Councilman tries to temper backlash from Banks' arrest

Friday, February 17, 2012 at 12:43pm

At least one Metro councilman hopes politics –– and calls for a resignation –– will initially be put aside in the aftermath of Councilman Brady Banks’ Thursday arrest for allegedly patronizing prostitution.

“I hope that at this time you will pray for the Banks family and not throw stones at Brady,” At-large Metro Councilman Jerry Maynard wrote in a Friday morning email, addressed to council colleagues and a Banks constituent.

Banks, a 33-year-old, first–term councilman, was arrested Thursday on a misdemeanor charge for patronizing prostitution during a Metro police sting operation at a MetroCenter hotel. Police accused Banks of paying $100 to a female undercover officer in exchange for sex.

The arrest immediately triggered widespread speculation on whether Banks, seen as a rising star in Democratic circles, would be pressured from other council members to step down from his District 4 council seat. Banks was elected to the council in September.

Maynard’s email was in response to a Banks constituent who said she was “disgusted” by Banks’ actions. She wrote that she “hopes someone will have the guts to call for Brady’s resignation immediately.”

“There will come a time to address whether he can continue serving your district,” Maynard responded, with council members copied on the email. “But, now is not that time. For those of us who believe in the Holy Word of God, the Bible says when a man finds himself fallen down in sin, those of us who are strong must bare the infirmities of the weak and not please ourselves.”

Banks has not returned a Thursday voicemail left by The City Paper seeking comment.

The next scheduled Metro Council meeting is Tuesday, Feb. 21. It is unclear whether Banks will attend.

Maynard, a Christian pastor and Democrat, told The City Paper “the reason there are pastors is because people make mistakes. People fall short.”

“For those of us who say we are believers, this is not the time to throw stones and throw Brady under the bus,” Maynard said in a phone interview. “This is a time where you don’t say, ‘I agree with what he did or approve of what he did,’ but what you say is, ‘All of us have fallen short,’ and that’s the purpose of the redemption power of Jesus Christ.

“Whether he should continue to serve as a council person is a good question,” Maynard said. “But it’s not the question to be answered now.”

24 Comments on this post:

By: ugetreal2 on 2/17/12 at 1:31

You have got to be kidding, don't throw stones? Ask his wife. This is not victimless. Prostitution is illegal. It breeds crime and drug abuse. It breeds disease. What about her embarrassment? What about her fearing he gave her a disease. How can he not be judged? Suppose he was just looking for a dinner date, or helping a constituent. I am sure he can "repent". Let's think about what he did to his family and the risk he exposed his wife to. He actually had disregard for her health and life. Can he represent you? You think?

By: Ask01 on 2/17/12 at 2:04

Illegal? Yes?

Victimless? Depends on the situation, but in this case, no.

Breeds crime, drug abuse, and disease? Quite possibly, however, recognizing prostitution is not called the worlds oldest profession just because the phrase looks dynamite on a tee shirt, and realizing society has a better chance of eradicating cockroaches than the trade, were we to legalize, license, monitor and control the workers, not only could you collect taxes, you could reduce the involvement of organized crime, monitor not only drug use but disease by requiring periodic health checks.

Many nations and cities around the world have realized the futility, and cut their costs by legalizing the practice and limiting the area where workers can ply their trade, restricting all 'legal' prostitution to specific areas.

That deals with most aspects except morality, which being fluid, is impossible to legislate.

Society once tried to ban alcohol. We all know how well that worked. Despite the headlines heralding sucesses in drug interdiction, I wonder how much made it through? Just my opinion, but unless you are stopping at least 50% all you've done is inconvenience street dealers. I don't think we're doing very well on that point. Which at last brings me to the subject at hand. As with the coaches story, all we heard about was three or four customers being removed from the street. The working girls, as far the story indicates, are still out there, uncontolled, probably moving to deeper cover, further off metro's radar, possibly still spreading disease, lining the pockets of some criminals.

All I'm saying is, this will not go away. Increase the pressure all you want, but the street ladies will always be there and, surprise, there will always be customers. As offensive as society might regard that fact, it remains a fact.

License, control, and monitor. In the end, that solution does more for everyone involved than the current plan.

By: Loyal Rebel on 2/17/12 at 2:10

Loyal Rebel

"Christian pastor and Democrat" -- he's BOTH?

By: Jughead on 2/17/12 at 2:46

Glad Maynard supports random sex that destroys families.

Wonder what Maynard has in his wallet? What a puke.

Burns my biscuit. http://burnmybiscuit.wordpress.com/

By: Jughead on 2/17/12 at 2:48

Criminals ALWAYS pull the Jesus redemption card after they are caught.

Maybe Maynard and Banks should pull the Ten Commandment card first---yaknow, the one about adultery.

