Texas Judge Has Party in court, Sentences Fugitive to life

[IChing]

ALLAS (AP) -- A judge threw a party complete with balloons, streamers and a cake to welcome a former fugitive back to her court - and sentence him to life in prison.

"You just made my day when I heard you had finally come home," Criminal Courts Judge Faith Johnson told Billy Wayne Williams, who had been convicted in absentia of aggravated assault after he disappeared a year ago. "We're so excited to see you, we're throwing a party for you."

Williams, 53, was accused of choking his girlfriend until she was unconscious. He failed to appear for his trial last November and was not captured until Thursday.

Before he was brought into the courtroom Monday, Johnson directed staff members as they placed balloons and streamers around the courtroom. A colorful cake was decorated with his name.


"It seems like everyone wants to have a party, and it's fun for you people, but not for me," Williams told reporters as he was led away in handcuffs.

Calls to the judge's office and the State Bar Association were not immediately returned Tuesday.

___________________________________________________________________

Texas justice is a mockery of impartiallity,
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PRISON_SENDOFF?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[PBX9501]

1. Hope the girl he choked got a piece of the cake..(nt)

[devilgrrl]

6. Hopefully she's still able to use her throat...

bet she's glad he's out of the picture - what an ass.

[freetobegay]

2. Sorry I won't slam this judge

[7th_Sephiroth]

12. thats why judges get away with this shit

and cops continue to rape, its because people like you wont stand up against it, all you thnk is "good, he's a criminal so he deserves it" havent you heard of human rights?

[jobycom]

20. You'd do it for Randolph Scott!

Sorry for the Blazing Saddles reference (if anyone gets it), but I don't see how a judge mocking a man already convicted and probably facing mandatory sentencing anyway equates to cops raping anyone.

[7th_Sephiroth]

21. its the same sentiment

of the cops allways being right, and "above the law"

[jobycom]

32. You'll have to explain it to me better than that

I'm not much into condoning judicial excesses, but I don't see how a sarcastic judge equates to police brutality and abuse. This man was already convicted, he mocked the court by going fugitive for a year, and a sarcastic judge returned the mockery. Yes, a little too personal, maybe, but we aren't talking about Rodney King or Malice Green or 41 shots.

If there is a law against holding a party in a courtroom, or any related such laws, then nail her for it. But I don't see anything "above the law" here. You are comparing a prank to a brutal crime.

And don't assume I'm one that jumps to the defense of cops. If you remember me from when I used to post more often, you know I'm pretty much an extremist against police brutality. I think we've been on the same side of such issues in the past, if I remember your handle right.

[7th_Sephiroth]

50. its the thought that police and judges can do whatever they want

that gives them to power trip to do humiliating things, big or little, its still humiliating, illegal and wrong

[Almost_there]

61. Humiliation is NOT illegal..

I beg to differ on your "humiliation is illegal" statement. Actually, public humiliation is used as punishment, equated with community service. Convicts of drunk driving, and crimes of that ilk have had to wear large signs and stand on street corners of the town where they were caught to announce their crime. No different than convicts having to work downtown painting curbs in their bright orange prison garb.

If it helps to prevent a senseless crime like a death from drunk driving, or to make someone think twice before a petty theft, I am all for a bit of humiliation. It beats other forms of primitive punishment.

~Almost

[neuvocat]

103. Well not so fast...

if you look at that article, you'd see that judges have to at least appear impartial. Her conduct is going to be investigated, I'm sure.

[Almost_there]

128. But this isn't about sentencing, he was tried & convicted previously..

In this case, the judge was simply passing down a sentence that I believe in reading the article was already reached as he was convicted and sentenced in absentia, however, I think you must be present to have the charges and sentence read to you before you report to jail. So, there is nothing to be impartial about. The jury already found him guilty, the judge, on advisement from the jury handed down a sentence, and in this courtroom of insanity, that sentence was read to him so he could go to jail and not collect his $200.

[neuvocat]

129. We'll see what happens.

There's enough to start an investigation. If there isn't a formal complaint they'll likely start looking into the case themselves.

[Name removed]

136. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[George_S]

138. If he was already sentenced to life...

... and he was such a criminal that he deserved life in prison, why did the judge give him a chance to not appear? Why bail or whatever?

The judge sounds like a nut.

[aldian159]

133. I'm with you

NOBODY is above the law, and for a judge to essentially dance on a criminal's grave is wrong.

[Almost_there]

59. RANDOLPH SCOTT!!

OK sheriff, we'll do it!

Actually, I tend to think that the judge did cross a line of poor taste, but, were his human rights violated? I don't think so. A judge has tremendous liberty in their courtroom, and well, the gentleman in question was already convicted, the guy jumped his hearing, had to be recaptured, and I sincerely doubt his victim was offended.

I am all for "humiliation" as punishment, having people wear sandwich boards with "I'm a drunk driver" and things like that. It might be embarrassing, but, hey! You broke the law.

Plus, the sheriff of Rock Ridge would have thrown a party too.

~Almost

[Dhalgren]

169. What if she had decided to smear shit on him?

Or strip him naked and and parade him around in a dog collar? Humiliation is humiliation; where do you draw the line and who gets to draw it? I think that it behooves the court to always conduct itself with sombre dignity and when it doesn't, it's rulings become suspect.

[northzax]

176. well, smearing shit on someone would be assault

and not acceptable. aparding naked would be indecent exposure, and not acceptable.

I am all for the role of potential humiliation as punishment. We have too often lost our sense of shame for wrong doing. I would love to see anyone convicted of DUI forced to apply a bumper sticker to their car saying "Drunk Driver on Board" for a probationary period. I think anyone convicted of sexual assault should be forced to wear a t0shirt saying "rapist" every day in public for a year. Scarlet letters worked because of the public opprobrium of failuer. keep it that way.

[TX-RAT]

37. cops continue to rape? little more info please.

("good, he's a criminal so he deserves it") Thats right, he deserved that party.
(havent you heard of human rights?)
Thats probably what was on his mind as he was choking the shit out of her.
Get real! She thankfully survived and he got a party complete with cake.

[Dhalgren]

170. Human rights are reserved for ALL HUMANS

even the ones you don't like...

[freetobegay]

130. I have also heard of victims rights, remember those?

He's a fucking scum bucket Nothing of a man running from what he did.

[Endangered Specie]

184. Wow, judge party causes Cop rape...

quite a nice straw man youve built there.

[nolabels]

71. I think that might be the incorrect response

Dang it, just think if others in our society had that judges attitude.

People are holding places of responsible stature because they are held to be responsible. It's that simple. If you see the world crumble around you, can you blame others or does it start with yourself.

The people that helped put this party together should also be looking for new employment in my book. I am not for defense of the defendant, just if your messing with large groups entire lives, professionalism needs to be adhered to. If not, otherwise no one can look soberly to laws as a place for justice or protection.

[devilgrrl]

3. Classy.

Not that I'm sticking up for the slime that was sent to the slammer but give a break with this shit.

[progdonkey]

208. Professionalism

You're completely right. The bottom line here is that the judge showed incredibly poor judgment and destroyed the dignity of the courtroom. He could have just gotten Nelson from the Simpsons to say, "Ha ha," and would have the same level of judicial decorum.

[specter]

4. The judge needs to have a disbarment hearing

That is not what her job is!!!! Regardless of the dudes crime. A court room is no place for that kind of behavior.

[TX-RAT]

40. horse-shit

Please explain what the judge did wrong.

[sui generis]

55. the judge done wrong

a judge is supposed to be impartial, even in sentencing. Throwing a party is not a sign of impartiality.

This is not the wild wild west.

[specter]

62. Not to mention

a breach of judicial ethics. Would you be just as happy if the Supreme Court had a party after ruling row vs.wade was an incorrect ruling and threw it out or would that be ok with you?? Or maybe we should have a party and get rid of Civil Right in this country. Maybe hang a few people in the process. Im not saying that dude didnt deserver to get punished, although life for assault I think is a little extreme, but then I dont agree with the Three Strikes Rule either!!. So lets have punch and cake everytime we sentence someone what a great party!!

[sui generis]

68. I do think the sentence was probably deserved though

If you choke someone until they are unconscious it could be argued that you intended to kill them but didn't succeed, particularly if you are by far the stronger. Same as shooting them in an argument, except that you have to keep choking them for long after the moment of insanity it would require to pull a trigger.

