Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 219 posts

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

#191

Post by a_puppy »

Reuters focuses on a few shocking cases, like Judge Les Hayes's treatment of Marquita Johnson -- which was truly awful! But it's important to keep this in perspective.

Reuters' investigation found 5,206 cases where people were affected by judicial misconduct over a period of 12 years, and the article noted two other investigations had found 3,500 cases and 2,251 cases each. For comparison, state courts in the USA hear approximately _one hundred million_ cases per year. [1] So there's evidence for misconduct in approximately 0.0009% of cases.

(And I'm guessing most of that misconduct was nowhere near as bad as the Marquita Johnson case, or the other examples they mentioned; they picked the most shocking examples to showcase in the article.)

[1] https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=30

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

#192

Post by trickstra »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #144
SkyBelow wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a bit more complicated than that. There is a tiered system based on your connections, class (wealth), gender, race, appearance, and other factors (these factors are not weighted equally). To further complicate it these factors are weighted differently for different categories of crimes.

>To further complicate it these factors are weighted differently for different categories of crimes. And weighted differently by local norms.

And by the amount of publicity they receive.

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

#194

Post by klyrs »

remmargorp64 wrote: post #127
candiodari wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole thing there can be reduced to the observation: why does society let foster care and youth protective services exist? You might say "well to protect kids". Except, there's a massive body of research proving that they make things worse, certainly on average: https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Massive negative effects, from reading scores, to later earnings, to subjective happiness (yes, really, kids rep…

So where is a child supposed to go when their parents have died or been imprisoned? Should they just be homeless? What alternative do you envision?

This is a big aspect of structural racism tbh. The disproportionate incarceration (duration and frequency) of black and indigenous people dumps a lot of their kids into the foster system. These kids overwhelmingly get sucked into the school-to-prison pipeline, around and around it goes. Relatively lucky ones have a family member, but they probably can't afford another kid, and the cycle of poverty keeps turning.

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

#195

Post by candiodari »

remmargorp64 wrote: post #127
candiodari wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole thing there can be reduced to the observation: why does society let foster care and youth protective services exist? You might say "well to protect kids". Except, there's a massive body of research proving that they make things worse, certainly on average: https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Massive negative effects, from reading scores, to later earnings, to subjective happiness (yes, really, kids rep…

So where is a child supposed to go when their parents have died or been imprisoned? Should they just be homeless? What alternative do you envision?

That is much less than 1% of the kids in youth services. A bit like saying we must have a million nuclear weapons in case there's another cold war in 200 years.

The answer to this question doesn't really matter for that reason.

The vast majority of kids are in foster care because otherwise their parents would be "unreachable" for social workers, for various reasons, like refusing psych treatment for their kid that the school insists on, like autism treatment for "difficult" children, sometimes just because they can't because treatment can only happen during working hours, but the parents need to work. Meaning they are hostages to "force change". That group is huge. Next largest group are kids suspected of a crime. Keep in mind that the way our law works kids don't have any legal rights. They may be convicted of a crime but for kids there is no difference between suspected and convicted.

The thing is, with just kids in youth services that really NEED to be somewhere the current system cannot possibly survive.

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

#196

Post by candiodari »

kortilla wrote: post #140
candiodari wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole thing there can be reduced to the observation: why does society let foster care and youth protective services exist? You might say "well to protect kids". Except, there's a massive body of research proving that they make things worse, certainly on average: https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Massive negative effects, from reading scores, to later earnings, to subjective happiness (yes, really, kids rep…

In this particular example of the mother being in prison, where would the children live without these services?

The best answer for that question is in 99% of cases (light offenders) also in prison (not locked up. With the mother still taking them to school, ideally the same school). There's research that this is both the best for the child and a very effective way to reduce recidivism.

And let's not forget that there really aren't that many effective ways to reduce recidivism, so this ought to be worth a lot to society.

Generally carrots work a LOT better than sticks.

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

#197

Post by cgriswald »

Kednicma wrote: post #147
chrisseaton wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I got to choose a prosecutor who won't take police-union money You see this seems massively inappropriate in the first place. Take that money for what? A prosecutor shouldn't take any money from anyone, in any circumstance, apart from their salary. They shouldn't even be talking to a political organisation like a union. Both things seem like grounds for automatic dismissal for a prosecutor. Why are you having to ch…

The district attorney, being an elected prosecutorial position, can spend money during the election; I chose the candidate who did not have a political action committee funded by the police union. Yes, it's stressful being a vigilant voter. But what's the alternative? Not caring?

So the main benefit of being able to vote for judges is that you can vote against one who is doing something that wouldn’t be allowed in a sane system anyway, by voting for one who did the same thing just with groups you don’t disapprove of...?

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

#198

Post by chrisseaton »

Kednicma wrote: post #147
chrisseaton wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I got to choose a prosecutor who won't take police-union money You see this seems massively inappropriate in the first place. Take that money for what? A prosecutor shouldn't take any money from anyone, in any circumstance, apart from their salary. They shouldn't even be talking to a political organisation like a union. Both things seem like grounds for automatic dismissal for a prosecutor. Why are you having to ch…

The district attorney, being an elected prosecutorial position, can spend money during the election; I chose the candidate who did not have a political action committee funded by the police union. Yes, it's stressful being a vigilant voter. But what's the alternative? Not caring?

> But what's the alternative?

Not electing prosecutors and judges.

That's where this thread started.

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

#199

Post by kazagistar »

candiodari wrote: post #111
ipython wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t forget the 2008 kids for cash scandal: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal . At least those judges were eventually tried and are serving time.

The whole thing there can be reduced to the observation: why does society let foster care and youth protective services exist? You might say "well to protect kids". Except, there's a massive body of research proving that they make things worse, certainly on average: https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Massive negative effects, from reading scores, to later earnings, to subjective happiness (yes, really, kids rep…

I see you citing a study that appears to be about the inadequacy of the USA system. You could read that and decide it means the whole system is inherently broken, but you could just as easily see that as an indictment of the US system and a need for reform or a replacement with the parts that work better in other countries.

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

#200

Post by pjc50 »

kazagistar wrote: post #199
candiodari wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole thing there can be reduced to the observation: why does society let foster care and youth protective services exist? You might say "well to protect kids". Except, there's a massive body of research proving that they make things worse, certainly on average: https://sci-hub.se/10.1257/aer.97.5.1583 Massive negative effects, from reading scores, to later earnings, to subjective happiness (yes, really, kids rep…

I see you citing a study that appears to be about the inadequacy of the USA system. You could read that and decide it means the whole system is inherently broken, but you could just as easily see that as an indictment of the US system and a need for reform or a replacement with the parts that work better in other countries.

Yeah, how much of this is just the same problems as the US huge prison population, but applied to children? The "carcerial state".
Post reply on HN