Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Crackpot Judge?  
User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1059 times:

I did a quick search in the forum and didn't see anything about this guy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071128/...;_ylt=Amvad3Pjk1op3YzxuA7iumAuQE4F

Seems that he had his whole courtroom arrested and JAILED because one persons cell rang and the culprit didn't step forward.

I remember when the teacher would close the windows because some jagoff wouldn't confess to a spitwad, but jailing innocent people?

I don't know whether to laugh or to cry. The "best" part of the whole thing is that he was suffering "stress" and is appealing.

Sad, sad, sad... Granted that I don't know the whole story about what went on in that courtroom, locking up 40-some-odd individuals because someone's phone rang, even if it was for a few hours... this dude needs to be at the very least processed and dumped in a cell for as long as these other folks were.

When I read stuff like this, justice is not only blind, but it's freakin' ignorant.


We can agree to disagree.
22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1042 times:



Quoting Wukka (Thread starter):
I remember when the teacher would close the windows because some jagoff wouldn't confess to a spitwad

Hey... Do not call me a jagoff  Wink

Quoting Wukka (Thread starter):
When I read stuff like this, justice is not only blind, but it's freakin' ignorant

I'm pretty sure that he's not representative of the entire criminal justice system.

He's probably got problems, I don't agree with what he did, I doubt many people do, but he's been removed from the bench. Beyond that no one faced too much hardship.


User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1033 times:



Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 1):
Beyond that no one faced too much hardship.

Other than sitting in a courtroom observing proceedings and getting jailed.

Maybe the other folks in the room had something other to do than spend time behind bars once court was dismissed.

I guess that I don't see your point here, unless you enjoy being detained for some bullshit reason.



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineNuori5084 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1024 times:

That's insane. That would piss me off if no one owned up too, but I would never think to go that far! That judges call was beyond the scope of reasonable.


Failure to plan on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part.
User currently offlineLobster From Germany, joined Oct 2008, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1022 times:

Too me this seems to scream of false arrest and false imprisonment. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not an attorney.

BUT, if I was in that courtroom for whatever reason, I don't think I would of just "gone to jail". I don't see how he got away with this and people just let it happen.


User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1015 times:



Quoting Wukka (Reply 2):
I guess that I don't see your point here, unless you enjoy being detained for some bullshit reason.

It was a couple of hours. The judge is gone. No one was hurt. The people detained should probably be tossed a couple hundred dollars to make up for any time that they may have lost from work. Beyond that, I don't know what else you'd expect done.

I don't disagee with your premise that the judge was a crackpot.


User currently offlineFr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5400 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1014 times:



Quoting Lobster (Reply 4):
Too me this seems to scream of false arrest and false imprisonment. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not an attorney.

BUT, if I was in that courtroom for whatever reason, I don't think I would of just "gone to jail". I don't see how he got away with this and people just let it happen.

Look up "Contempt of Court" sometime. Judges have a wide latitude as to what they may allow in the courtroom and what discipline they can mete out.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineLobster From Germany, joined Oct 2008, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 997 times:



Quoting Fr8mech (Reply 6):
Look up "Contempt of Court" sometime. Judges have a wide latitude as to what they may allow in the courtroom and what discipline they can mete out.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c118.htm

"CONTEMPT OF COURT - Any willful disobedience to, or disregard of, a court order or any misconduct in the presence of a court; action that interferes with a judge's ability to administer justice or that insults the dignity of the court; punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. There are both civil and criminal contempts; the distinction is often unclear.

Contempt Of Court -- Civil Or Criminal


"A judge who feels someone is improperly challenging or ignoring the court's authority has the power to declare the defiant person (called the contemnor) in contempt of court. There are two types of contempt - criminal and civil. Criminal contempt occurs when the contemnor actually interferes with the ability of the court to function properly - for example, by yelling at the judge. This is also called direct contempt because it occurs directly in front of the judge. A criminal contemnor may be fined, jailed or both as punishment for his act.

Civil contempt occurs when the contemnor willfully disobeys a court order. This is also called indirect contempt because it occurs outside the judge's immediate realm and evidence must be presented to the judge to prove the contempt. A civil contemnor, too, may be fined, jailed or both. The fine or jailing is meant to coerce the contemnor into obeying the court, not to punish him, and the contemnor will be released from jail just as soon as he complies with the court order. In family law, civil contempt is one way a court enforces alimony, child support, custody and visitation orders which have been violated.

However, many courts have realized that, at least regarding various procedural matters such as appointment of counsel, the distinction between civil and criminal contempt is often blurred and uncertain.

