Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench • Hacker News Board

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#61

Post by lmkg » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:19 PM UTC

logicchop wrote: post #53

Fjolsvith wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but that a prosecutable case couldn't be made for that So we suddenly have proven guilty without proof, but rather just because there's some suspicion. Doesn't seem American.

That's wildly naive and I think with a little bit of imagination you too can envision a scenario where it makes sense. It needn't be "wild guessing" on the judges behalf; there could be even absolutely convictable evidence that would cause any reasonable person to immediately and unquestionably believe in the guilt of the mother, yet might be barred because of a rule governing the admissibility of evidence (that's it…

We have the Rule of Law for a reason. If there's an issue with the system where guilty people are going free, then fix the system. Letting people take justice into their own hands is a cure worse than the problem, especially when those people are abusing the authority that was given to them to enact the justice that was created by a democratic process.

A judge enacting a sentence based on inadmissible evidence is a violation of the rights of the accused, the Constitution, and the specific oaths and duties of their profession.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#62

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:25 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #36

CyberDildonics wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you are saying. Are there more details that know about this specific case that explain the sentence?

Perhaps contempt. Perhaps a disregard for public safety. Who knows? It of course was outrageous, but there was certainly something going on that pushed the judge's buttons. Because, every traffic violator didn't get that sentence, right?

[deleted]

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#63

Post by logicchop » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:26 PM UTC

lmkg wrote: post #61

logicchop wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's wildly naive and I think with a little bit of imagination you too can envision a scenario where it makes sense. It needn't be "wild guessing" on the judges behalf; there could be even absolutely convictable evidence that would cause any reasonable person to immediately and unquestionably believe in the guilt of the mother, yet might be barred because of a rule governing the admissibility of evidence (that's it…

We have the Rule of Law for a reason. If there's an issue with the system where guilty people are going free, then fix the system. Letting people take justice into their own hands is a cure worse than the problem, especially when those people are abusing the authority that was given to them to enact the justice that was created by a democratic process. A judge enacting a sentence based on inadmissible evidence is a v…

Again, wildly naive. There is no "rule of law" that is so prescriptive. We basically have a loose confederation of laws, interpreted by courts, and exacted by humans. There is flexibility in various aspects, including sentencing, and things like that are (when they are) left to the discretion of the judge precisely because there is no formula otherwise. There is nothing about this that violates anyone's oath or duty, and nothing about it is inherently wrong. That is precisely the space that judges occupy that no formula can fill.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#64

Post by rayiner » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:29 PM UTC

There is some horrible conduct detailed on here, but also not so horrible conduct:

> They included a California judge who had sex in his courthouse chambers, once with his former law intern and separately with an attorney; a New York judge who berated domestic violence victims; and a Maryland judge who, after his arrest for driving drunk, was allowed to return to the bench provided he took a Breathalyzer test before each appearance.

Judges in all these states are elected. Should an elected official be impeached for any of this conduct? Maybe the one who had sex with an attorney, if the attorney had cases before the judge (but the article doesn’t say that). The other stuff is bad, but is it impeachable?

By lumping together really heinous conduct with things that probably should be disciplinary violations that don’t result in impeachment, it’s hard to know what the magnitude of the problem detailed in the article actually is.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#65

Post by simonh » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:29 PM UTC

logicchop wrote: post #29

Reedx wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, even if she failed to pay 10,000 traffic tickets, how does it do any good to put her behind bars at all? They really couldn't think of a better way to deal with non-violent offense??

I agree with you that failure to pay traffic tickets is hardly grounds for that sentence, and that it would in fact be stupid if those were the grounds. And that is exactly why it is a pretty uncharitable initial interpretation of what happened. There are always publicly cited "endorsable" reasons that must conform to the law, and then there are the underlying messy reasons that actually motivate the decision. It fit…

Hang on, there was a judicial inquiry that found he handed down hundreds of punitive sentences to people too poor to pay fines. He was found in violation of 10 state laws. It’s all in the article.