It could be argued that you used deadly force as meaningfully as if you had been wielding a gun or other weapon, and most medical professionals can verify that crushing the esophagus, vagus nerves, and major blood vessels to the brain even briefly can cause unpredictable heart failure or stroke and brain damage in addition to the complications of suffocation.

I prefer my justice a bit more austere though.

[saigon68]

123. IN TEXAS THEY DON'T NEED JUDGES TO DISCIPLINE CRIMINALS

This Judge should just have let a few of the posters here give it a go---------\


Like why even bother with a trial.




Lynching 1930

A mob of 10,000 whites took sledgehammers to the county jailhouse doors to get at these two young blacks accused of raping a white girl; the girl’s uncle saved the life of a third by proclaiming the man’s innocence. Although this was Marion, Ind., most of the nearly 5,000 lynchings documented between Reconstruction and the late 1960s were perpetrated in the South. (Hangings, beatings and mutilations were called the sentence of “Judge Lynch.”) Some lynching photos were made into postcards designed to boost white supremacy, but the tortured bodies and grotesquely happy crowds ended up revolting as many as they scared. Today the images remind us that we have not come as far from barbarity as we’d like to think.


JUDGE LYNCH ALIVE AND WELL IN TEXAS AND PANDERING TO A TOOTHLESS CROWD OF INBREEDS

[AMD_CPU]

147. Yes, indeed, the criminal was an African-American male.

So was the judge. Well, African-American, but not male, she's female. And the criminal had previously been convicted for murdering another woman, his wife.

It appears that the judge was worried about this guy. Probably with just cause. But to compare it to a lynching??? That's a tad bit overboard.

[saigon68]

153. Enjoy your stay

It will be short.

[AMD_CPU]

158. Excuse me?

Low post count doesn't mean I'm a freeper, thank you very much.

[Swamp Rat]

151. I HATE THAT PICTURE!

Please keep showing it as often as possible. :grr:

[Wilber_Stool]

76. Does that mean that you would

be in favor of a defendant in a murder trial, upon his acquittal, having a party in the courtroom? Who knows, this may have set a precedent.

[TX-RAT]

80. You see the OJ trial?

[Wilber_Stool]

88. No I didn't,

but I hardly think they had balloons and streamers in the courtroom. I did, however see some jubilation from off site viewers. That's hardly the same.

[saigon68]

95. THIS JUDGE WAS NOT IMPARTIAL

If Judges are always going to agree with the police, and act as advocates for the so called victim, why even have them.

In my state they would overturn this sentencing and Remove the Judge for cause. this is America--- not Russia Saudi or some other dictatorship where clowns like this Judge hold a vaudeville sentencing.

[mountainvue]

109. How different is this

from former Governor Bush mocking Karla Faye Tucker?

[johnnie]

110. You're right

I think this judge should be told to do her job and leave the bullshit to Judge Judy and television.

[gatlingforme]

166. I do not think so. It may have been a little over the top but the

judge is not without some humor. and if the guy felt a little humiliated than so what. He obviously had priors and for the judge to do this is no big deal in my book, actually if I lived around there and knew what a party it would be I would have gone and brought a dish to pass.

[Jack The Tab]

5. A worthy cause for celebration!

Good for the judge!

[7th_Sephiroth]

7. how the hell do you get life for assault?

shit, this guy just got himself an instant appeal

[anotherginger]

9. sounds like it was not his first party....

"Williams has a criminal record dating back to the 1980s, authorities said. During his year on the run, Williams used disguises, posed as an attorney and used aliases such as "Justin Burroughs" and "Bubba Lee Williams," authorities said."

[7th_Sephiroth]

13. the judge will be disbarred

the man will be set free, this is illegal, the judge is bad

[Bake]

35. The judge, at most, will get a reprimand

The sentence can be appealed, perhaps. This is pretty mild in comparison with some judicial misconduct.

Bake, Esq.

[Almost_there]

63. Disbarred? Why? Set free? On what LEGAL grounds?

I understand you hate this judge for humiliating this fine, upstanding citizen, but, under legal guidelines (which are not posted in the article, neither is this fine, innocent, upstanding citizen's "rap sheet"), the judge may well have had little wiggle room in sentencing. The article indicates the guy was on the run (hence the "welcome home" party), he had been convicted in adsentia, he had committed previous crimes (again, unknown) and yet, the judge should be disbarred for doing something at most in poor taste?

You can only be disbarred for gross isconduct pertaining to legal matters. Please let me know what was illegal that went on here.

And also, please explain how in the world this guy goes free. Because he had his feelings hurt? Poor baby! Maybe that's why he did all these crimes.. the judge picked on him like a bully at his sentencing that he had previously run from, and previously committed crimes where he had previously been convicted of. Yeah, he'll be set free. Right.

[rinsd]

81. Great Idea....

Free the guy with a long criminal who was convicted of choking his girlfriend to the point of unconciousness, then became a fugitive for a year.

Disbar the judge that made what appears to be a bad choice in decorum.

Yeah that makes sense.....

[IChing]

14. My brother was a judge in texas

The courtroom is not a place for this behavior
no matter what the crime, guilty or not
know your law, this is not professional behavior
and makes the court a mockery of justice, not the mockery of the defendant, even if guilty.

[7th_Sephiroth]

15. guilty or not

the court room was turned into a mockery of justice, and violated his rights against cruel and unusual punishment

[Bake]

36. Good luck with THAT argument

The Supremes apparently don't think prison beatings are "cruel and unusual." They'd LAUGH at this episode.

Bake

[7th_Sephiroth]

52. this country makes me sick, man

prison rape is joked about by judges, judges and politicians are openly bribed, cops can rape and murder and commit heinous crimes and get away with it because other cops wont investigate or anything

[prayin4rain]

58. Me too. I don't know exactly why because I have never known anyone

in jail, but the criminal justice system REALLY disturbs me. From charging, sentencing, and then how the sentence is carried out. In my opinion holding violent people along with non-violent people is cruel and unusual punishment. Bad check writers and pot smokers in prison with murderers and rapist. WHAT????? That is crazy. And it is also weird that nobody seems to care.

[PBX9501]

17. Choking is Assault with Intent to kill

IE it meets criteria for use of deadly force by victim. You have to have grounds for appeal. His rights were not violated at a sentencing hearing. Feelings hurt is different.

[TX-RAT]

41. how the hell do you get life for assault?"

She's lucky to have survived.
Might want to look at his criminal history.

[7th_Sephiroth]

54. life is a bit excessive for someone who hasent raped or taken a life

he diddent kill her did he? no, its a bit too excessive a sentance even if he has a long rap sheet

[rinsd]

82. Free the woman beater!

:eyes:

[sui generis]

94. "Free the woman beater!"

nobody wants to free the woman beater. We just don't want our judges to act like clowns in the courtroom. Indications of bias in a judge who is supposed to be impartial are what jedges in the ol' wild wild west used to do, just before they pulled the lever on the gallows.

This is not the old wild wild west.

[7th_Sephiroth]

99. not free him but

life is a bit too long

[AMD_CPU]

150. How many people should he be allowed to kill before he's locked up...

permanently?

[AMD_CPU]

149. Nope, he didn't kill her...

but he did kill his wife previously and was convicted for it. Does that count?

[AMD_CPU]

148. When it's called "attempted murder"....

and you have a previous murder conviction for whacking your wife...

[mountainvue]

111. Not to mention

that he will probably get some help from the ACLU-which I think he should.

[Freddie Stubbs]

206. He has already served time for murder

Williams, who previously served time in prison for killing his wife, went on the lam a year ago while on trial in Johnson's court on charges he choked his girlfriend until she passed out. He was convicted in absentia of aggravated assault.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/10029380.htm

[sui generis]

8. the bad news is that he may get a mistrial as a result

The judge engaged in highly prejudicial and biased behavior and behaved entirely inappropriately for a court of law. If he has a lawyer with the brains of a four year old he'll be out on mistrial.

If you have ever sat in a Dallas courtroom, there are little notices everywhere telling you about the "gravity" of court, respect for the judge, including giving your undivided attention (i.e., you may not read a magazine or book while waiting on a hearing in traffic court).

I am sure the guy deserved to be put away, but imagine if he really didn't deserve to be put away. Let's just say the judge didn't like him because he was black, or queer, and then behaved like that. It really is inexcusable.

[specter]

10. Agreed!

The courtroom is where you expect professional behavior not classroom clown antics

[jobycom]

16. No, he was already convicted, this was sentencing

They can challenge the sentencing, but he was convicted a year before and went fugitive. It may have even been an automatic sentence, but if not, the worst that will happen is he'll be re-sentenced, and probably to the same fate.

