The rhetoric battle between a Douglas County judge’s supporters and detractors has stepped up another notch.

Brought into the fray was a Kansas University law professor who said Judge Paula Martin acted appropriately when she rejected an Indiana governor’s warrant seeking the arrest and return of a Lawrence man accused of being a deadbeat dad.

“The papers filed had some pretty glaring errors from Indiana,” said David Gottlieb, a criminal law and procedure professor.

Last week Lawrence Police arrested Leman Booher, wanted in Indiana because he allegedly owed $60,000 in back child support. Booher has since been freed on bond to await a court appearance before Martin on Thursday. His case twice before has gone before Martin, and she has dismissed the Indiana warrants because she said they were invalid.

Gottlieb agreed, saying the information in the Indiana court papers was incomplete or had inconsistent information about Booher. He noted that instead of properly redoing the paperwork and making corrections, the Indiana prosecutor filed a new court application that also had defects.

Gottlieb also pointed out the Douglas County District Attorney’s Office didn’t appeal Martin’s earlier decisions.

Voters will decided in the Nov. 2 general election whether Martin should be retained as district court judge.

The Retain Judge Martin Committee asked Gottlieb to review the Booher case and other Martin cases. He said he wasn’t speaking for KU in the matter.

“I don’t see any evidence that she wasn’t conscientiously trying to apply the law accordingly,” Gottlieb said.

The Retain Martin Committee’s Web site lists more than a dozen cases for which the judge has been criticized. But the site also has detailed case information about facts in the case that might have led Martin to rule the way she did and points out inaccuracies in allegations against her. The Web site is www.retainjudgemartin.com.

Gottlieb’s comments come on the heels of a news release issued earlier in the week by the Justice for Children Committee, which is seeking Martin’s ouster.

In the release, Martin’s supporters were chided for “playing the blame game” and attempting to shift the focus from the judge’s decisions to someone else. The release also claimed Martin supporters assembled a legal team to “cherry pick facts out of cases to try to justify Martin’s extreme soft on crime record.”

The Justice for Children Committee was formed by people angered at sentences handed down earlier this year by Martin in three statutory rape cases involving a 13-year-old girl. They said Martin was too lenient in departing from sentencing guidelines and allowing probation instead of jail time.

The anti-Martin group also claimed the pro-Martin committee was made up of people who were key Douglas County Democrats and attorneys.

“By contrast our group is made up of mothers, fathers and grandparents from both political parties and independents who simply want a judge worthy of community confidence,” the release said.

Dan Watkins, an attorney who has been vocal in his support for Martin, said there were only four attorneys on a growing list of 141 people on the pro-Martin committee. The rest are a broad cross-section of people from all walks of life, including Republicans and Democrats.