A Springfield woman this week had a "get out of jail free" card strong enough to trump even a judge's decree.

Her unborn child.

Jennifer Jansen Van Vuren, 32, was released from the Greene County Jail twice in the past week, despite a municipal judge's order she be held on a $2,000 bond.

Sheriff Jack Merritt made the call both times, saying the woman's advanced pregnancy would have made her stay in jail a risky one.

"My medical staff told me it was such a danger," Merritt said. "There were so many things."

Not only that, but the county would likely end up footing the bill for her hospital stay, Merritt said.

So he released Jansen Van Vuren on Friday evening -- a day after she'd been sent to jail for failing to appear in court several times --and secured a promise she'd go before Springfield Municipal Court Judge Todd Thornhill again on Monday.

The woman kept her promise, but the result was unchanged. Thornhill ordered Jansen Van Vuren, who is more than eight months pregnant, back to jail.

This time, Merritt flatly refused to take her.

"I just told booking not to accept her," he said.

Instead, Merritt said he called Springfield Police Chief Lynn Rowe, letting him know he wouldn't hold the woman.

While he waited to hear back from the chief, Merritt kept the woman close at hand.

"She was just sitting outside of my office," he said.

Eventually, City Prosecutor Johnnie Burgess said he received a call from City Attorney Dan Wichmer explaining the situation.

Burgess and Thornhill arranged to eliminate the woman's bond, releasing her on her own recognizance.

She was allowed to leave Merritt's office.

Reached Tuesday, Thornhill said he couldn't comment on the situation, noting Jansen Van Vuren's cases are pending.

The woman faces charges of stealing, trespassing and careless and imprudent driving.

Questions remain, though, as to how justified Merritt was in refusing a judge's order.

The sheriff said Tuesday state law gives him some leeway to refuse prisoners if they aren't fit for confinement.

He conceded, though, that a judge's authority trumps a sheriff's.

"The pecking order has judges way above sheriffs," he said.

And case law suggests Merritt could be held in contempt for not following Thornhill's directive.

In a 1997 case, the Missouri Supreme Court held the police chief of St. Charles "was wrong in his temporary refusal to comply with the oral and written orders of the court."

It went on to say a judge had been correct in viewing the chief's resistance to an order "as contemptuous of the power of the court."

"That certainly wasn't my desire," said Merritt. "There's a lot of people I have disagreed with, but I have not lost respect for the judge or his decisions."

On Monday, Merritt sent Thornhill an e-mail, explaining his views on the matter.

"I regret any complications I may be causing by refusing to accept Ms. Van Vuren, but I feel the liability issues associated with her medical condition is something we cannot accept," the message said. It went on to say the woman's due date is in late November -- well before her next scheduled court appearance -- and that she was not able to post bond.

Jailing municipal defendants before a conviction is fairly uncommon, but becomes necessary when they repeatedly miss court dates, Burgess said.

He said a bond can sometimes be necessary in such cases to ensure a defendant arrives for trial.

"Every time my office gears up for trial, that's an expense to the citizens of Springfield," he said. "If there is a defendant who skips trials, then that is another cost."

In the case of Jansen Van Vuren, Burgess said, the potential cost for medical care outweighed the possibility she'd fail to appear.