[Bake]

42. This was a sentencing hearing, not a trial

I see nothing to indicate that a mistrial would be proper. The guy was tried in absentia, when he failed to show up for trial.

Bake, Esq.

[George_S]

140. What!!! in absentia????

And no one is concerned about that? How is that possible? What about the Bill of Rights? Did they flush that in Texas?

No wonder the judge is celebrating.

[AMD_CPU]

155. because he absconded while the trial was ongoing...

He was there, and then, as the saying goes, fled justice.

[AMD_CPU]

154. Race probably wasn't an issue.

both defendant and judge were of the same race. I think the rancor stems from the fact that the judge was apparently very, very generous in giving him bail in the first place (he had sucessfully escaped from prison before while serving time for murdering his wife, which is generally seen as being indicative of the defendant being a flight risk) but when she gave him bail ane he bailed on her, I think that was not the smartest possible move on his part.

I think it was that the judge gave him every possible break in the book, and he responded by figuratively pissing in her face.

[w4rma]

11. That judge is cool. But, only if this didn't jepordize this case. (nt)

[TX-RAT]

44. It didn't.

[w4rma]

46. I've decided to retract my statement. Courts aren't the place for this.

And, imho, it does lessen the honor that courts should be given by throwing a party in one.

[jobycom]

18. I just can't help smiling about this

Right or wrong, it's amusing as hell!

[MatrixEscape]

19. Regardless of the case ...

That judge made a mockery of his courtroom and the system. If they judge has no respect or adherence to the decorum and the process, then are his other decisions rational?

In this case, the judge should have also dressed in full clown garp and makeup to underscore his own behavior.

[Walt Starr]

28. Precisely, the judge is a fool and should be disbarred for it

A court of law is a serious place. The mockery this judge made of the court of law flies in the face of over 200 years of jurist prudence.

He should be disbarred and humiliated for it, regardless of the case.

[Bake]

45. I'm telling ya, the judge will NOT get disbarred!

Ain't gonna happen. I'll bet $20 on it right now. You've got to screw up pretty bad to get disbarred, and believe me, this ain't it. The worst the judge will get is a reprimand, IF THAT MUCH!

Y'all need to read some REAL judicial horror stories. I'm not defending what the judge did here, but it's pretty minor in the scheme of things. Yes, it was unprofessional. Yes, it besmirched the decorum of the court. But it isn't an offense that merits disbarment or removal from the bench.

Bake

[saigon68]

124. Disbarred-- Removal from the Bench

a new sentencing for the defendant.

I never though too much of Texans---- but after watching the chimp as governator and reading a few of the posts from the Texas toothless wonders tonight .

I have a real case of a loose bowel tonite

So I am about to go to the bathroom and sit on my stool---- my cheeks a "Flexin" about to make another "Texan"

[TX-RAT]

47. disbarred for what?

Please explain exactly what law or laws you think she violated.

[Hobarticus]

51. You don't necessarily need to break laws to be disbarred... n/t

[TX-RAT]

53. Gonna have to explain that one to me.

[Hobarticus]

75. No, not really. Your mind's made up that this is acceptable.

[TX-RAT]

77. That we agree on.

[Hobarticus]

78. Speak for yourself. I don't find this acceptable at all.

[TX-RAT]

86. Seems you don't find answering questions acceptable either.

[Hobarticus]

90. Not at all...

From the ABA's website:

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/juddis/rule6.html

Model Rules for Judicial Disciplinary Enforcement
Section II. General Provisions
RULE 6. GROUNDS FOR DISCIPLINE; SANCTIONS IMPOSED; DEFERRED DISCIPLINE

Grounds for Discipline. The grounds for discipline are:
(1) any conduct constituting a violation of the {code of judicial conduct} or {rules of professional conduct} or other applicable ethics codes; or
(2) a willful violation of a valid order of the highest court, commission or panels of the commission in a proceeding under these Rules, a willful failure to appear personally as directed, or a knowing failure to respond to a lawful demand from a disciplinary authority.

Commentary
If a jurisdiction has determined that referees, mediators and arbitrators acting under the judicial branch are to be included under these Model Rules, then a violation of any ethics codes applicable to those positions would be grounds for discipline.

Removal and suspension are the most serious sanctions that can be imposed by the judicial discipline system. They can be imposed only by the highest court, and their use is appropriate when the respondent's misconduct demonstrates that the respondent is unfit to hold judicial office.

In many instances, however, judicial misconduct is of a lesser nature that does not require the judge's removal or suspension, either to protect the public or to preserve the integrity of the judiciary. The facts may indicate that the judge can continue to serve effectively with certain limitations (e.g., limitation to a specific court or docket or participation in a therapy, counseling or recovery program). In these cases, the commission should recommend, and the highest court should exercise its inherent authority to fashion, appropriate limitations and conditions.

[TX-RAT]

91. Once again, What law did the Judge violate?

What would you charge her with?

[Hobarticus]

93. Once again, a judge doesn't have to break a law to be disciplined

A judge's actions merely have to be construed as in violation of "rules of professional conduct".

A judge having a party in court may not be "breaking the law". But they violate "rules of professional conduct" in doing so, in that it's unprofessional and demeans the bench, and the judge can be removed for it.

Do you walk around your workplace doing whatever the hell you please? If not, then you follow rules of professional conduct, too.

I'd say that having a party in court celebrating someone's sentencing is certainly unprofessional and warrants disciplinary action. Having to send someone away isn't something to be celebrated as such, no matter what they did.

It's quite simple to understand. You can keep going on about 'what laws were broken' all you want, but it doesn't work that way.

You can have the last word.

[Bake]

113. No, she doesn't have to violate a law, VUT

She DOES have to violate one of the rules of professional conduct (to be disbarred as a lawyer) or one of the canons of judicial conduct.

You can jump and scream all you want to, but this is SMALL POTATOES in terms of judicial misconduct. Get your panties out of your crack. This judge will not be removed from the bench. A reprimand at most, if even that. I see this kind of stuff every day. If you're not a lawyer you probably need to STFU about this.

Bake, Esq.

[Walt Starr]

72. He violated court ethics

He made a mockery of the court and a lawyer CAN be disbarred for such a transgression.

[AverageJoe]

22. My guess is Freepers love this judge's behavior

I don't.

What a shameful and unprofessional display. My response has nothing to do with the guilt, innocence or sentencing of the convict. A "judge" like this has no buisness on the bench or even being a member of the bar, if you ask me.

[mac56]

23. I hope Judge Johnson enjoyed her little party.

Because I bet Williams gets to walk now due to this stunt.

[The Stranger]

24. Disturbingly Irresponsible and Undermining Confidence in the Bench.

[NorthernSpy]

25. contempt of court -- from the JUDGE!

A judge who forgets the dignity of her office clearly has no business continuing on as a judge. Evidently, some people haven't the slightest idea how to behave.

I'll bet that silly woman also wonders why there is 'so little respect in society today'. :eyes:


Mary

[chicagojoe]

26. Another piece of crap conservative.

And surprise, surprise !!!! It's in TEXAS!!!
With apologies to the small number of progressives in the South,
why does all of this nonsense and backward thinking occur down there???
Is it the water, or defective genetics???

[jobycom]

33. Good thing

No one ever gets beaten to death by cops in the north, eh?

[chicagojoe]

144. Nowhere NEAR as often as I hear about that crap out West...

...and down South. I'm not saying it never happens here. It happens in every corner of the world. My whole point was that up here, the
"cracker" sheriff, or "cowboy" sheriff, or "hangin' judge" characters would be laughed right out of town. There actually seems to be community support for these kinds of buffoons in some parts of this country. Don't take it so personally. I would presume that if you're on this site, you're not "one of them".

[Kagemusha]

27. No way this was cruel and unusual punishment. However..

It was behavior that serves to make a mockery of the court of law.

It's not enough to set the man free, but it's more than enough to give a reprimand not to do this again, and in extremis, strip the judge of his robes.

[Voltaire99]

31. I would have this judge removed from the bench.

The courts must never be a place for this kind of mockery, which is a short walk from wickedness. Judge Johnson has led a symbolic stoning.

And in Texas, of all places, with its long colorful history of mob violence and corruption on the bench, there should be a special awareness of the need for impartiality.

[TX-RAT]

48. strip the judge of his robes?

