Judge was honorable

I read with interest the article about Kenneth Starr’s book and his references to Judge Henry Woods. Mr. Starr’s jab at one of our state’s most beloved former federal judges is typical of him and special prosecutors like him.

I am very familiar with Mr. Starr’s work in Arkansas, having represented five individuals he and his deputies got in their cross-hairs. I also remember very well the case where Judge Woods dismissed an indictment brought against our governor and others.

Mr. Starr knew Judge Woods’ background before the Tucker case began, yet made no request of Judge Woods to step aside. That is the correct way to deal with potential judicial bias. Instead, Mr. Starr waited until after Judge Woods ruled against him before crying foul before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. When that happened, the 8th Circuit stood established precedent on its head to side with the special prosecutor. There is an abundance of 8th Circuit case law holding that an attorney must make a motion to recuse before the trial judge or the objection is waived. At least, that is what us trench lawyers had to do.

Finally, my take on Mr. Starr is the same now as it was when he was the self-made media darling of the press in the ’90s. Mr. Starr took a collection of known bullies and renegades and made them deputy prosecutors. They storm-trooped around Arkansas indicting people who, by and large, couldn’t afford to defend themselves. When he was finished, he apparently convicted 14 people who had nothing to do with the so-called Whitewater investigation of Bill Clinton.

Judge Woods, and rightly so, was offended by the scope of Mr. Starr’s professed commission. At that time the entire nation was focused on Arkansas. It took guts to tell Mr. Starr his indictment was outside the scope of his authorization. That’s what I remember about the Honorable Henry Woods. SAMUEL A. PERRONI Little Rock