A Willful Disregard Or Disobedience Of A Public Authority.

By the Constitution of the United States, each house of congress may determine the rules of its proceeding's, punish its members for disorderly behaviour and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member. The same provision is substantially contained in the constitutions of the several states.

The power to make rules carries that of enforcing them, and to attach persons who violate them and punish them for contempts. This power of punishing for contempts is confined to punishment during the session of the legislature and cannot extend beyond it, and it seems this power cannot be exerted beyond imprisonment.

Courts of justice have an inherent power to punish all persons for contempt of their rules and orders, for disobedience of their process, and for disturbing them in their proceedings."


It seems that you first need to be "in contempt" to be punished. Simply being in the same room when someone else is "in contempt" does not seem to satisfy the standard. Good thing he was kicked off the bench. What a d-bag.


User currently offline57AZ From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2550 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 945 times:



Quoting Lobster (Reply 7):
It seems that you first need to be "in contempt" to be punished. Simply being in the same room when someone else is "in contempt" does not seem to satisfy the standard.

Depends on whether the court rules were posted in the hallway outside the courtroom or on the courtroom door. If they were, specifically prohibited cell phones to be on (while in the courtroom) and the person carried an active cell phone inside, then they would be in contempt. In the Pima County Superior Court (my workplace), cell phones are not permitted to be on while one is in court and the rule is clearly posted in the hallways. Some federal courts have local rules that prohibit the public from carrying a cell phone beyond the security checkpoints. When I interned with the United States District Court-Eastern District of Tennessee, all cell phones carried in by the public were required to be checked at the security checkpoint. You would receive a claim tag so that you could retrieve your phone when leaving. Only court staff were permitted to carry cell phones beyond security and those were to be turned off while in the office.



"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."
User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 943 times:

This is the part that kills me, though...

"Restaino told the state panel he had been under stress in his personal life."

...and is going to appeal to get back on the damn bench!

What I'd *really* like to know is if this arrest will be wiped off the record, or are these people he ordered imprisoned going to have a record for contempt (or whatever they were booked on)? If the answer is no, there are plenty of lives that have been damaged the next time they submit their resume and have to fill out an application for damn near anything. For most decent jobs, and some that suck, the background check is the rule, not the exception.

Not to mention the 14 people that were shackled and bussed to another facility because they couldn't post bail.

For anyone who downplays this incident like it's no big deal is just shocking. SHACKLED and bussed. What a fine mess.



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 937 times:



Quoting 57AZ (Reply 8):
Depends on whether the court rules were posted in the hallway outside the courtroom or on the courtroom door. If they were, specifically prohibited cell phones to be on (while in the courtroom) and the person carried an active cell phone inside, then they would be in contempt. In the Pima County Superior Court (my workplace), cell phones are not permitted to be on while one is in court and the rule is clearly posted in the hallways. Some federal courts have local rules that prohibit the public from carrying a cell phone beyond the security checkpoints. When I interned with the United States District Court-Eastern District of Tennessee, all cell phones carried in by the public were required to be checked at the security checkpoint. You would receive a claim tag so that you could retrieve your phone when leaving. Only court staff were permitted to carry cell phones beyond security and those were to be turned off while in the office.

Did you even read the article?!? The WHOLE of the COURTROOM ATTENDEES were jailed. Are you telling me that *every single one of them* had a cell phone on their person?

Please read the frickin' article before you go on about how it is where you work. I would hope that you find this absolutely ridiculous upon knowledge of the situation.



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offline57AZ From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2550 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 905 times:



Quoting Wukka (Reply 10):
Did you even read the article?!?

I did. If they refuse to answer the judge, then yes they are in contempt. A simple yes or no would suffice. It may seem extreme, but that is the perogative of the judge. The presiding judge issues the rules for the entire court, but each judge or commissioner can add their own courtroom rules as long as they do not conflict with the local court rules or statute. The judge has wide latitude as to how to enforce the rules or whether to suspend a rule in the interest of justice.

Do I think the judge's response was extreme? Yes. Do I find it ridiculous? Not entirely. The hearings involved were domestic violence hearings and I don't know what was being said in open court. Here, domestic violence hearings are held in camera and non-related members of the public are not generally permitted in the courtroom while petitions are being heard. It would have been more appropriate for the judge to poll the people in the gallery to see who possessed a phone and deal only with that group.



