Judge forced to resign after putting hands on Woman

[cooks1]

Holy crap

Yeah. The whole neighborhood was a mess for months.

3 years later half the people in our nice suburban enclave shit themselves and batten down the hatches very time there is a messy divorce. Which, of course, is often.

 

[7437]

So you're saying the judge should have hit her. You talk like a wife beater.

Lots of people are wife beaters. Usually not hard to spot in attitude.

 

[Milgrim]

If he had colour of right to do so, then we would not likely be talking about it. The fact that he stepped down says to me that he acted beyond what he was authorised to do.

That may very well be so. Of course, we live in an age where hurting someone's feelings can cost you your career. Then again, if anyone should know that a resignation is essentially a guilty plea and the end of the discussion, it would be a judge. So, your point is well taken.

I'm just trying to understand your logic here, if you'll forgive me..

You are forgiven ... but seriously - and to clarify - the main focus of TS was the fact that he touched her and I was responding primarily to that. But I did say, essentially, that assuming he was acting within his authority to order her back to the courtroom, I didn't think putting his hand on her shoulder was worth losing his job over.

 

[cooks1]

Judge that denied the request should be hanged.

Yeah, It was a very bad call. Just a very sad situation that probably could have been prevented.

 

[Andy Capp]

That may very well be so. Of course, we live in an age where hurting someone's feelings can cost you your career. Then again, if anyone should know that a resignation is essentially a guilty plea and the end of the discussion, it would be a judge. So, your point is well taken.


You are forgiven ... but seriously - and to clarify - the main focus of TS was the fact that he touched her and I was responding primarily to that. But I did say, essentially, that assuming he was acting within his authority to order her back to the courtroom, I didn't think putting his hand on her shoulder was worth losing his job over.

You didn't answer the question. Your clarification did not clarify.

 

[Madmick]

Wow. Interesting one here. Lady makes a ruckus outside a judges courtroom so the judge marches out, chases her down, and marches her back to his courtroom with his hand around her the back of her neck and plants her ass in a seat.



https://www.aol.com/article/news/20...rabbing-black-woman-around-the-neck/23527227/



Not sure what to make of it. A judge should probably not be putting his hands on people though. To make matters worse, the woman was there to get a protection order. So she ended up getting manhandled while trying to avoid getting manhandled.

What say you ???

Judges are Order, not Law. Why wouldn't he dispatch his bailiff to handle her for him? Have the bailiff drag her back into court and then either level contempt against her (a bit heavy) or more likely just disorderly conduct.

Nevertheless, firing him for putting his hand on her shoulder is a gross overreaction.

What do you think would have been an appropriate consequence?

A formal reprimand on his record.

 

[Phr3121]

What say you ???

I think the judge was out of order. Woman had already stopped shouting and had left the area by the time he walked out of the courtroom. Why go after her? Why bring her into his courtroom? Touching the woman's shoulder is the least of the issues. Everything the judge did should have been done by police officers in the judge's courtroom. Unprofessional behavior for a judge and the fact that he was doing someone else's job. The judge should have remained in his courtroom seated behind his bench.

 

[JamesRussler]

I watched the video. I hereby judge AOL as using clickbait headlines.

Resting your hand on someones shoulder does not live up to the outrage expectations.

I can't speak for everyone, but my outrage is this:
If I did what this judge did, I'd get arrested, probably charged, lose my job, and have my reputation ruined for life. Any one of us would. He has at the very least committed the crime of assault, and possibly kidnapping / false imprisonment. Does a judge have authority to physically and personally enforce court orders? No. That's not his job. If he wants to hold her in contempt, he should make findings on the record, make an order, and direct law enforcement authorities (e.g., the bailiff, or sheriff) to enforce that order. He's a judge, so he should know that. There's a process he's supposed to go through, and that process is what keeps government officials from using their authority to satisfy personal vendettas. IMO, this was a flagrant abuse of the judge's authority.

That said, if this lady walked out of court in the middle of a proceeding and/or otherwise acted in contempt of court, she should be held in contempt. People should realize court is not a game. Judges have to manage their courtrooms, and there are consequences for getting out of line.

 

[Amerikuracana]

Why? That's forcible confinement.

Yeah that's what judges do every day; confine people against their will. That's their job.

 

[irish_thug]

Yeah that's what judges do every day; confine people against their will. That's their job.

Incorrect.
They sentence people.
That judge unlawfully removed that woman's freedom of mobility.

 

[JamesRussler]

Judges are Order, not Law. Why wouldn't he dispatch his bailiff to handle her for him? Have the bailiff drag her back into court and then either level contempt against her (a bit heavy) or more likely just disorderly conduct.

He should have done exactly that, minus the disorderly conduct.

Nevertheless, firing him for putting his hand on her shoulder is a gross overreaction.