Once again what laws were broken.

[NorthernSpy]

57. that's not really the issue, TX

Once again what laws were broken.


The issue at hand is that of an officer of the court who broke decorum and behaved badly; most of us have contended that her actions harmed the dignity of the court, and that it might be wise to dismiss her from her position. Unless it is the case down in Texas that a judge may be debenched ONLY for lawbreaking, then your question is beside the point.

You've heard the phrase 'behavior unbecoming'? As in 'disciplinary action may be taken against the person who commits behavior unbecoming a student/employee/officeholder/whatever'?

Well, that's what's happened here.


Mary

[TX-RAT]

79. Since when is public humiliation

behavior unbecoming?

[manic expression]

119. It becomes

unacceptable when it is carried out IN A COURT. I would like to remind you that a court is supposed to uphold law at all times. Mocking and humiliating anyone, guilty or not, is absolutely wrong in court. This is an abomination of justice, law and truth. This judge should never be allowed in a court again.

[iverglas]

120. specifically, it's ...

"Since when is public humiliation
behavior unbecoming?"

... improper conduct, since Texas's Code of Judicial Conduct said so.

http://www.courts.state.tx.us/Judethics/canons.htm

http://www.courts.state.tx.us/Judethics/canons.htm#Canon3

B. Adjudicative Responsibilities.

(1) A judge shall hear and decide matters assigned to the judge except those in which disqualification is required or recusal is appropriate.

(2) A judge should be faithful to the law and shall maintain professional competence in it. A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor, or fear of criticism.

(3) A judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the judge.

(4) A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and should require similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control.

(5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice.

(formatting fixed)

[iverglas]

118. TX-RAT, my old friend

"Once again what laws were broken."

As so many people have tried to explain, that just isn't the question.

These are the rules that apply:

http://www.law.uh.edu/ethics/Judicial/judiccanons/indexb.html

(see my post way down at the bottom as well)

Rule 1:

... A judge should participate in establishing, maintaining and enforcing high standards of conduct, and should personally observe those standards so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary is preserved. ...

Apart from plainly having violated other more specific bits of the canons, she really just didn't do what that one calls on her to do.

[saigon68]

126. She is a Criminal in her own right her fame world wide

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/i_latestdetail.asp?id=23757



Dallas judge throws party for man before sending him to prison for life?

Before Williams was brought into the courtroom on Monday, Johnson directed gleeful courtroom staff members as they placed balloons and streamers around the courtroom. A colorful cake was decorated with "Welcome Home Billy Ray Williams."


"We're so excited to see you, we're throwing a party for you," Johnson told the fugitive.

[impe]

29. Unprofessional

and trivializes not only the bench but the victim as well as this slime ball's rights. Everyone wants to
be the court jester. News Flash, some of these back water towns have judges that only have GED equivalents, she made
her funny but it may cost everyone in the end.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

30. This is exactly on the same level as a certain former governor

publicly mocking a woman's plea for life shortly before her execution.

I don't recall anyone here approving THAT little moment in the sun...

[jobycom]

34. Umm....

Bush mocked Karla Faye Tucker AFTER her execution, and he mocked her directly for pleading for her life. I don't see the comparison.

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

38. ANYONE who mocks someone in handcuffs

just because they can, deserves the utmost in contempt. I don't give a flying fuck if it was before, after, or in the middle. It's a slap in the face of humanity and civility, and it pisses me off.

[seafey]

174. I agree totally. NT

[sui generis]

70. wait wait wait, this could be funny. is she one of us?

/nt

[jobycom]

108. No, she's a Repub. A rising star, the first AA judge, etc

I forget the full details, but she's an African American judge and a Republican, so the Repubs like her, because she is proof that some black people like them.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Az_lefty]

43. This guy deserves to be sentenced but...

this judges behavior is ridiculous. If she doesn't have respect for her own court, why should anyone else.

[Blue_Tires]

49. completely unprofessional

and a disservice to the legal system

[Copperred]

56. look what lucy is doing under the table....

There is something severely wrong in this country that this judge is not reprimanded.

And further...life in prison for choking your girlfriend?

gmab



remember americans..ur job is to save liberty....not to save your government

[Tight_rope]

60. Good for Judge Johnson. Williams is a bastard....

And fuck all of you who condemned the judge for actions. But it doesn't surprise me that we live in a country that would rather reward the criminal and punish the victim and the prosecutor.

[Almost_there]

65. But.. but.. the criminal's feelings might get hurt!

Don't you have to take into account William's feelings? He might need therapy in prison, since he was so hurt by the "welcome home" party! He needs a group hug, and maybe some counseling, and back into society.

I'm sorry, but, this guy is a convicted felon! He should be set free! Right into a jail cell free! Head out for your morning walk in the quad kind of free. I would prefer these guys be humiliated again and again if it prevents crime and prevents senseless death penalty cases.

Better alive and humiliated then dead and indigent.

[specter]

The issue is the judges actions

not the creep who choked his girlfriend

[Almost_there]

97. The judges actions are somewhat tasteless, yet poignent.

I do agree that the judge used poor judgement (haha) in this case, but, at the same time, the judge was making a point that this guy had been found guilty in prior crimes, had been found guilty of choking (attempted murder, perhaps? not specified in article) his girlfriend, had run from the law and was captured.. a little welcome home party for him. Tasteless, perhaps. But, I think the judge was trying to be funny in READING his judgement (which, since he was convicted and sentenced in absentia, had already been rendered, but, had not been announced to Mr. Williams) and it failed. I doubt he'll even be officially reprimanded, since it is his court, and the judge has so much lateral mobility in what goes on in his court of law. I know several judges and some of them have a heck of a sense of humor, usually with the attorneys, to the extent that I heard one judge actually ask an attorney if he got his law degree by mail order.

[specter]

66. sounds like

right wing mentality if you dont like someones response then say "fuck you" real intelligent and mature. It amazes me how many supposed democrats really crave to be repukes here. Your responses betray you!



FLAME THE FUCK AWAY!!!

[Tight_rope]

135. No...you sound like a repuke...

I'm just stating how I feel. As I said before. If you don't like if FUCK OFF. This is a free country remember.

[NorthernSpy]

74. my, what a dimwitted remark you've inflicted upon us

You spewed: And fuck all of you who condemned the judge for actions. But it doesn't surprise me that we live in a country that would rather reward the criminal and punish the victim and the prosecutor.


I am sure that if you will pay closer attention to what people here have said, you will notice that your commentary is as irrelevant and stupid as it is shrill and rude. No one has made a single move to "reward" the criminal or to "punish" his victim. And I don't think that the prosecutor -- whoever that was -- got much of a mention at all.

What we have done is to make it clear that we expect officers of the court to maintain a certain standard of behavior while they conduct the business of the court.

Or perhaps you might consider that an awfully, frightfully difficult thing to expect, even of a public official.


Mary

[sui generis]

85. you go girl! /nt

[specter]

89. Thanks MARY!!!!

:hi::toast:

[Tight_rope]

137. .

I know you must be blind and dumb because you had to bold and underline your statement. As I said before. Why should anyone be condemning a judge who is trying to keep our society safe of thugs. And if embarrassing them will keep them from doing the crime, better that, then a police office beating them. Sometimes harsh punishment doesn't do the trick. Try beating a child or time out. See which they hate more. It was a very good psychological move and I'm sure his follow inmates will never let him live it down.

[sui generis]

83. doink.

the sound of my finger snapping on top of your head. We don't say "fuck alla ya'll fer not agreein' with me" in here. It's rude.

Go back to free republic if you are that angry, otherwise, play nice.

[iverglas]

101. for this occasion

... I will present one of this week's awards outside J/PS, for which they are usually reserved, there being such a deserving field of candidates there most weeks.

"But it doesn't surprise me that we live in a country that would rather reward the criminal and punish the victim and the prosecutor."

Here ya go:


http://users.rcn.com/rostmd/winace/pics/

... on so many levels. I mean, just for starters, who was even talking about the victim or prosecutor? ... without even raising the question of who suggested rewarding the criminal ... .

[chimpy the poopthrower]

64. I'm pleasantly surprised by this thread.

I had expected more defenders of the judge's actions. I'm glad to see so many who realize that this cheapens the Court even if they don't have much sympathy to the man convicted of killing his girlfriend. If I were a relative of the woman killed, I would be horrified by this, even if it there was no possibility that it could affect the case or sentence.

