Niagara Falls Judge Robert Restaino

29 Nov

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct decided to remove Restaino from the bench as punishment for a 2005 incident when the judge jailed his entire courtroom because no one would fess up to a ringing cellphone.

Read the whole decision.

I’ve been before Restaino only one time, on a civil matter, but I found him to be quite cordial, and he conducted his courtroom in a reasonable and respectful matter. It’s a shame that he snapped so badly that it cost him this job, and that this one incident relegates him to the “strange but true” category of news. Restaino intends to appeal.

50 Responses to “Niagara Falls Judge Robert Restaino”

  1. hank November 29, 2007 at 9:39 am #

    I read the decision. It’s a toughie.
    I’ve spent as many hours in a courtroom over the 6 years I was a Deputy as some lawyers have. I had to testify in many major cases regarding fingerprints. Many lawyers will not stipulate that the prints on a card belong to their client, and the officer must sit in court until called to say so.

    I’ve seen judges show their ass. In this singular instance, Restaino sure showed his. I believe his errors after the incident were
    A. Not calling the Sheriff to make sure all defandants had transportation back to the NF Courthouse.
    B. Expressing his remorse to each defendant in a letter delivered by certified mail, and also to all of them in public in his courtroom with the media present.

    We ALL screw up. Just beacuse you wear “The long Black Dress” doesn’t mean you’re not human. I believe even the defendants in question could look at the judges actions in that persepective and see what a load that judges do carry and their common humanity. And I’ve seen judges make worse decisions on the bench regarding admissability of evidence or testimony that hurt defendants worse than this.

    Censure–Without a doubt. Public Censure would have been enough embarassment for Restaino. Keeping him on the bench would have shown the defendants in his part that when a judge screws up, there’s a price to pay, but just as THEY were there for making a mistake, so too can a judge.

    Destroying his career as a judge was overkill.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if the appeal part overturns the removal order.

  2. Johnny C. November 29, 2007 at 9:52 am #

    He’s gone based upon his over the top actions.

  3. MIke November 29, 2007 at 10:15 am #

    Losing his job for putting people in jail for smiling on a cloudy day? Sounds fair to me.

  4. Johnny C. November 29, 2007 at 10:26 am #

    Mike,

    I like the reference. Very Bill Walton-like.

  5. Greg November 29, 2007 at 1:30 pm #

    he should have had a bailiff check each phone’s “calls received” menu and only jailed the person that got a call with the phone set to ring

    If I got jailed and had done nothing wrong I’d be suing for a violation of my civil rights

  6. Joey November 29, 2007 at 4:08 pm #

    Definitely overkill. Shouldn’t the board have used the same standards as a court does for a first offense? Rapists get better breaks. It smacks of politics.
    Censure is more than enough for this offense. Let’s hope that the appeal is successful.
    The issue of cellphone use in public meetings/courts/etc. is long overdue for control. They should be surrendered at the door or jammed by a signal in the room. What happens if someone uses one to record or photgraph victims or sealed documents?

  7. Bill Altreuter November 29, 2007 at 5:57 pm #

    The single most important quality a judge must possess is a good temperament. Judges who are mercurial, judges who have an over-inflated impression of their personal magnificence, judges who go over the top like this give the legal system a bad image. And let’s face it, if the legal system looks like it operates based on judicial whim, the whole process breaks down.

    Beyond that, he has embarrassed the entire legal community in Western New York in front of the whole world. As it happens I’m out of town at a conference, and lawyers from all over the country are asking me about this cat. That’s not cool.

    Never appeared in front of the guy, so I can’t say if this incident was an aberration or not but it doesn’t seem like it– it is not the sort of thing that just happens because someone is having a bad day, you know? Throwing a room full of people into stir calls for more than a slap on the wrist, I’d say. His career is not over– he can go back to being a lawyer. Probably the kind of lawyer who screams at his secretary.

  8. Johnskis November 29, 2007 at 7:23 pm #

    What would Judge Judy Say????

    hehehehe

  9. Jeff November 30, 2007 at 2:55 am #

    I read the decision.

    The Judge should be removed.

    It’s difficult not to feel the stress and humiliation experienced by all 46 targets of his rage.

    Abuse of power rarely so explicit.

    Completely Inexcusable and worthy of expulsion from the bench. Having a “bad day” does NOT suffice.