This wasn’t a single aberrant case where maybe he made a mistake, it was an long term persistent pattern of deliberate behaviour identified in a inquiry. He even said he was ‘very remorseful’.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#66

Post by twic » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:30 PM UTC

mjw1007 wrote: post #56

justaguyhere wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a third option though?

This is what's used in the UK: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Appointments_Commissi...

It had never occurred to me that any developed country would do anything other than this. Are there any that do?

A bit of a survey from the Venice Commission, some sort of gang of euro-judicial boffins:

https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/CDL-AD2007_02...

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#67

Post by cmurf » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:33 PM UTC

thex10 wrote: post #44

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps contempt. Perhaps a disregard for public safety. Who knows? It of course was outrageous, but there was certainly something going on that pushed the judge's buttons. Because, every traffic violator didn't get that sentence, right?

> but there was certainly something going on that pushed the judge's buttons Yeah, but who's to say whether that something was remotely reasonable versus something completely frivolous (she rolled her eyes at him, she didn't cry convincingly enough, some other bullshit). Anyway I'd argue that our justice system should have zero room for such capricious, emotional judging.

The culture demands and thrives on capriciousness and emotional judgements.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#68

Post by defen » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:35 PM UTC

SkyBelow wrote: post #59

defen wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a sensationalized way of describing it. Judges can't just decide to have random people sterilized. The mother petitioned the court to have her minor daughter sterilized. The judge made a large number of procedural mistakes in granting the petition, but the Supreme Court ruled that he didn't act outside of his judicial capacity. The general rule is that judges can't be held personally liable for mistakes they m…

>Judges can't just decide to have random people sterilized. More specifically, they can't unless they do, but if they do then that's okay. Which seems to simplify to "they can".

"Judges can order people to be put to death." That's a true statement, and in my opinion not deceptive, because capital punishment is widely understood as a thing that exists, and that it is treated as a punishment for certain crimes for which a person has been duly convicted. No reasonable person hears "Judges can order people to be put to death" and thinks "Wow, so a rogue judge could just order me to be killed for no reason and that would be it, game over for me?"

My claim is that "a US judge can order to you be sterilized without your knowledge and you can do nothing about it nor can anything be done to the judge." is not like the previous statement, because it only applies in an extremely limited (at the time; possibly not at all now, I don't know) set of circumstances with which an ordinary layperson would not be familiar.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#69

Post by simonh » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:36 PM UTC

tenebrisalietum wrote: post #32

Reedx wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, even if she failed to pay 10,000 traffic tickets, how does it do any good to put her behind bars at all? They really couldn't think of a better way to deal with non-violent offense??

Devil's Advocate: Look at a Youtube video of any country where they don't enforce traffic laws. It's chaotic and unsafe. Fear of consequences is the only thing that keeps people somewhat sane on the road, the alternative is chaos or literally having police every quarter mile looking for infractions. Until we have self-driving cars, it's beneficial for society and everyone who has to drive for traffic violations to be…

Read the article, he was found in direct violation of 10 provisions of the state judicial code by a full enquiry. This has nothing to do with road safety. He did the same thing to hundreds of other people too poor to pay fines for all sorts of things.

Re: Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws, oaths remained on the bench

#70

Post by alexashka » Tue, Jun 30, 2020, 8:36 PM UTC

This article is depressing.

What I find troubling is not only what's in the article, but what's left out. There is no call to action, there is no information provided as to what a reader can do, to help fix this disaster.

It leaves you feeling deflated, because now what? Now you go about the rest of your day with this burden of knowledge.

This is very common with these types of stories - it's not enough to complain, you need to provide a set of potential solutions or else people begin treating these stories the way they do homeless people - they just learn to ignore them.

Maybe that's what these newspapers want or are coerced into - that'd be the darkest and most sinister interpretation.