I might add that judges are supposed to be concerned with (and give the appearance of being concerned with) justice, not revenge. This judge was pandering to the public.

[Copperred]

67. Did he killl or just choke and she survived?

Did he kill her or choke her and she lived?

IF he killed her I undestand the sentance... The theatrics of the Judge however under no circumstances can be justified and she should be put on probation.

[sui generis]

69. he choked her until she was unconscious

did he intend to kill her and she survived? That's the reasoning.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

73. Sorry, I read carelessly.

He choked her but did NOT kill her. I had no comment regarding the sentence, only the theatrics, as you said.

[AMD_CPU]

160. the woman he was on trial for attacking survived.

it was his wife that he killed and was convicted for killing previously.

[MatrixEscape]

84. Good discussion here!

I agree that the judge's actions may have not been illegal, but there is still the issue of decorum and what precedent it sets, right?

Firstly, if we accept this party as not worth censuring or reprisals, then what might be the next flagrant abuse? How far can a judge go in using the courtroom to make a point?

Secondly, is the courtroom the place where punishment is supposed to be given rather than determined? If we consider the idea of "humiliation" as punishment, then can we take another step and have other forms of punishment inside the courtroom rather than in traditional modes?

In other words is this not a mild form of judge, jury, executioner?

I would also ask here, who paid for the party dressings? Does that municipality allow for party decorations in a court of law as a justifiable expense?

[sui generis]

87. it's Dallas

they'll shoot ya here if'n ya ask too many qwershtuns.

[saigon68]

127. A rope and a few howling drunken Christians

And they might have Meeted out some justice to old Billy on the nearest oak tree.

[freebird04]

92. Definitely in poor taste

and not approrpriate for a judge but I think it's only deserving of a very serious reprimand, not disbarment. This judge obviously went a little ove the line but I think some poepl are missing something here.

With repeat offenders in a particular area, you'll find judges who have dealt with the same person repeatedly and, to some extent, have developed some sort of rapport with the perp. Thus, judges develop a personal relationship with certain repeat ofeenders. I suppose that had a lot to do with what wnet on here.

Obviously, what she did was an embarassment to her profession which deserves some sort of erprimand but before indcting her and calling for immediatedisbarment, I think it would be approiriate to view this in light of hor general behavior over the course of her tenure.

What gets me is judges like the WA state Supreme Court judge, who while driving at almost twice the legal limit, not only comitted a DUI but also cimmitted a hit and run and was only stopped when another driver pinned her in so she couldn't leave. This, IMO, is inexcusable for any judge, much less a SC judge. She did not have th common decency to step down. What she did ENDANGERED LIVES willfully and far exceeds throwing a party in court for a repeat offender.

[Fleshdancer]

96. All the odd Judge stories come out of Texas

and as a Texan, this bothers me. What ever happened to just knowing and upholding the laws? Why all the theatrics? You wanna be funny? Fine. Become a clown, do stand-up... but just get off the bench already.

[Orangepeel]

98. what a sick freak this judge is

Without knowing the facts about the case, I'll assume the worst about the perpetrator and say that he's way more of a sick freak. That wouldn't excuse a judge for being perverted enough to take pleasure in this tragedy.

Again, assuming the worst, it is horrible that a woman was choked unconscious. It's horrible that a person could be depraved enough to do it. It's horrible that the best thing society can do in an effort to prevent terrible crimes is throw the criminal in a hole for the rest of his life. The whole thing is a tragedy, not something to be joyful about.

Sentencing a man to life in prison, even if he deserved it in the worst way, is hardly a cause for celebration.

on edit: this reminds me of bush's second debate with Al Gore, where he smirked about not being able to execute James Byrd's murderers more than once. That whole incredibly awful tragedy was a very tragic, very serious event. Justice done should offer closure, and maybe even some satisfaction, but that wasn't a situation to be gleeful about.

[iverglas]

100. oh look (have you folks no curiosity? no google?)

If somebody's said this before me, I apologize for missing it.

http://politicalgraveyard.com/geo/TX/female.I-K.html
("The Internet's Most Comprehensive Source of U.S. Political Biography, or, The Web Site That Tells Where the Dead Politicians are Buried")

Faith Johnson Republican. Presidential Elector for Texas, 1992. Female. Still living as of 1992.

Gosh, do you think it could be the same Faith Johnson?

Texas Presidential Electors, 1992

Electors Meeting, probably on December 14, 1992
President - 32 votes cast for George Bush
Vice President - 32 votes cast for Dan Quayle

http://www.texasgop.org/convention/committees.php

Congressional District Caucus Chairmen
... 30 Faith Johnson

Okay, maybe it isn't the same Faith Johnson (after all, there's a Michael Moore on that list, too ...)

But I kinda think it is:

http://www.wfaa.com/sharedcontent/washington/washington/rconvention/delegates/tx/stories/wfaa040902_jml_1700delegates.dae4aaef.html

Texas delegates ready for big moment

Republican National Convention

The Texas delegation is easy to spot. Every night, Dallas Judge Faith Johnson and other delegates wear different matching outfits. They've saved their showiest cowboy look for President Bush's big night.

I don't think this judge got elevated to the bench by appealing to liberal sentiments. (Up here, judges are "elevated" from the bar by appointment. Down there, they're elected, right?)

This here isn't just a casual Republican. This here is a real, to-the-core, inner-circle Republican:

http://www.tialumni.org/new/story_adler.asp

Dot was part of a convoy of members from the Dallas Downtown Republican Women's Club that attended the event; others traveling with her were Alicia Alvarez, Doris Collins, Sandy Denton, Judge Faith Johnson, Mary Silva and Patricia Van Winkle.

And really, just not one of those wimpy John McCain Republicans, either:

http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2002-06-14/pols_capitol.html

... God, Country, and a Free Ride

That episode was hardly concluded when the convention began wrapping itself in the flag, the cross, and what the faithful like to call "mainstream values," including such charming novelties as the declaration that what Texas needs is an all-Christian judiciary. As reported Sunday by Ken Herman, the Saturday morning prayer rally devoted specifically to that purpose featured Dallas District Judge Faith Johnson proclaiming, "Father, draw the unsaved judges unto you. Then, and only then, Father, will they be able to truly be the righteous judges that you would have us to be." Afterward, Johnson conceded that such a measure, however desirable, is not quite yet legally enforceable, and party chair Susan Weddington backed off a bit further: "I recommend it very strongly to people, but I'm not going to force them into it." If there were other doubters, Stuart Lane, board member of the rally's sponsor, the Texas Christian Coalition, made the morning's agenda crystal clear: "We are praying to the only way to God; that is Jesus Christ." ...

And I gotta tell ya ... if I found myself approving of just about anything that she or anybody like her did, I'd be taking a good luck at myself in the mirror and considering some serious plastic surgery. Because I don't think I'd be looking very liberal/democratic/Democratic/progressive ... .

[iverglas]

115. ^^^^ the judge is a GOP hack!!! (and here are the actual rules)

Doesn't anyone think that her political history might be the tiniest bit relevant to her behaviour? Or to an informed, intelligently sceptical person's view of that behaviour?

I mean -- the behaviour in question having been so inappropriate that it would beyond question have led to a complaint to, and an investigation by, the Canadian Judicial Council, where I'm at, and beyond question have led to a finding that the judge in question "failed in the due execution of that office".

That's what my legislation has to say about (federally-appointed) judges (the equivalent to her position, here).

Here's a bit of actual info about complaints against members of the Texas judiciary:

http://www.law.uh.edu/ethics/Judicial/complaints/howfile.html

And here are the actual Texas Canons of Judicial Conduct:

http://www.law.uh.edu/ethics/Judicial/judiccanons/indexb.html

Always handy things to know about when discussing such matters, I'd think.

How about this one?

http://www.law.uh.edu/ethics/Judicial/judiccanons/canon3.html

Canon 3

Performing the duties of Judicial Office Impartially and Diligently

... (3) A judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the judge.

(4) A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity, and should require similar conduct of lawyers, and of staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control.

(5) A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice. ...

I'd have some questions about this judge and certain other judicial canons ... like Canon 5:

Refraining From Inappropriate Political Activity.

A judge or judicial candidate shall not authorize the public use of his or her name endorsing another candidate for any public office, except that either may indicate support for a political party. A judge or judicial candidate may attend political events and express his or her views on political mattes in accord with this Canon and Canon 3(B)(10). ...

