But an attorney for the five House members who requested an ethics investigation of Walker said that House Speaker Greg Curtis, R-Sandy, should be investigated. Curtis denies he had any conversation with Walker about raising Ellis' pay. Walker lost the GOP treasurer primary in June to Ellis and resigned his seat — thus ending the Legislature's ethics investigation. Two independent prosecutors are still looking at any criminal activity by Walker; their investigation should be done within a month.

Meanwhile, Mascaro says he did nothing wrong last February when he counseled and spoke privately with a female intern who told him she was having personal troubles and had "pills" to solve problems. After meeting with Mascaro and two staffers, Curtis wrote the young woman (who declined to comment to the Deseret News) a letter, in which Curtis apologizes on behalf of Mascaro.

The private meeting between Mascaro and the intern had a more sinister outcome, Curtis writes in his letter, listing alleged actions by Mascaro that were inappropriate. But Mascaro denies any wrongdoing, denies those events happened, and offered to take a polygraph test. Mascaro and others see the "leak" to the media about the intern contact as retribution for Mascaro signing the ethics investigation letter against Walker.

Allen said that if she or any other House member acted wrongly in formally asking for an ethics investigation of a member (Walker) who is accused by a respected source of offering a bribe — in this case Richard Ellis — then under what possible conditions would an ethics complaint be appropriate?

"Never; there would never be an instance" of questionable behavior by a legislator where the current ethics process would work, Allen said. "I don't think anyone will" ever ask again for an ethics investigation of a fellow member — as the current rules require — without the accused member agreeing to the investigation beforehand, Allen said.

The answer is to get ethics investigations out of lawmakers' hands, at least at first. The Judicial Conduct Commission works like this: Anyone can make a complaint against a judge (currently, at least three fellow legislators can start an ethics investigation of a lawmaker.) Privately, the complaint against a judge is investigated. If it's groundless, under judicial conduct rules, it is dismissed and not made public.

If the complaint has some grounds, the process moves forward. And in the end, the Utah Supreme Court, which oversees the judicial branch of government, can issue a public reprimand or even remove a judge from office.

The high court has already ruled that only the Utah House and Senate can kick out a member midterm. So ultimately, the respective bodies must decide the fate of a misbehaving member.

---

E-mail: bbjr@desnews.com