  10. mike hudson November 30, 2007 at 8:39 am #

    every single one of the 46 “victims” in this case were men who had beaten their wives and/or terrorized their own children. they should have been in jail to begin with. but because of our touchy feely legal system, they were merely required to attend “anger management” classes and show up in court every once in awhile to check in.

    the removal of a public official — who was elected to his position be an overwhelming majority of the people — by some faceless bureaucrats a world away is indicative of the contempt for democracy shown in new york state. the judge hasn’t been charged with any crime, much less convicted, and if he were permited to run he would win the special election that will have to be held next november to fill his seat on the bench with 70 percent of the vote.

    if you all want to defend the rights of a gang of woman beating, child terrorising dirtbags at the expense of a guy who’s served on the bench for a decade with no prior whiff of trouble, and sanction this usurping of democracy in the bargain, that’s entirely up to you.

    it speaks volumes about why western new york is the shithole it is.

  11. hank November 30, 2007 at 9:05 am #

    Mike–You’re right–when this hit Fox News, everyone came to me and asked–luckily Alan posted this early in the day so I already knew.

    I have no respect for men who beat on women. They don’t do very well in jail/prison either. Kids can get spanked, but I’ve seen detectives come in with pics of 4 year old kids with cigarette burns all over the, bruises from being hit all over with a steel police style flashlight…etc

    When you compare the judges “momentary lapse of reason” to a room full of people who have assaulted and abused people they are supposed to love, where is the bigger crime?

    What the hell can you expect though, it’s BLUE BLUE WNY.

    Betcha every kid on the soccer team with the worst record in the league gets a trophy up there too. We don’t need to be fracturing their fragile psyches, no?

  12. Russell November 30, 2007 at 10:43 am #

    Mike, you can’t have it both ways. The democracy you’re claiming to love and champion does protect the rights of those people. Many consider that the greatest quality of a democracy. If they were found guilty and are there as part of their sentence/punishment, that’s what they got. That does not mean that the judge can arbitrarily disregard their rights at any time he wants, no matter how upstanding or likable he may be. That is not democratic. Sounds like you’re advocating something more along the lines of an aristocracy.

    And whether you like it or not, a “faceless bureaucracy” determining this judge’s fate is also democratic. He knew it when he pursued this job and swore to work by its rules and regulations. And they are not faceless to him. All democracies have a similar set up for removing officials. It is not unique to New York at all.

  13. Joey November 30, 2007 at 12:29 pm #

    No matter how you slice it , Russ, we have a group of people, who were not elected, removing an elected official. He was put into office by voters; he should only be removed by voters.
    Censure is plenty for bad bench behavior.
    IT WAS NOT A CRIME. HE WAS NOT CHARGED. SEE THE DIFFERENCE?
    There is a real problem with commissions being able to take this power away from the people. The system should be changed.

  14. Russell November 30, 2007 at 1:09 pm #

    This Commission is made up of some elected judges and the process is outlined in the State Constitution. The Constitution was voted upon and approved by the voters. The Commission did not take any power away from the people. The people very willingly granted these powers to the Commission. Again, that is how democracy works and it is working perfectly fine in this situation.

    This judge did receive due process. Something he denied others. Any one of us could lose our jobs for any number of disciplinary reasons having nothing to do with committing a crime. He was charged with abusing his position according to the rules and regulations of his job. He was given a hearing where he offered a defense. The democratically appointed commission determined that his actions were so egregious more than censure was necessary. The only difference I see here is that he was afforded all the rights he denied others. There are no grounds to decry his treatment as undemocratic and there are less grounds, according to democracy, to defend his treatment of the 46.

  15. Russell November 30, 2007 at 2:31 pm #

    Oh, and Joey, you’re so concerned that he committed no crime and was not charged. Well, I do fail to see the difference. These people committed no crime that warranted this imprisonment. Read the report. The Commission says it and so did Restaino himself. Restaino’s behavior is not a question of criminal conduct. The 46 did not behave criminally either and Restaino acknowledged that even while he was ordering them into custody.

  16. Terry November 30, 2007 at 3:07 pm #

    Ask Barbara Sims about the appeal process (if any of you “experts” remember that case….. [not you, BP, cuz you weren’t here at that time])

  17. MIke November 30, 2007 at 3:17 pm #

    Dear Mr. know it all Hudson,
    I did not know you had first hand acount of the people in the courtroom. I guess you paint broad and sweeping stokes whenever one of your buddies gets in trouble. 70 percent of vote, oh please did’nt you just write a few days after the election what a waste of time it really is to vote? So everyone in the courtroom is a child/wife beater, you can’t be that big of an idiot.

