ANDERSON — Madison County Prosecutor Thomas J. Broderick Jr. claims in a response to a complaint filed by the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission that he was not acting as his son’s attorney when he sent a letter to Florida prosecutors following the son’s arrest for battery.

In an Aug. 9, 2001, letter sent to Deputy State’s Attorney Susan Bexley in Daytona Beach, Fla., Broderick asks the prosecutor to “consider a deferral or withheld prosecution” after his then-19-year-old son, Evan Broderick, was arrested eight days earlier on suspicion of misdemeanor battery.

“Evan, his mother and I, are all hopeful that you will consider a deferral or withheld prosecution that will allow Evan the opportunity to pursue his career goals,” Broderick writes. “Our only concern in this case is a resolution that will accomplish this purpose.”

Broderick did not return a message seeking comment earlier this week. The letter, written on the attorney’s professional letterhead, was included with his response to the complaint filed by the Disciplinary Commission. Broderick filed his response Dec. 18.

The Disciplinary Commission alleges Broderick committed professional misconduct when he acted as Evan’s attorney and signed a deferral agreement with the Delaware County Prosecutor’s Office in 2003 after Evan was arrested for allegedly driving drunk. The complaint claims Broderick engaged in wrongdoing by not disclosing Evan’s earlier arrest in Florida. Broderick was not then prosecutor of Madison County.

“A reasonable attorney would have known that there was a high degree of probability that Evan’s past arrest and resolution of his Florida case would be relevant to a prosecutor’s exercise of discretion to allow deferral or diversion of his case in Delaware County,” the complaint reads. “Under these circumstances, by knowingly signing the agreement as Evan’s attorney without reading it and without taking appropriate steps to verify that the document he was signing was truthful, (Broderick) acted with such willful blindness and recklessness as to constitute knowing conduct.”

Under the terms of the deferral agreement, Broderick stipulated that Evan had no prior arrests, which would have made him ineligible for the deferment, according to the complaint. The OWI charge against Evan was never filed after he successfully completed the terms of the agreement, according to the complaint. There are no allegations of wrongdoing against Evan, currently a deputy prosecutor in Madison Superior Court 5, from the Disciplinary Commission.

According to Broderick’s letter to the Florida prosecutor:

Evan got into a fight with a security guard at the hotel where he and his family were staying during a vacation. Evan was returning to the hotel after being at a dance club when he couldn’t find his money to pay cab fare. When they got to the hotel, the cab driver began arguing with Evan about payment. The security guard asked what was going on, and the fight ensued.

As he was trying to get out of the taxi, Evan “perceived the security guard as a threat” and punched him in the eye. The guard then punched Evan several times and took him to the ground. The guard then punched him more and kicked him in the head twice. Evan lost consciousness for three hours afterwards and suffered a concussion in the brawl, Broderick writes. It wasn’t stated in the letter whether the guard was also arrested.

In his response to the discipline complaint, Broderick “explicitly denies knowingly misrepresenting his son’s alleged criminal history to obtain the benefits of deferred prosecution (in Delaware County).”

Broderick goes on to state that, in both instances, he was acting as Evan’s father and not his attorney, and the rules of professional conduct didn’t apply. If the court determines that he was acting as Evan’s attorney, then he claims attorney-client privilege. He also claims the legal defense of mistake of fact, meaning it was an unintentional error.

---------

What’s next?

Madison County Prosecutor Thomas Broderick and attorneys with the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission are expected to attend a pretrial conference in Grant Superior Court 1 at 1 p.m. Wednesday. The hearing will focus on scheduling issues, such as setting a hearing date.