Clark County Recorder Frances Deane has been charged with 19 felony bribery counts growing out of allegations she made private sales, for personal profit, of title records held by her office.

She has not been convicted. She deserves her day in court, where it appears her attorney will attempt to impeach the credibility of her accusers. Fine.

But it must be admitted Ms. Deane has displayed a curious inability or unwillingness to observe the boundaries between entrepreneurship and potential abuse of her office on past occasions. And before she was booked last month, Las Vegas police detectives conducted a thorough investigation.

The point is that, while Ms. Deane is presumed innocent until proven guilty, the charges against her are considerably more substantial -- and substantiated -- than some mere water-cooler rumor.

Which leads to the legitimate question: Just what is Las Vegas Justice of the Peace Karen Bennett-Haron up to with this case?

At the time charges were lodged against the recorder, Clark County Sheriff Bill Young complained that Ms. Deane was receiving special treatment -- the court allowed her to turn herself in within a few days at her convenience, at which point she was held for only as short time and then released on an unusually low bond. A typical felony suspect would be arrested without advance notice, hauled downtown in handcuffs, and so forth, the sheriff protested.

It's true that public officials should get no special, "kid glove" treatment. The latitude afforded this suspect by the court could have had that appearance. But on the other hand, arrest, incarceration and a requirement to post bond were never intended to serve as a kind of ritual public humiliation for a suspect long before he or she comes to trial. They are justified only to the extent they seem necessary to assure the accused will show up. The justice of the peace was within her discretion.

But the role of Ms. Bennett-Haron in the preliminary hearing of this case, which concluded in her courtroom Thursday, should have been fairly routine. She is merely required to certify whether adequate reason has been presented to bind over Frances Deane for trial in District Court.

No one is saying Ms. Bennett-Haron shouldn't pay close attention. But a matter that might have been expected to take an hour or two stretched over two days. Then, after the hearing, the justice of the peace said she would not bind the matter over immediately; she needed time to review a transcript of the hearing. Fine. And her decision is due ... next week?

Try Sept. 14. Justice of the Peace Bennett-Haron wants 70 days to decide whether Frances Deane should face trial, based on sworn testimony from two separate local businessmen that they had $10,000 and $16,000 in cash delivered to this public official for access to public records in her care -- the latter sum hidden in stuffed animals!

Does Ms. Bennett-Haron really believe some railroad job -- some massive miscarriage of justice -- is under way, here? Is she enjoying the drama?

Or is she simply not too clear on what she's doing?