    Hank, I didnt know you were also a cheerleader.

  18. Buffalopundit November 30, 2007 at 3:17 pm #

    Never heard of her, but the SCJC decision on Sims is here, and here’s a 1984 AP article about her lawsuit.

  19. Russell November 30, 2007 at 4:07 pm #

    Mike not Hudson,

    Read the decision. All 46 people were in court because they were convicted of domestic violence. There were actually around 70 people in court, but the 46 sent to jail just had their release revoked.

    I don’t know about the 70% or his level of idiocity, but he was accurate in saying all 46 were child or wife beaters. That’s why they were in the courtroom.

  20. mike hudson November 30, 2007 at 4:49 pm #

    mike and russell , you ingorant morons…. i hope one of these 46 guys restaino detained for TWO EFFIN HOURS does to your mother or your daughter or your sister what he’s done to other women, and then come back and tell me about his rights. i’ve spent the day doing criminal records checks on all of these guys and they have an average of five priors each. virtually all of the crimes were against women and children. yes mike, i said it doesn’t matter who you vote for, and the board of review WHICH HAS THE HEAD OF THE EFFIN AMHERST CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ON IT rpoved the argument entirely. if someone from downstate an overturn the results of a legal election and remove a public official who hasn’t committed a crime what the hell sense is there in voting? yes russell, that’s democratic. ON MARS.

  21. Russell November 30, 2007 at 4:57 pm #

    Hudson,

    They received their sentences for their crimes and were in court following through on that. Just because they were convicted of these crimes does not mean the judge can now throw out the rule of law and suspend their rights. Even Restaino himself admitted what he was doing was wrong, so who’s the ignorant one?

    I have no idea what you think democracy means, but all of this in response to Restaino has been democratic and according to the rule of law. He’s the only one whose actions have been undemocratic.

    This has nothing to do with my sister or mother or daughter or even any elections.

  22. mike hudson November 30, 2007 at 5:44 pm #

    he was voted into office. he didn’t commit any crime. he was removed from office by a group of people who were never elected to any office. and that’s democratic? you’re a credit to western new york, russell.

    and mike, where did you get the idea that the judge and i are “buddies”? i haven’t spoken to him in a year, we’ve never had breakfast, lunch or dinner together, never seen each other in any sort of a social setting other than those associated with politics where his position involved him being there and my job involved me being there, he’s never been in my office, i don’t know his wife and he doesn’t know mine. i hear he’s a big yankees fan like his brother tony, who used to be the city administrator, and i bust their balls about it once in awhile in my column. but you commit to print that we’re “buddies.” you too are a credit to western new york.

    each of you, in your own unique way, personify a mindset that has driven buffalo so deep into a hole it may never recover.

    worrying about the rights of 46 dirtbags with nearly 250 prior arrests in order to crucify a judge who maintained a spotless record in 10 years on the bench makes me wonder, russell, whether you’ve ever been arrested on domstic violence charges or had a restraining order issued against you. and mike, it’s a good thing you’re not in the newspaper business because your cavalier attitude toward fact and truth would make you a libel magnet. of course, you’re the same dope who sticks up for vince anello.

  23. hank kaczmarek December 1, 2007 at 2:02 am #

    Cheerleader? Nah, we had some male ones at St. Joe’s when I started there, but we decided that chicks from Mt St Mary’s and Mt St Joe’s filled the bill quite nicely.

    If you read the article, almost every one of those 46 were STILL ON BOND, which is why the Sheriff released nearly all of those actually transported to County Jail. Those that weren’t and couldn’t post were the only ones held.

    Every defendant was there for Assault on a woman or a child.
    CONVICTED by the system. So they had some inconvience?
    WAH. Was the judge wrong? YES.

    Do you think if you spent a year or more seeing all these “models of self control and discipline” every week for a year might sour you a bit on people? They’re lucky I wasn’t elected a judge.

    Judges must have a hard time looking at the flotsam of our society and their bullshit excuses every day, and not seeing them as dogs pissin’ and shittin’ on his carpet. I don’t know how they do it, and some just don’t.

