms. Price will become a wonderful public servant. The fact that she went to a law school that permits part-time students doesn’t mean that she will not be an excellent prosecutor. These schools allow the attendance of those who must work to support their education. More power to them.

But there’s no question that a prosecutor has a difficult job. Also let there be no doubt that Ms. Price will have to work hard at it. A county prosecutor must be able to try a case when necessary. But above all, good judgment is what we need in a prosecutor. And Ms. Price has shown the good judgment not to do two things:

(1) She refused to be hectored into bringing unfounded charges against school officials regardless of the urging of our own Alderman, her most fervent supporter; and

(2) She refused to compromise the dignity of her office by entering into online debate with the same Mr. Alderman.

What can we learn from all this, my friends? Well, we have here another indication that Alderman’s antennae is almost always askew. He salivated over Ms Price as a candidate. He claims to be a journalist, but made no criticism of her in the election, even though there is nothing on the public record now that wasn’t evident at the time of the election.

There is only one issue for Mr. Alderman as to whether a prosecutor is doing a good job. Will the prosecutor bring a prosecution against school officials because they spent money that was appropriated for the golf team on the expenses of the golf team? That’s Alderman’s litmus test for prosecutors.

Here’s the scary thing. Alderman’s accusations are taken as facts by some, influencing the votes of the credulous. I really fear that such a thing is true. Because Alderman hoped to get his job back by brokering a sham charge against school board officials, he spread malice about a capable sitting prosecutor, while slobbering over Price as aforesaid, thereby switching enough votes to affect the outcome. Such is the power of the internet, heaven help us.

Don’t let Alderman fool you again. Pay no attention to what he says about a candidate for office. Pay no attention to what he says about a sitting office holder. He’s almost never accurate. He always promotes his own agenda.

Two friends and I sat into the late hours of last night discussing this very same topic.

2 to 1 majority thinks Mr. Tater likes to spend a lot of time squabbling over dead issues or NO issues to avoid having to stand strong on the REAL issues.

Higher Ground, you are right to say this Mr. Tater never comes back with a rebuttal. He just ignores legitimate conclusions and courses of action that would put a lot of our serious issues to bed.

When Mr. Tater doesn't contest a really good opinion, he's not looking to solve a problem or get the hell off what he CLAIMS is a problem.

Thank you, Higher Ground, for recognizing the validity of my charges that the misappropriation occurred.

Sometimes I think there must be someone who posts pretending to be Alderman in order to make fun of his opinions. For instance, someone, using one of Alderman’s pseudonyms, actually said that he appreciated that I had recognized Alderman’s claim that school board members are guilty of misappropriation of funds.

In prior posts, I said that Alderman wants school officials prosecuted for spending money that was appropriated to the golf team on the expenses of the golf team. I might have followed up with a Foghorn Leghorn, “That’s sarcasm, boy!”

Surely, Alderman doesn’t think that my statement supports his claim. It must be that someone is making fun of him, using his handle.

"Will the prosecutor bring a prosecution against school officials because they spent money that was appropriated for the golf team on the expenses of the golf team?"

Oh, no I said it! That money was appropriated for "equipment"--namely golf bags not travel expenses.

NOTE: GEORGIA ISN'T ON THE LIST

Attorneys who have actively practiced for five of the last seven years may be eligible to apply for admission to practice in West Virginia by reciprocity (Rule 4.0) if also admitted to practice in one of the following jurisdictions (please note that this list is subject to change):

Alabama Missouri
Colorado Nebraska
Connecticut New York
District of Columbia North Dakota
Illinois Oklahoma
Indiana Pennsylvania
Iowa Tennessee
Kentucky Texas
Massachusetts Vermont
Michigan Virginia
Minnesota Washington
Mississippi Wisconsin

We are checking with the WV Board of Examiners to see how Donna became an attorney. Stay tuned! We are committed to getting to the bottom of this mystery!

You Norman live at the bottom, of the barrel, with the scum that sinks there to start with.

You railroaded Walt until the people voted him out of office.

Then you promoted Donna like she was Queen Sheba now you are on the railroad trail to get her out of office.

No one will please you, except you, so get a life and leave these people alone to do their jobs.

1. Walt was voted out of office because there was someone running against him.

2. Whether or not PA Price earns her wings as a prosecutor, it's not HOW she prosecutes but WHO she doesn't.

So is she prosecuting Ben Wilfong?

Does she ever spent time in the office doing her job?

You have got to be kidding! Then why are we paying her $90,000 per year and calling her the "Prosecuting Attorney?"

Thank you!

Have you ever wondered why the county officials feels that they shouldn't prosecute county employees? You will remember that Magistrate Beverage once recuse herself from the Alkire case because they were friends. Wilfong is a cousin-in-law to the sheriff and it stands to reason (I guess) that you wouldn't want to start a family feud by holding a cousin accountible under the law expecially when it is your wife's cousin. I don't know Donna's connection but she seems as determined to let Ben go as the sheriff. She must be some kin to Wilfong!

Also, what is a cousin-in-law?

Tom, are you stupid or just retarded? Try google.com and enter it in the search book.

Noun

cousin-in-law

1. Husband of one's cousin
2. Wife of one's cousin
3. Cousin of one's husband
4. Cousin of one's wife
5. Husband of the cousin of one's husband
6. Husband of the cousin of one's wife
7. Wife of the cousin of one's husband
8. Wife of the cousin of one's wife

What is a Husband in law. My 1st.wife has been married once befor me and 3 after. Does that mean that I have 4 HUSBAND'S IN LAW??

the rest of your answer was still funny!