(edited to elucidate in the header)

[AMD_CPU]

161. Question:

Would an "average" judge in Canada likely grant bail for a convicted felon with a history of escaping from custody? Would it matter if the defendant was on trial for a charge that had a possible penalty that would put the defendant in prison for the rest of his natural life?

I know nothing about the Canadian criminal justice system, and am asking in all seriousness.

I'm pretty sure that no judge around here would be so kind, and I'm not even in Texas.

Thanks for your time.

[iverglas]

181. Question??

"Would an 'average' judge in Canada likely grant bail for a convicted felon with a history of escaping from custody? Would it matter if the defendant was on trial for a charge that had a possible penalty that would put the defendant in prison for the rest of his natural life?"

What on earth does this have to do with anything I said? Or with the issues being discussed in this thread?

Here's one for you:


http://users.rcn.com/rostmd/winace/pics/

Should you wish to satisfy your curiosity about bail ("judicial interim release") in Canada, you can read the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code:
http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec515.html

-- here's an excerpt:

Justification for detention in custody

515. ... (10) For the purposes of this section, the detention of an accused in custody is justified only on one or more of the following grounds:

(a) where the detention is necessary to ensure his or her attendance in court in order to be dealt with according to law;

(b) where the detention is necessary for the protection or safety of the public, including any victim of or witness to the offence, having regard to all the circumstances including any substantial likelihood that the accused will, if released from custody, commit a criminal offence or interfere with the administration of justice; and

(c) on any other just cause being shown and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, where the detention is necessary in order to maintain confidence in the administration of justice, having regard to all the circumstances, including the apparent strength of the prosecution's case, the gravity of the nature of the offence, the circumstances surrounding its commission and the potential for a lengthy term of imprisonment.

And an overview for the layperson I've come up with for you:
http://www.brooksandmarshall.com/bail.html

Now, back to our sheep -- on the topic of the thread and what I said about the Canadian Judicial Council, you can always read some of its decisions:

http://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/
http://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/article.asp?id=2286
-- seems to be an incomplete list; the annual reports may provide more info:
http://www.cjc-ccm.gc.ca/article.asp?id=2323

[AMD_CPU]

190. Thanks.

I really wasn't trying to bring up a red herring. I asked the question trying to get to the underlying reason the judge took his FTA so personally. She granted him bail during the trial, despite his previous escape from prison, and his murder of one woman and the supposed attempted murder of another that he was on trial for. My theory is that she tried to give him every possible chance, and took offense when he abused that trust.

Going by what you so generously posted, it sounds like a Judge in Canada would have no problem with holding him in custody until after trial, both as a flight risk based on his previous escape from custody and as a risk to the general populace in that he'd already killed one woman and was accused of trying to kill another.

[iverglas]

192. oh

"My theory is that she tried to give him every possible chance, and took offense when he abused that trust."

What you might need to recall is that the job description for "judge" does not include taking offence. That's, like, kinda the prime directive for judges: thou shalt be impartial. Thou shalt not have a personal interest in the cases that come before you, whether it be a pecuniary interest in the outcome or a desire to save thine own face or to cover thine own ass or to satisfy thine own personal needs, desires or sense of fair play.

Your theory might also be reworked along something like these lines:

She boobed rather badly by granting this individual bail, and feared for her political life if she didn't perform some grandstanding feat of légerdemain to shift public attention away from her lapse of judgment and over to the individual's awful badness and her own (if self-proclaimed) moral outrage at it.

[AMD_CPU]

193. yeah, OK, i'll buy that.

:)

[SahaleArm]

102. Why assume the judge to be a man?

Faith Johnson
363rd Criminal District Court

http://www.dallasbar.com/judiciary/profiles.asp?item=54

[Laelth]

104. Everyone's missing the point ...

Judges are elected in TX. If I had to guess, this was nothing less than a re-election stunt. Bet she'll win on it too.

And for those of you who are angry that the convicted criminal will probably go free, you must realize it's the Repuke judge's fault. If she had done her duty and shown respect for the judicial system, the guy would be in jail. Instead, she basically let the guy out just to insure her re-election.

That is unacceptable, and yes, she should be disbarred for making a mockery of the courts. And for the last time ... you don't have to commit a crime to get disbarred.

:mad:

-Laelth

[SahaleArm]

105. Appointed not Elected

Judge Johnson can also be considered a pioneer of sorts. She was the first African-American woman to be appointed to the position of State Criminal District Judge in Texas. She was also the first African-American to attain the position of Chief Felony Prosecutor over the child abuse unit in the Dallas County District Attorney’s office in 1987. For her efforts, she was awarded the Trailblazer Award from the South Dallas Business and Professional Womens Club in 1990. She’s received numerous other leadership and community service awards from various groups in and around Dallas.

http://www.dallasbar.com/judiciary/profiles.asp?item=54

[Laelth]

106. She may have been appointed initially ...

as often happens when, for example, a judge dies or resigns mid-term, but I'm pretty sure all TX state judges are elected.

I'll check and make sure.

-Laelth

[Laelth]

112. I found a Dallas County Sample Ballot

and it's clear that State Criminal District Judges, like Johnson, are elected in Texas, but I can't find her name on the ballot anywhere. Perhaps she's not running for re-election, which might explain why she felt she could get away with this. Perhaps it was merely a personal vendetta. Either way, her conduct was inappropriate, and she should be censured.

Here's the ballot: http://www.dalcoelections.org/nov22004/UnofficialSampleballot.htm

-Laelth

[mountainvue]

107. This is disgraceful. This woman

should be made to leave the bench.

[Bake]

114. Seems to be a lot of "experts" (i.e. nonlawyers) here

Who are making pronouncements about who should be disbarred, and what it takes to get disbarred.

No, you don't have to violate a law. But you DO have to violate either (a) the Rules of Professional Conduct -- to get disbarred, or (b) the canons of judicial conduct -- to get removed.

I'll bet everybody here $20, right now, this judge doesn't get EITHER disbarred or removed from the bench. Not in Texas. Not in any state in the Union. At most, a reprimand.

Bake

[Laelth]

117. You may be right.

But don't expect me to be happy about it.

Couldn't find Texas's Canons, but here's one from Virginia:

Canon 2

A Judge Shall Avoid Impropriety
and the Appearance of Impropriety
in All the Judge's Activities.

A. A judge shall respect and comply with the
law and shall act at all times in a manner that
promotes public confidence in the integrity and
impartiality of the judiciary.

Her conduct was not very impartial.

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--added the canon.

[Zayin]

116. Why am I not surprised this happened in Texas?

[Downtown Hound]

121. There are a lot of idiots on this thread

No one is defending what this man did but to turn a courtroom into a celebration at a sentencing is stupid, backwards, childish, and degrading, not only for the prisoner but for our society as well. Judges are supposed to be impartial and professional, treating everyone with respect. I don't want to live in a country that degenerates to this level, and as I've said before on threads regarding the stupidity of Texas as a state, I'm glad I don't live in Texas.

To all you people who are cheering this judge, grow the fuck up!

[saigon68]

125. This will result in removal for the Judge and

a new sentencing for the defendant.

I never though too much of Texans---- but after watching the chimp as governator and reading a few of the posts from the Texas toothless wonders tonight .

I have a real case of a loose bowel tonite

So I am about to go to the bathroom and sit on my stool---- my cheeks a "Flexin" about to make another "Texan"

[AMD_CPU]

159. Do you understand what goes on at a sentencing hearings?

The guy showed up to hear his sentence read. There was no adjudication done.

I've seen a fair number of judges joke and kid around in the courtroom while court was in session. I've seen them actually joke while there was testimony going on. And it's a stupid, STUPID person that doesn't laugh at the judge's joke, much less pipes up with "Your Honor, you're making a mockery of the court!"

[Downtown Hound]

180. Oh yeah

It's a really stupid person that thinks that when a life sentence is handed down there should maybe be a little professionalism in the courtroom.

And I think there is a little bit of a difference between making a few jokes and throwing a party in mockery of a sentencing. And it's a stupid, STUPID person that can't see the difference. And you know what, I don't really give a fuck what other judges have done because I'm talking about this one. And what this one did was completely unprofessional.

[TroubleMan]

122. The judge was totally out of line.

The judge is supposed to be impartial.

If I'm not involved in the case, then I can celebrate locking up this scumbag - otherwise remain somber and impartial.

THE COURT IS A PLACE OF LAW, NOT A PLACE OF RIDICULE.

I don't care how bad the guy is or how heinous his crimes are - you don't do this shit.