    Spend you next free afternoon in a Criminal Court Part near you, and listen to the bullshit that people perpetrate on each other, and on their loved ones. Then multiply that by days that judges have to do it, and you’d be surprised that he’s not executing the bastards where they stand.

    Yes the judge was out of line, and the defendants didn’t get “Due Process” for a few hours of their lives. Ever sewed up the split lip of a woman whose husband kicked the shit out of her? I have. Ever seen a picture of a 4 year old girl bruised by a 30 year old man (not her father) wth a flashlight?
    or a 1 year old with their leg squeezed so hard you can see bruises where the fingertips of the babysitter were?

    I’m all broken up about their momentary lapse of freedom.

    Censure was enough.

    Elected Judges who exhibit bad behavior should be censured by the commission, and if necessary recalled BY THE VOTERS— You know, the people who PUT HIM THERE, if they feel his behavior excessive after his punishment by the Judicial Commission.

  24. mike hudson December 1, 2007 at 5:09 am #

    amen hank……as i mentioned previously, if the judge were permitted to run in the special election for the seat he’s just had taken away from him, the people of niagara falls would reelect him with 70 percent of the vote. there are many problems in this broken down burg the state ought to be addressing, but instead they use the city as a cash cow, siphoning off tens of millions of dollars annually from the seneca casino and the state parks system.

    now they come in and remove an honest and wildly popular judge after having allowed a criminal mayor to sit in city hall for the past four years unmolested.

    unlike russell and mike, the brief inconveniencing of 46 lowlifes and menaces to society one afternoon two years ago isn’t very high on the list of things to worry about for the vast majority of decent, honest people living here in the falls.

  25. MIke December 1, 2007 at 9:53 am #

    I may have stuck up for vince, but your the idiot who indorsed him in your Free weekly newspaper. If you would charge a nickel for it, your readership would be nonexistant.

  26. mike hudson December 1, 2007 at 10:41 am #

    we make quite enough providing valuable news and entertainment for free to our loyal readers, have been doing it weekly for the past eight years, and will contiue to do so in the foreseeable future. charging a few sheckels for our writing doesn’t seem to hurt things much either though. our insanely expensive “niagara falls confidentential” book has just gone to a second printing (5,000 copies) and was recently recommended by buffalo spree (thanks guys!) as one of wny’s greatest holiday gift ideas of the 21st century. likewise, advance orders for the pagans newest release (due out christmas on smog veil) “the blue album” already gaurantee it a place on the independent charts. i wrote and sing all the the songs on this classic “lost” release, recorded in 1988. buy one and listen to it while your reading my book, dickhead! then go out and pick up the latest copy of the niagara falls reporter!

  27. Eisenbart December 1, 2007 at 4:36 pm #

    Criminals have rights too, and we should all be very lucky that that is the case. What this judge did was wrong and he lost his job. It happens to a lot of people everywhere. They fuck up at their job and get fired and this judge is no different.

    If you can’t see why criminals having rights is important you should honestly go back to middle school for a recap. Doesn’t matter if there was 46 rapists or 46 soccer moms or 46 wife beaters or 46 old people in his court room that day. They all have the same rights.

    Restaino was a good judge and an honest man about it and he fucked up.

  28. MIke December 1, 2007 at 4:46 pm #

    Hudson, I should of trusted you on the court room being filled with dirtbags, because it takes one to know one.

  29. mike hudson December 1, 2007 at 5:00 pm #

    “They fuck up at their job and get fired and this judge is no different.”

    your sympathy for human scum is touching eisenbart, but generally, you can only get fired from your job by the people who hired you. in this case, the overwhelming majority of the citizens of niagara falls elected judge restaino, are outraged by his removal, and would vote for him again if they were given the chance.

    can the brainless mike — who follows me around the web like a dog in heat — get me fired from my job because he thinks, or claims to think, that i fuck up every time i commit a word to paper. no. it’s absurd. only the people who gave me my position have the authority to take it away.

    in addition to your soft spot for wife beaters and child terrorizers, you seem also to be one of those touchy feely assholes who has complete faith in big brother authority figures making your decisions for you.

    as i noted in a previous post, that mindset is largely responsible for the fact that most sane people no longer have any interest in living here.