"When a man runs on railroads over half of his lifetime he is fit for nothing else-and at times he don't know that."
User currently offlineQueso From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 901 times:



Quoting Wukka (Thread starter):
Seems that he had his whole courtroom arrested and JAILED because one persons cell rang and the culprit didn't step forward.

That's about the same as deleting an entire thread because of a couple of bad posts!  Big grin


User currently offlineORFflyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 896 times:



Quoting Queso (Reply 12):
That's about the same as deleting an entire thread because of a couple of bad posts!  

 rotf   rotf   rotf   rotf   rotf   rotf   rotf   rotf 


User currently offlineAirlinelover From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 5580 posts, RR: 23
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 881 times:

One thing worth mentioning is that this was in 2005.... why is this happening 2 years later?


Lets do some sexy math. We add you, subtract your clothes, divide your legs and multiply
User currently offlineFr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5400 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 857 times:



Quoting Lobster (Reply 7):
It seems that you first need to be "in contempt" to be punished.

But it is the judge that gets to decide what is contempt and what is not. Oversight comes later, as in this case.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineAirCop From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 845 times:



Quoting 57AZ (Reply 11):
Do I think the judge's response was extreme? Yes. Do I find it ridiculous? Not entirely.

You got to be kidding..Locking up 46 people on a whim? Wonder how much the city will end up paying on this.

Quoting Airlinelover (Reply 14):
One thing worth mentioning is that this was in 2005.... why is this happening 2 years later?

It takes that long to go through the entire process. I would guess he's been off the bench for awhile.


User currently offlineWukka From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 1017 posts, RR: 16
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 815 times:

Well, as of Wednesday, his "ticket" was yanked permanently, so it would appear that some with common sense and decency prevailed.

Note to judges, don't be a dick in a public court. :P



We can agree to disagree.
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4008 posts, RR: 28
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 805 times:



Quoting Lobster (Reply 4):
I don't see how he got away with this and people just let it happen.

No kidding - why didn't any of the bailiffs (sp?) step in and refuse to obey the order? In a lot of professions you not only have the right but also the resposibility to refuse accepting unlawful orders or if you are under the impression that your superior is mentally unstable, which clearly seems to be the case. Do bailiffs have that right?



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlineFr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5400 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 802 times:



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 18):
No kidding - why didn't any of the bailiffs (sp?) step in and refuse to obey the order?

Because, then they would have been held in contempt.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlinePyrex From Portugal, joined Aug 2005, 4008 posts, RR: 28
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 800 times:



Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 19):
Because, then they would have been held in contempt.

But who would hold them?



Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
User currently offlineNeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 799 times:



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 18):
Do bailiffs have that right?

I doubt it. I don't know that for a fact mind you. The judge clearly had problems, as long as everything gets cleared up for those that were arrested then that's all that matters. Even if the bailiffs did have that right I doubt this situation would warrant using that power, because no one's life was ever in jeopardy, and there never was any real danger to the people who were arrested.


User currently offlineDoona From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 3769 posts, RR: 13
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 795 times:



Quoting Wukka (Thread starter):
locking up 40-some-odd individuals because someone's phone rang, even if it was for a few hours...

Wouldn't this count as collective punishment? And is that even legal in the US? Sure as hell is a human rights violation...

Still, I gotta say that I enjoy civil servants who go on a nutty every once in a while, means that the bureaucracy in which they live hasn't supressed every ounce of humanity...  silly 

Cheers
Mats



Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Judge Rules Part Of Patriot Act Unconstitutional posted Thu Sep 27 2007 16:32:52 by B752fanatic
Federal Judge in TN Rules Lethal Injection Unconstitutional posted Fri Sep 21 2007 10:15:01 by EK20
Anti-gun Judge Commits Suicide With Gun posted Mon Jun 25 2007 16:41:51 by Queso
Georgia A.G. Appeals Judge's Prisoner Release posted Mon Jun 11 2007 20:13:49 by AeroWesty
Judge Sues Drycleaners For $65 Million posted Thu May 3 2007 15:54:20 by Levent
Judge Blocks Release Of Britney Rehab Stories posted Fri Mar 23 2007 14:38:56 by KaiGywer
A German Judge Cites Koran In Divorce Case posted Thu Mar 22 2007 16:06:37 by Agill
Saudi Judge Sentenences 20 Foreigners posted Mon Feb 5 2007 18:02:01 by PanAmOldDC8
Judge Delays Next Week's Execution Of Cult Killer posted Wed Oct 18 2006 13:42:57 by Luv2fly
Judge Tosses Conviction Of Ken Lay Citing Death posted Wed Oct 18 2006 03:55:13 by Jetjack74