[Zhade]

131. Justice is supposed to be blind, not emotional.

I think this is perhaps not the kind of thing that should be encouraged, no matter how sleazy the guy is.

Judges are supposed to be fair and impartial. This kind of behavior does not fall under that category.

[IChing]

132. UPDATE

AP

Seana Willing, executive director of the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct, said she found the incident troubling. "It's the kind of thing I look at and scratch my head and wonder, `What was she thinking?'" Willing said.

She questioned whether the party violated standards of decorum and impartiality.
snip....

Willing said the commission will investigate if a complaint is filed, or can decide on its own to look into the matter. Judges found guilty of misconduct face a range of discipline, from private admonition to removal from the bench.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PRISON_SENDOFF?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

From the guy that started this thread

[JSJ]

134. fuck decorum- this is murka!

[UL_Approved]

139. Eric Cartman, attorney at law...

Yes, people, we have a good ol' case of compassionate conservatism in our hands here. We all know that everybody gets brought to court because they are guilty. Why shouldn't this man be treated as the sub-human garbage he is?

****************************
For those who agree with the above statement, please report to the admins immediately so that your account can be terminated.

For those on the fence, please refer to several sources:

The Green Mile
Cool Hand Luke
The Hurricane
any given episode of South Park

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

141. Isn't it really amusing how this kind of shenanigans never fail to bring

all the Punishist Porn Perverts out of the woodwork?

[MisterP]

142. like animal-rights discussions bring out the Chuck Graner in folks

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

143. Please enlighten the furrinah. Who's Chuck Graner? (nt)

[saigon68]

145. Here Chuck Graner and his "PET CORPSE"

He's the idiot that likes to torture the Iraqi POWS

[AMD_CPU]

146. some more facts for you:

http://theparisnews.com/texasstory.lasso?WCD=132826

[saigon68]

152. These facts indicate the Moran Judge is a Freaking Religious nut case

I wonder if she will allow the defendant a pie of pie before she sentences him to death. Or some other bizarre behavior.

This is like the referee getting in the game to kick the extra point. Obviously this idiot Judge is a "Head Case"

The fact she was appointed as a black woman to be a judge in 1989 illustrates the fact that there a few mentally ill blacks in positions of authority in Texas


But after all the mold has been set with Rice and Colon Bowel 2 very flawed human beings who sold their souls to the DEVIL a long time ago.

[AMD_CPU]

157. If she were a "law and order" judge...

she wouldn't have given him bail in the first place. She probably shouldn't have given him bail, period, due to his previous escape.

[Gore1FL]

156. While thrilled this guy is behind bars

The judge overstepped the line.

If I have to stand up to honor a judge, they need to honor that same courtroom decorum.

[anarchy1999]

162. Nothing but an outright embarassement, I'm ashamed for Dallas.

I'll be making many calls in the morning. I am so sorry for this.

Guilty is guilty, but to throw down a party and be proud of it? I'm lost!

[depakid]

163. Some of the posts here are DISGUSTING

some of you really make me sick. You don't know what the facts of this case really are- yet that doesn't seem to bother you. The fact that this defendant was tried in absentia also doesn't seem to bother you, not does the fact that this judge is making a mockery out of the seriousness of situation and the decorum of the courtroom.

I would expect some of this kind of shit from freerepublic- after all, they're some pretty sick puppies and don't know any better- then again, apparently neither do some of you.

[freebird04]

165. What's wrong with trying someone in absentia?

What's your beef here? Since the defendent skipped bail, isn't it obvious to you that the defendent was given the opportunity to present his case but instead chose to flee.

Put yourself in a victim's shoes. The court tells you: "Your attacker refuses to come to court so we cannot prsoecute him."

Should people be let off because they refuse to appear at their own trials? I think not.

[jayfish]

168. Ever Heard Of The Right To Confront...

ones accuser? You don't give up that right simply because you are not around to take advantage of it. How would this work for terror trials?
"Sorry Mr. Brown Skin, you had a trial today, but since the government wouldn't let you attend we convicted you in absentia? As far as putting myself in the victims shoes goes; is it the courts job to comfort accusers or prosecute justice? There is no victim until a guilty verdict is reached. And finally, I don't recall anyone saying criminals should be "let off" because they did not show up for their court hearing. Thats a bit of a false dichotomy, don't ya think? He shows up for court or he "gets off"? I've got to go with the kid on this one.

Jay

[Bake]

178. The govt. wouldn't LET him attend??? NOT!

Does anybody here pay any attention to the facts? The state of Texas did NOT prevent him from attending his own trial! HE HIT THE ROAD, JACK!! He was out on bail and skipped out on his own trial, on his own initiative. When a person does that, YES, HE/SHE CAN BE TRIED IN ABSENTIA!

Good grief.

Bake, Esq.

[jayfish]

179. I Know It's Hard Work, But Try Reading The Post Again.

Read it for comprehension this time ...JACK!!

Jay

[bloom]

194. I think you are the one who needs to read.

Or maybe you don't get it - that if a person voluntarily does not go to their own trial - that's their own fault.

[Hobarticus]

182. Ever try Valium, Bake?

You seem wound a little tight these days.

[Bake]

196. I am wound a bit tight, yes. No on the Valium

It irritates me that people are making waaaaaaaay more of this than it is -- calling for disbarment, removal from the bench, etc. As much as I disagree with what this judge did, it is not grounds for removal or disbarment. I've seen far worse as a lawyer, believe me.

And yeah, I'm wound a little tight this close to Nov. 2.

Bake

[Hobarticus]

200. Relax, brother. We're all friends here.

Bear with us, we don't know the decorum and 'rules of conduct' of the courts as well as you might.

[AMD_CPU]

191. not only that...

but he fled after jeopardy had attached.

[George_S]

198. It depends on if he was present for the beginning of the trial

FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

X. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Rule 43. Presence of the Defendant.

(a) Presence required. The defendant must be present at the arraignment, at the time of the plea, at every stage of the trial including the impaneling of the jury and the return of the verdict, and at the imposition of sentence, except as otherwise provided by this rule.

(b) Continued presence not required. The further progress of the trial to and including the return of the verdict, and the imposition of sentence, will not be prevented and the defendant will be considered to have waived his right to be present whenever a defendant, initially present at trial, or having pleaded guilty or nolo contendere,

(1) is voluntarily absent after the trial has commenced (whether or not the defendant has been informed by the court of the obligation to remain during the trial),

(2) in a noncapital case, is voluntarily absent at the imposition of sentence, or

(3) after being warned by the court that disruptive conduct will cause the removal of the defendant from the courtroom, persists in conduct which is such as to justify exclusion from the courtroom.

(c) Presence not required. A defendant need not be present:

(1) when represented by counsel and the defendant is an organization, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 18;

(2) when the offense is punishable by fine or by imprisonment for not more than one year or both, and the court, with the written consent of the defendant, permits arraignment, plea, trial, and imposition of sentence in the defendant's absence;

(3) when the proceeding involves only a conference or hearing upon a question of law; or

(4) when the proceeding involves a correction of sentence under Rule 35.





http://www.gamb.uscourts.gov/fedr/frcr9x84.htm

[KingChicken]

164. Loss of respect, unprofessional

I think regardless of the person in question that we have a duty to conduct life altering affairs of state in a dignified professional manner, lest we lose respect for the courts. The sentence is the agreed upon punishment, I don’t recall humiliation as a key part of our justice system; otherwise we are really no better than an archaic civilization.

[impe]

167. Alas,

Judge Faith at a loss of whether to bake or masturbate.

[patcox2]

171. Absolutely, indisputably a violation of judicial ethics.

And I am not an un-informed non-lawyer.

Ridiculing and humiliating a prisoner is also a violation of recognized UN human rights priniciples.

In reported cases in the US, judges have been admonished merely for failure to stop other people, members of the public, from ridiculing or taunting a prisoner or defendant. For the judge to engage in such behavior himself or herself is so far beyond the pale it is hard to find a case where it happened.

Here is a section of a typical state code of judicial ethics:

"The purpose of judicial proceedings is to ascertain the truth. Such proceedings should be conducted with fitting dignity and decorum, in a manner conducive to undisturbed deliberation, indicative of their importance to the people and to the litigants, and in an atmosphere that bespeaks the responsibilities of those who are charged with the administration of justice. NMRA 1986 23-104(A).