  30. MIke December 1, 2007 at 8:25 pm #

    Mike, no one else will hire you, thats why your still here working for the penny saver. And yes, ask bruce strasburg a teacher charged and conviced of child terroirizering. These kids need a boot in the ass, but if you do you have to face some idiot judge like your buddy. Your the big puss mikey, 70% of the teachers we had growing up would be classifted as “human scum” under your rules. Sometimes kids need to here “no”, you cant be their best friend, just look in the mirror if you want to see someone who’s a failure at being a father.

  31. mike hudson December 2, 2007 at 5:43 am #

    a child beater. as i said.

  32. mike hudson December 2, 2007 at 6:08 am #

    my media credentials, of course, are matchless. in the past year, i’ve written for more than a dozen national/international publications, including field & stream and the popular british magazine, master detective. in the past five years, stories i broke in the reporter have been credited in the washington post, new york times, the columbia journalism review, editor & publisher, cnn and msnbc, among many others.

    nearly eight years ago i helped launch western new york’s most successful new media company of the 21st century. my book is the #1 bestseller among local titles in wny, and has been since august. the reporter web site has attracted 1.4 million unique visitors and makes money as a stand alone.

    currently, the reporter has a pulitzer prize winner and a peabody award recipient on staff, and is the only paper between new york city and chicago able to make that claim. our staff makes more money than their counterparts at the greater niagara newspapers and, unlike those poor wretches, enjoys full medical benefits.

    all of this in an economic environment that has seen the heavily backed buffalo current, blue dog, the beast and many other weekly publications go belly up.

    the fact that you would characterize such an operation as a “pennysaver” betrays your ignorance of both journalism and business, which is why both your past and your future are inexorably tied to greater buffalo, a place you seem to regard as paris effin france.

  33. mike hudson December 2, 2007 at 9:13 am #

    and mike, if you’d like to discuss the tragic death of my son further, i’d prefer that we had that conversation privately and in person.

  34. MIke December 2, 2007 at 12:37 pm #

    Mike, most of your staff have day jobs, their barroom rants in your paper is done more for fun. Unless it really takes you a week you write your half page bitch fest. now are calling me out to the playground? because i wouldnt want to have to snap your pencil neck.

  35. mike hudson December 2, 2007 at 1:39 pm #

    you have threatened violence toward me before, though i learned early on in my newspaper career that maggots too cowardly to sign their nown names never represent any real threat. on those occasions though, you have failed to show up.

    my son richard had many friends here in the falls, and his death at the age of 26 was a great personal tragedy for me and my family. any time you would like to discuss it, i am available. at your convenience.

  36. mike hudson December 3, 2007 at 7:58 am #

    well, that obviously didn’t work, how about this?

    the niagara falls reporter will pay $1,000 to anyone who can correctly identify for us the maggot who goes by the name “mike” and whose posts can be seen right above this.

    we want a name and an address, although other info, such as where he works, his mother’s address, and where his children attend school might qualify the informant for an additional bonus.

    send info to the niagara falls reporter, snakebite13@sysr.com

  37. steve December 3, 2007 at 12:55 pm #

    Go away for a couple of days, and look at what I miss…we’ve reached the point where a bounty has been put on the head of a comment writer? And his kids?

    Looks like the start of a sequel to Niagara Falls Confidential.

  38. eliz. December 3, 2007 at 4:46 pm #

    I am not sure the blurb for NFC rose to quite that level of hyperbole, Mike, but you’re welcome.

  39. mike hudson December 3, 2007 at 4:52 pm #

    just for the record steve, i haven’t threatened anyone or intended to threaten anyone. i am merely curious about what sort of sub-human maggot would bring up to a bereaved father the death of his only son in a way deliberately calculated to cause pain during the course of an otherwise unremarkable conversation about politics. apparently, the buffalo area is full of such maggots, as the volume of email i’m recieveing suggests that just about everyone knows some scumbag they think capable of such a thing, and it will probably take me a day or two to sort them all out. as you may know, i follow leads for a living. as for the reward, it will be well worth every penny to see the look on this maggot’s face when i afford him the opportunity to repeat his remarks to my face. i doubt that his tough-guy patter will hold up.

  40. mike hudson December 3, 2007 at 5:01 pm #

    and thanks eliz!

  41. steve December 3, 2007 at 5:46 pm #

    mike hudson — my apologies, I missed the commentor’s reference to your family tragedy in my quick catch-up reading of this thread.

    I love a good argument, but that was uncalled for.