A formal reprimand on his record.

Well, I dunno. What you described is a simple assault, and possibly a kidnapping. That's a big deal. But aside from that, he did this under color of his authority as a judge and violated several of her Constitutional rights. If the law clearly prohibited his behavior (e.g., under a state statute, canon of judicial ethics, or published case law), then he committed a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 242. I doubt they'd ever prosecute him, but just saying' — his behavior was pretty egregious IMO.

 

[Trotsky]

She was trying to leave, but then he detained her and brought her to the courtroom so she could be arrested for being too loud outside an unrelated proceeding?

Fuck him. Good riddance. Now he can go be a bailiff, security guard, or police officer where that is actually part of his job.

 

[Madmick]

He should have done exactly that, minus the disorderly conduct.

Well, I dunno. What you described is a simple assault, and possibly a kidnapping. That's a big deal. But aside from that, he did this under color of his authority as a judge and violated several of her Constitutional rights. If the law clearly prohibited his behavior (e.g., under a state statute, canon of judicial ethics, or published case law), then he committed a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 242. I doubt they'd ever prosecute him, but just saying' — his behavior was pretty egregious IMO.

Was he not restoring her to the courtroom in order to process her request?

She appeared to me to be willfully returning to the courtroom. He did not place his hand on her until she turned to take the wrong side exit. So, no, I don't see the case for "assault", and I am certain he isn't going to be charged with that. But hey, you're someone with a knack for "predicting" legal outcomes, isn't that what you said? Maybe you'll turn out right this time.

 

[Prefect]

Don't care. Any judge with that sort of temperament is unfit to be a judge.

 

[cabear]

yeah why didnt he send the bailiff to do that shit? you're the judge, you set the schedule, don't do the dirty work.

 

[JamesRussler]

Was he not restoring her to the courtroom in order to process her request?

She appeared to me to be willfully returning to the courtroom. He did not place his hand on her until she turned to take the wrong side exit. So, no, I don't see the case for "assault", and I am certain he isn't going to be charged with that. But hey, you're someone with a knack for "predicting" legal outcomes, isn't that what you said? Maybe you'll turn out right this time.

What he did was technically a “seizure” (whether characterized as arrest or detention) by show of authority, with a little physical contact as well. That’s what cops are for. He did not have authority to personally conduct an arrest, despite having the authority to order her arrested. What he should have done is, like you said, hold her in contempt, order the bailiff to seize her, or order that a warrant issue for her arrest.

I doubt they’d charge this guy because he’s in a special elite class of people that are never held accountable. Among other reasons, the DA is an elected official, and charging a judge may cause a political shitstorm he doesn’t want / need. But the judge absolutely committed a crime, and there’s no reason he’d be immune from prosecution. I can assure you, any non-judge / non-cop would be charged for the exact same conduct.

 

[Madmick]

What he did was technically a “seizure” (whether characterized as arrest or detention) by show of authority, with a little physical contact as well. That’s what cops are for. He did not have authority to personally conduct an arrest, despite having the authority to order her arrested. What he should have done is, like you said, hold her in contempt, order the bailiff to seize her, or order that a warrant issue for her arrest.

I doubt they’d charge this guy because he’s in a special elite class of people that are never held accountable. Among other reasons, the DA is an elected official, and charging a judge may cause a political shitstorm he doesn’t want / need. But the judge absolutely committed a crime, and there’s no reason he’d be immune from prosecution. I can assure you, any non-judge / non-cop would be charged for the exact same conduct.

He "arrested" her? He invoked this authority? You know that he threatened her with criminal action if she didn't come back to the courtroom? I didn't see this in the OP article.

She follows him back to the court, willfully, as far as I can tell in the video.

 

[JamesRussler]

He "arrested" her? He invoked this authority? You know that he threatened her with criminal action if she didn't come back to the courtroom? I didn't see this in the OP article.

She follows him back to the court, willfully, as far as I can tell in the video.

Yup. Either an arrest or a detention, i.e. a Fourth Amendment seizure. I’m under the impression that he ordered her to get back inside in some way, which is a clear show of authority. I of course could be wrong about that, but I doubt there’d be any controversy if he just sweet talked her into changing her mind.

 

[Staph infection]

Black woman, white man that says it all. Black woman are invisible.

 

[Madmick]

Yup. Either an arrest or a detention, i.e. a Fourth Amendment seizure. I’m under the impression that he ordered her to get back inside in some way, which is a clear show of authority. I of course could be wrong about that, but I doubt there’d be any controversy if he just sweet talked her into changing her mind.

So you have no evidence that he either arrested or detained her, and are assuming both.

That right?

Black woman, white man that says it all. Black woman are invisible.

That why he lost his job over guiding her into his courtroom?