The requirement that judges be impartial dictates that parties and their attorneys be treated respectfully, and that a dignified atmosphere prevail in court. A judge's demeanor is crucial to maintaining impartiality, because it is what others see. Improper demeanor can undermine the judicial process by conveying an impression of bias or indifference. "A judge's courtroom conduct symbolizes the law in action. . . ." In addition to demonstrating bias, disrespectful behavior toward a litigant infringes on the litigant's right to be heard and compromises the dignity and decorum of the courtroom. Lack of courtesy also affects litigants' satisfaction with the handling of their cases and creates a negative impression of courts in general."

Thats from New Mexico's code of judicial ethics; it happened to be readily available on the internet. I am certain that Texas has an identical provision.

There is no question about this whatsoever. It was a violation of the law (the codes of judicial conduct are laws). It was judicial misconduct. I will be extremely surprised if she is not removed from the bench.

How anyone can support this disgusting behavior is beyond me. justice is not prejudice, your personal strong emotional reaction against the crime has nothing to do with justice. It is in fact a form of prejudice. Justice is not revenge.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

172. Here is the problem with what this judge did...

Despite what some here are trying to pretend, no one is feeling sorry for the guy who choked his girlfriend. It is wrong to use humiliation as a punishment, but that is not even what this is about. The guy got life imprisonment. Do you really think he cares whether the judge hurt his feelings on the day of sentencing? The point is that this judge was putting on a show to pander to the voting public. Most people would agree she screwed up in the first place by letting this guy out on bail. Now she is trying to cover up her own incompetence by putting on a show. She has turned her courtroom into a joke. The next person who goes in there -- who may very well be innocent -- is going to have to wonder whether the judge will be more interested in seeing that justice is served or in making herself look good to the voting public. And this stunt did nothing in the way of reparations for the guy's victim. In fact, if I were the victim I'd be pretty PO'ed that the judge would make a big joke out of someone almost killing me. If this judge can't behave like a grown-up and a professional, she doesn't belong on the bench. And I don't need to be a legal expert to say that. I'm not a medical ethics expert either, but I know it's wrong for a doctor to hit on a patient.

[mac56]

175. Excellent point.

I think you've gotten to the heart of the matter.

[saigon68]

177. Kick

[gatlingforme]

186. The judge has much discretion in her courtroom. This guy has

had a rap sheet since the 1970's. WHat she did could have had something to do with politics... but there are plenty of judges that do far worse than she. So your point is taken but in the big picture she really did not do anything wrong.

[saigon68]

189. This creepy political appointee would be removed in Wisconsin

Here are the rules . She would be on her way to being removed and probable License revocation. SHE IS AN IDIOT See Judge Lynch above.

She is like that Crazy Judge Moore from Alabama

SCR CHAPTER 60

CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

JUDICIAL COUNCIL COMMITTEE'S NOTE, 1979: The following rules, called the code of judicial ethics, govern the members of the Wisconsin judiciary. These rules were originally adopted by the supreme court on November 14, 1967, effective January 1, 1968. They were amended on June 28, 1974; December 23, 1977, March 16, 1978; March 28, 1978; and November 20, 1979. The rules were originally numbered standards 1 to 16 and rules 1 to 17. They have been clarified and numbered 60.001 to 60.19 for uniformity and convenience.

http://www.wicourts.gov/html/rules/CHAP60.htm

SCR 60.04 A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially and diligently.

The judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge's other activities. The judge's judicial duties include all the duties of the judge's office prescribed by law.



b) A judge shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it. A judge may not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear of criticism.

(c) A judge shall require order and decorum in proceedings before the judge.

(d) A judge shall be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals in an official capacity and shall require similar conduct of lawyers, staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control. During trials and hearings, a judge shall act so that the judge's attitude, manner or tone toward counsel or witnesses does not prevent the proper presentation of the cause or the ascertainment of the truth. A judge may properly intervene if the judge considers it necessary to clarify a point or expedite the proceedings

[seafey]

173. We don't even know the whole story...

I've seen the criminal called a slime, and assertions that he deserves the humiliation, blah blah blah... But none of us have any idea of the entire case- what was the defense? Is this man mentally ill? Was he supposed to be on meds? No one is asking these questions- why? Maybe someone did ask it- maybe I missed it.

I think even if this was a deserved sentence (life, that is) that mocking a convicted criminal goes way beyond what's appropriate. Extreme Akim is for TV- it's not supposed to be what you find in the supposed "Halls of Justice"!

[samtob]

204. He murdered his late wife, and had been

in and out of the legal system since the 70's.

Not quite sure why the life sentence, someone familiar with Texas law would better answer that question. Could they take into account the fact that he had murdered his former wife in this sentencing?

[rocktivity]

183. While I don't think this qualifies as grounds for a new trial

unprofessional behavior is unprofessional behavior, officially codified or not. And I'm sure the judge wouldn't hesitate to come down like a ton of bricks on any lawyer in her court who pulled a stunt like this.

:headbang:
rocknation

[Endangered Specie]

185. Wish they would send the victim a piece of cake and some balloons.

Reminds me of 9th grade the teach would play a melody on a music box on a when he wrote someone out of class into In school suspension, we all laughed :)

[Bo]

187. Leave it to Jack @$$ Texans

to make a mockery of the USA all over the world

[reprobate]

188. Can a state involuntarily secceed?

[Maddy McCall]

195. I love it!

Brilliant!!

[bloom]

197. It has been interesting to see the range of outrage....

I am sure it is far better for judges and courts to pretend to be neutral.

But nobody should doubt that when legal professionals sentence murderers and rapists to long jail terms - most are probably "having a party" whether it is visible or not.

Disdain for others is best kept under wraps, however - even if it seems justified - because we don't want the Judges, etc. to seem to disdain society as much as the criminal has proven that he/she does.

I do have to take issue with those who would suggest that "having a party" is any way comparable to killing or nearly killing ones wife or anyone else - or like cops committing rape. :wtf:

[George_S]

199. No, "having a party" is compared to a lynching party

Most judges, I don't think, are glad they are sentencing someone to death or to life in prison. Most would rather the case never happened in the first place. Many people suffer throughout. The original victim and his/her family, the defendant's family, the expense to the court and the expense of incarceration. No one is glad all that is happening and only a sadist would think it reason the celebrate.

The comparison to cops committing rape is in reference to those in power who rape under color of authority. The argument is that without professional conduct that is more likely.

The first google example:

http://www.spr.org/en/news/2004/0205-1.html

The sadistically indignant are incapable of granting dignity. That is a flaw, not a virtue.

[bloom]

202. Sure we would like life on earth to be a utopia

where no one ever hurt anyone else and no one was ever humiliated.

That is not the world we live in.

I suppose it seems horrible - the idea that after months of trial preparations and the trial itself and so on and so forth that people would be relieved that it was over and that the criminal actions ( at least those actions of a free person out in society) would end with the person being incarated.

I think - that the people involved can feel happy as well as horrible at the same time. Happy that it's over. And sympathetic that the person has ruined his own life as well as other lives.


I suppose - where I'm coming from is that I think people expect everyone - especially judges to be perfect - as if they are gods. This was mentioned recently in a show I saw about the Supreme Court case where Bush was annointed.

Judges aren't gods. They are people.

I think a lot of people want to believe in the illusion.

[George_S]

207. utopia?

Expecting judges to live up to what they preach is a utopia? If a judge cannot at least pretend to be impartial, he/she should not be a judge and probably isn't impartial.

Maybe the police and prosecution could have reason to celebrate, but not in the courtroom. We would expect the judge to be the one to pound the gavel if they did.

No wonder most judges are ex prosecutors.

[IChing]

201. I started this post

and I don't understand that my related post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=935137&mesg_id=935137
did not generate one twentieth the responce about the ending of a man's life
in the Texas "justice" system

[samtob]

203. I think the party was out of line, but

this guy had done time before for KILLING his wife.

He is obviously an abusive individual. The judge stated she felt her actions were warranted by stating

<snip>The judge said about 4 million U.S. women a year are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners, and some 30 percent of female murder victims in this country are slain by their husbands or boyfriends.

"When these kind of stats begin to shrink, then we'll have cause to celebrate," she said. "Until then, this man's recapture — particularly in national domestic violence month — sends the message that the law is against domestic violence."
</snip>

I cannot argue with her statement, I don't think anyone here would either.

Does the fact that he had murdered his wife prior to this assault change anyone's mind about the judges conduct?

on edit, grammer issues

[eyeswideopened]

205. I wonder if the Judge is from Crawford?