I prefer informed decisions on policy. YMMV.
1 Like
District or State Attorneyās office first, I would think. Unless the judge is federally appointed, in which case I think that goes to the DoJ.
5 Likes
Iām not sure anyone needs to warn a defender about passionately defending a client.
Iām not sure passion belongs in the courtroom. Not in real-life courtrooms.
You are entitled to your opinion of the contempt charge, but Iām sure a lot of people would disagree with you.
Judges are the alphas of the courtroom. Ideally, they should be fair but firm, just as a parent or dog owner should be, and for the same reason. Only one person can be in charge in the courts, and everybody else needs to know that in no uncertain terms. Allowing a little leeway to a āpassionateā defender may only encourage them to go a little further next time.
From the article:
Thereās been a progression of steps in the courtroom where Iāve tried to let her know itās not proper decorum for her to continue to talk over me or interrupt me after sheās already made her argument,ā he said. āOnce an argument is made, then you have to allow the judge to respond, so thereās a clear record, and you shouldnāt be interrupting the judge as the judge is making a ruling. ā¦ Iāve been trying to work with her. And today it just spilled over to where I thought, Well, clearly sheās not understanding what Iām trying to tell her.
3 Likes
He denied a defendant the right to counsel. Thereās no distinction between different parts of the trial process.
(IANAL either, but I played one at an investment banking firm when I was youngerā¦I wish I were kidding)
7 Likes
How did handcuffing her shut her mouth?
I couldnāt help but notice that he refers to everyone by their first names. Itās an authoritarian move, meant to show dominance and importance.
8 Likes
Thanks for the info @chgoliz
I totally get that. We are setup to create authoritarians at every step so I really do understand why you might think like that. We excuse things like violations of basic human rights, murder, violence, and the like all in the name of authority. This is why cops are allowed to murder people and get paid vactions and why judges feel free to sentence without a trial. We made them the authority and we have been taught to defer to authority in all cases.
Me, I come from an earlier generation when question authority was rule #1. We had it in textbooks, television, and t-shirts so I guess it sunk in. We were told authority was granted and could be taken away by the people whenever it suited us. It was a more elegant way for a more civilized time.
7 Likes
I donāt know, but:
The judge said he thought handcuffing the lawyer may cure the problem. āAnd it did. We went on with the rest of the calendar, and everything was fine.ā
Iāve been avoiding reading the news articles about this, because I just didnāt want to get into the muck of southwestern politics/law, but youāre making me think it might be an entertaining read!
I wonder, is it the audacity or the fear that shut her up?
1 Like
Some authority figure do abuse their power and should be punished harshly when caught. However, simply having authority does not make one an abuser or an āauthoritarian.ā
Question authority? Certainly, and hold their feet to the fire. When a law is broken, work to fix it.
I do not see this case as an authoritarian issue, I see it as an order issue. Like it or not, enforced order is pretty much required to make society function. Our species is weak that way. The defender broke the rules of the court and got slapped.
While it sounds unfair for the defendant, I do not know enough about the case or the relevant laws or statutes to say.
3 Likes
It was out of order. She was interrupting the judge to make an argument literally out of the proper order that a court trial goes through. Each side makes an argument then the court responds. Sheād had the chance to make the mitigating argument before the sentence was decided.
As for charging her thatās an extreme reaction when all thatās really needed is to just stymie the interruptions so that the sentence can be announced. At that point thereās little a defense can do anyways, all the evidence and mitigating arguments are made before then and after the sentence is handed out the defendant is taken away for whatever sentence was decided.
3 Likes
You misunderstand me and thatās my fault Iām sure. An authoritarian is not one with authority or one who abuses it, but rather one who defers to it and one who believes authority to be correct.
When we defend the practice of contempt of court charges and sentences without trial so that the judge may have order, we are acting as authoritarians. When we give vacation to cops who murder and refuse to press charges, we are acting as authoritarians.
Agreed upon order is required. I invite you to learn about restorative justice and the power of preventative measure.
See? Thatās a perfect example of the authoritarian mind. Instead of erring on the side of the powerless people, you chose to err on the side of authority citing your ignorance of the case. In other words, you have deferred to the judgment of those in power rather than stand for those without it.
You have more information than I do it seems. I see nothing about her arguments being out of the proper order. I did see that he took away a personās right to counsel. Where do you see that this was simply the judge trying to speak the sentence?
1 Like
Have I deferred to those in power, or to those who would know better? I freely admit that I am not qualified to make certain decisions. Rather than make a stupid decision, I defer to someone who is in a better position to decide. I see nothing wrong with allowing highly trained people to do their jobs on my behalf, just as I occasionally do my job on their behalf.
Iāve seen and heard of attorneys being taken into conference, reprimanded on the record, fined, reported to a supervisor or the bar ā even jailed. If jailed, I think the process is likely to be subject to review.
Iāve never heard or seen a judge order a marshal to handcuff an attorney and humiliate her by making her sit with criminal defendants.
From the article, there was no precedent in that courtroom either.
5 Likes
A head of an election and now he probably has one of these waiting for him in the morning.
http://judicial.nv.gov/Resources/FAQ/
Judicial Complaint
A judge arrests a public defender, denies legal representation, and like to turn off microphones and video cameras.
What a great political stunt.
2 Likes
I think that her client has grounds for appeal based upon incompetence of counsel.
āPissing off the judgeā is rather low on the list of things I want my attorney to do.
1 Like
Only if it can be shown that counselās off-pissing made any difference to the judgeās decision. Whoās to say that the judge would have shown more leniency absent counselās intransigence? Sounds like he had his mind made up already.
The defense attorneyās primary (actually, only) responsibility is to do the very best for the client. Creating headlines that generate clickbait isnāt even on the list.
There is not enough info here to be completely sure whether this attorneyās actions helped or hurt her client, but Iām OK with a presumption that perhaps they did not.
1 Like
Indeed. Chicago courtrooms have been soooooo very instructive:
Yeah I noticed that too. It grates on my nerves about as much as when LEOs (and others) say āfemaleā instead of āwomanā even when they refer to a man as āmanā and not a āmale.ā
Language choices and tone are such dead giveaways, such tells (a fascinating, icky read 
that may well put you off of thinking the best about all fellow humans), most people donāt even realize what they are divulging with their communication choices.
9 Likes
And the hoooooome of the braaaaaavvvvveeeee
1 Like