Creeps.

By: Joe Possom on 2/17/12 at 2:49

The Law in Moses commands us to throw stones at people who commit adultery. Now, what do you say, ugetreal2?

Council member Maynard has asked to take some time, perhaps draw a few figures in the sand, and then straighten up and answer the question.

People make mistakes, sometimes even grave ones, and then go on to do very good things.

Again, how would you answer those who ask you to apply the law of Moses to such a one?

Walk away, give him some time, and perhaps he too will learn from this mistake and do good.

By: Melstruck on 2/17/12 at 5:03

Joe - I hope he does learn from his mistake. He is the one who needs to take time - away from Council to reflect on the error of his ways. Council is not his full time job, so it shouldn't jeopordize his life (what may be left of it) and well being if he steps down. If he truly wants to do good, he needs to step down now and then try to come back after he has fixed his life. The people shouldn't have to wait for that to happen.

By: Nitzche on 2/17/12 at 11:35

Can a brother help jerry get his law license back?

By: govskeptic on 2/18/12 at 4:12

I suppose this same letter went out to the Congressional Democrats to same
their "Weiner" some months ago. The right Rev. Maynard has a big heart, but
it's only for allies and democrats!

By: Loner on 2/20/12 at 5:46

What in the hell is a pastor doing sitting on a secular governmental board, such as Nashville, Metro?

Pastor Maynard is full of forgiveness, for a fellow Democrat...the Republican pastors are full of forgiveness for the Republican sinners....for these "Christians", forgiveness is a partisan issue.

You put theocrats into government and you get a theocracy...what in the hell is wrong with you people? Lincoln should have let the South go...they just don't get secular democracy...never will.

By: Ask01 on 2/20/12 at 7:45

You know Loner, if these politicians actually feared a wrathful God, having some spiritual advisor whispering in their ear might not be such a bad concept.

The problem is, I believe if the truth was known, most politicians are as religious as needed to get elected. I cannot shake the feeling most of the electorate would be shocked by behavior of their 'bretheren' when safely out of public view.

The South has always been weird when the subject turns to any type of religious discussion, particularly public displays of faith. I know, I grew up in a small southern town. Left as soon as I was 18.

The south is changing though. Allow another generation or two and they might join the 20th century.

I know, I know. We may never catch totally up with the rest of the country. Wait, we'll blame it on Reconstruction and the oppressive Northern yoke. Yeah, that's it! That's the ticket! Just a little humor for a Monday morning.

By: T-BONE on 2/20/12 at 7:54

HYPOCRISY IS A FUNNY THING! This is supposedly a "CHRISTIAN" nation? Take a look at the "STATS" then (divorce, fraud,etc on and on) Give us all a break, Most "Hanky Panky" is going on in churches among the "FLOCK"...and you know it! Keep giving the "Preacher-man-Priest-Padre" your money (his gravy-train-meal ticket and you can be forgiven...see how easy that was!) Then we can start "STONING TO DEATH" anyone that "WE" deem deserving! Mean while the EGO-STROKING continues at "The DOG & PHONEY SHOW"! (LOL)

By: Ask01 on 2/20/12 at 9:48

You reminded me of something I heard growing up which was a slap at one predominant southern denomination.

The saying went the members of this particular denomination would always recognize and acknowledge each other when meeting. Unless the meeting was an inadvertant one at the ABC store.

If this was truly a Christian nation, there would be so many fewer prisons, as more would be forgiven for mistakes The outpouring of charity and care for each other would head off all but the most troubled souls from the path to purgatory. There would be little poverty, homelessness, and the other myriad ills which trouble society. There would be little need for layers, police judges, etcetera. Why, if this was a Christian nation the pro death penalty crowds would not be out cheering an execution, but rather mourning the fact this had to be done because a lost soul took the wrong path.

I could go on and on, but I won't. I've given the crowd enough with which to skewer me already.

Suffice to say, dragged into World Court, accused of being a Christian nation, there would probably not be enough evidence to convict.

Sorry for the rant.

By: PJ66 on 2/20/12 at 11:09

I live in Banks' district and having a Metro council member rounded up in a Metro police sting is unacceptable. During the campaign, we were bombarded with mailers from Banks, thanks to his union support, telling us what a great "family man" he was. We do not need losers like Banks on our Metro council and I think he should resign or be removed from the council, and forget about politics. The unions will need to find another shill to do their bidding.

By: Nitzche on 2/20/12 at 12:39

somebody call 911, Loner is being held hostage by the city of nashvile...he is trying to escape but cannot....wait a minute, false alarm, he willingingly came here, now he wiliingly will not leave..can somebody send him a atlas to get him back to his beloved northeast?

