Action For ‘Airhead’ Remark Justified, Court Rules

Court of Appeals

The Idaho Fish and Game Department was justified in disciplining an employee who remarked at a meeting that he felt many of the state’s female legislators were “airheads” or had “nothing between their ears,” the Court of Appeals says.

The court on Thursday unanimously upheld the department’s disciplinary action against Jerry Lockhart for those remarks and other violations of department policy. Lockhart was suspended for 15 days and now works as a senior fish technician at the state hatchery at Eagle.

Lockhart’s appeal contended his remarks were protected by his rights to free speech.

But the Court of Appeals, in a decision written by Chief Judge Jesse Walters, concluded that under the circumstances, the comments were not protected.

Court records said Lockhart made the remarks in 1989 at a meeting with a newly elected female state legislator. The court noted that Lockhart’s job at the time involved contact with the public and that his comment “tended to have a detrimental and potentially devastating impact on the close working relationship between Fish and Game and the Legislature …”

The department’s interest in promoting efficient public services through it employees “outweighed Lockhart’s interest in commenting on the intelligence of certain female legislators,” the court said.

In another decision released Thursday, the court said it is not necessary to prove specific intent to rob in certain circumstances.

In a Bannock County case, Jerry D. Belue was sentenced to 10 to 25 years in prison for battery with intent to commit a serious felony and for robbery. Judge Karen Lansing wrote an opinion that rejected Belue’s appeal.

Court records said Belue was charged with attacking a woman at a Pocatello laundromat in a rape attempt. The woman said when Belue dragged her into a back room, she gave him $15 in hopes he would take it and leave.

Belue ran off and was arrested a few blocks later.

His appeal claimed he shouldn’t be convicted of robbery, because his intention was to rape the woman, not rob her.

But the court, ruling for the first time on the issue, concluded that the woman gave Belue her money under threat of harm or force; that Belue knew that his violence caused her to give him the money, and he intended to permanently deprive her of the money.

The court said “force and fear” was what caused the victim to give Belue money and that supports a robbery conviction.

In a Canyon County drug case, Jose Remington won reconsideration of his petition for post-conviction relief. Remington was sentenced to at least five years in prison for selling cocaine near a school.

The Court of Appeals ordered a new hearing for Remington, accepting his argument that the district judge did not deal with his claim that his attorney said he would file an appeal but did not do so.