By: Ask01 on 2/20/12 at 1:06

PJ66, the case of Pam Murray, District 5, I think, proves constituents can remove those representing them who have offended. Perhaps you can organize the recall and fill the seat yourself.

Particpatory government at it's finest in action.

By: Jughead on 2/20/12 at 1:33

Isn't Maynard the guy who was either suspended or disbarred from the practice of law?

Why does his opinion matter? Sheesh...dude was porking a petri dish and taking the incubation home to wifey. Classy.

By: Nitzche on 2/20/12 at 3:15

YES....and his opinion matters NOT

By: shinestx on 2/21/12 at 6:09

Gail Kerr-less of the other rag... and now this article. Funny to see the bobble-heads in the media bend over backwards to try to give Banks a second chance... all because he is a Demwit. Had Banks been of the other party (which we know would never happen in this bass-ackward 'yellow dog" county), the paper would already have written his political obituary and moved on. Geesh, as if there were a double standard in the media? Oh wait, there is.

By: TRHJR on 2/21/12 at 11:40

why is this boy fool`n around with $ 100 gals ... that whats` pissed off karl dean & the dems .... what ya gonna do with all the money karl dean put into the brady fund ? ask01 are you some kind of OPPUPIRE ? or just a huge lib with no moral ?

By: Ask01 on 2/21/12 at 1:31

TRHJR, what? I'm sorry, but your the greater portion of your post is unintelligible. Please explain OPPUPIRE.

I refuse to identify with either liberal or conservative as I have ruffled feathers on both the right and left wing. I refuse to blindly follow party line on any issue, prefering to actually think for myself. For example, I oppose the death penalty in all but some very narrow parameters leaving no question as to guilt or intent; at the same time I do support abortion, but only for specific circumstances, believing it is more prudent, cheaper, and less agitating to society to educate people on prevention.

My morales are just fine, thank you for asking though. Morality is a transient concept, changing with each generation. Brothels for example, were once commonplace in the west and generally tolerated as this tactic usually kept the practice confined to known locations, rendering the trade easier to monitor.

More recently, I can recall when the use of the word pregnant was forbidden on television, television husbands and wives were always shown in seperate twin beds, and bathrooms were never seen.

Who else remembers the seven words you can't say on television? Are there any left now?

Trying to control minor human vices as acohol, tobacco, drugs, and sex is a futile attempt to legislate morality. Concepts of morality are vary from person to person, so leave them in the closet. Can you honestly say, with a straight (meaning serious, as one must be specific) face all the policing efforts have made any significant impact on the prostiution trade long term?

I don't believe so.

By: TRHJR on 2/21/12 at 3:19

ms ask01 oh I see ... leave morales in closet ... what a dumb ass statement !!!!!!

ms ask01 have you ever lived in a society like that ???? if so tell me which one ... don`t think you have or you would not have that type attitude .... go peddle that crap some place else .... what a fool

By: Ask01 on 2/21/12 at 4:20

Name calling and vulgarities, eh TRHJR?

I should have expected as much.

Although, I should have been more clear I suppose, just to keep concepts simple for the like minded.

So many base their arguments on religion based morale arguments, I supposed you were doing likewise.

What other objections could you apply to the subject at hand?

Please wash your mouth out and learn some manners. Perhaps then I will address you further.

Oh, answer my question.

By: Ask01 on 2/21/12 at 5:34

I'm afraid having read my 4:20pm response, I was a little curt, and did not properly address the issue raised.

A society without morales?

While we obviously need guidelines by which to live in a civilized society, we need to excercise restraint when crafting laws by which to live. For example, burglary and murder are immoral and illegal because these actions deprive someone of possessions or their life.

Their are other actions people consider immoral, prostitution, for example, but whom is deprived of what? A wife of her husband's affection, perhaps? I propose that by this point, the matter is likely moot, the couple having more serious problems. Adultery accomplishes the same goal, but with no money exchanging hands. Both immoral, but only one transgression is, to my knowledge, actively prosecuted. So what is the difference? Morality? This is a circumstance when you need to leave your morality at home when deciding legalities.

I have known people who considered smoking to be just as immoral as drinking. Does it follow we should enact laws making smoking illegal? The act certainly deprives non smokers of fresh air.

Hence my argument concepts of morality are ever changing, and we should leave any moral arguments out of issues that do not result in life changing consequences, or a monetary loss.

I hope that clears up any confusion I may have caused by responding so off the cuff. The doorbell was ringing and I hurried through. I do apologize for that.

For those who are still bewildered, consider how much effort and money is spent versus how little return in the way of prevention is realized.

Would not it make more sense to use those resources combatting and investigating real crime, as opposed to policing, or attempting to police an act in which people engage everyday?