  42. mike hudson December 3, 2007 at 6:33 pm #

    thank you steve.

  43. Sarah December 5, 2007 at 7:59 pm #

    I actually know someone who was thrown in jail that day. My girlfriend was there on the wrong day for a parking violation and was thrown in jail with all the others. All of the others there were there for assault charges, some women some men.

  44. mark December 5, 2007 at 8:48 pm #

    hey mike i was there as you well know.I was going through a bad seperation. my wife made a false report to have me removed from the home it worked.i went to court ever week as the court said to.i paid my det.i beat no one.in my past i was no saint you know and you let every one who reads that shit paper know to.how about letting people know about yours.you to had a broken marriage how was that?you probly dont remeber.heres some of your own words.i did everthing got in fights went to jail for assault and weapons what ever.herion cocaine acid a bottle of vodka a day.whos the real dirt bag maybe you should have gone to jail with us.heres another one that came out of your mouth. id rather die then be bored.lets hope you dont run out of bullshit to talk about people or you will be bored!

  45. Scott December 6, 2007 at 3:15 pm #

    The article written in the reporter was a little weird on a couple of levels. First, i love the fact that the author of the article Mike Hudson is in fact no stranger to law enforcement himself and condemns people that are only charged not yet convicted of crimes.Second it states that 46 men who should have been locked up anyway because they are wife beaters so on and so forth deserved it.Mike seeing that you were on that end of the law numerous times should understand that you are innocent until proven guilty, but oh wait you are part of the media aren’t you? So we should expect such bias articles, but being a criminal yourself or reformed or what ever i would expect a much more fair article from you.You praise resieno like he’s your cousin, or are you going to go in front of him possibly in the future and want him to be nice to you? Another point is this- Of the 46 people jailed 17 of them were women. And as a matter of fact i know one of them and she was just lucky enough to show up for traffic court on the wrong date and ended up confined herself so that there was noone to pick up her child from school that day. What about those people? The ones that you unfairly judge without even knowing. No woinder the reporter is a free paper, your facts are so biased and incorrect that no resident in the city would even purchase one.!!!!

  46. TOM December 6, 2007 at 4:33 pm #

    Hey mike isn’t that a little strange that for your reward that you are offering you want this persons mothers address and where his children go to school? I think that would equate to a threat am i wrong? What does where this mike characters children go to school have to do with anything? Are you lowering yourself to the point where you are threatening mothers and school children? Wow you sure know how to dish things out but can’t take it when it comes to someones past. Not that mentioning the death of your child was fair in the least, but when you attack peoples character you must know that yours will come into question also. And just because you are a reporter or call yourself one doesn’t mean that your shady past won’t be brought into question when you question anothers!!!! And why is it you want to know who this person is anyway? Or their address or any personal info oh wait you have an assault record don’t you?

  47. Mike December 7, 2007 at 12:39 am #

    Sarah, Mark, Scott, Tom, Amen.

  48. Nora December 12, 2007 at 9:38 am #

    I sat and watched him handle a few cases as the only attorney in the courtroom in the Falls when he was acting Fam.Ct. judge a month or two before this happened. I did not know him and was shocked at how crudely he treated unrepresented litigants.

    Seems to me they were mostly initial appearances. In response to very mild provocations, essentially laypeople’s expressions of puzzlement at procedure, he explained, in one case after another, the power he had to do things to them, for “contempt,” including local jail. At least twice he got up and paced back and forth behind his chair while running this stupid spiel, swinging his arms in rigid semi-circles, like a little Ceasar from hell. He seemed emotionally disturbed. The deputy stood aside and never moved. I caught his eye and he just blinked.

    Many of our judges are young, unseasoned, inexperienced, provincial, and — unwise — when they ascend the bench. The emotional and mental instability that we see on the bench, at times, is the upshot.

    Being a judge is not about a career, and it is not about the income, Justice Kaye. It is an honor voluntarily granted by the electorate, for terms of many years.

    What this means in practice should be that the lawyers who decide to run — for this honor, granted for terms of many years — ought to have distinguished and proven legal minds and deliberate and calm temperaments. In practice, judging should be the capstone of useful lives.

    But in practice, the responsibility of judging is often awarded to government and politial hacks worried about paying for their childrens’ higher educations. And this is one example of we get as the result.

    I cannot say the judge and I know each other. He’s at the other end of the county. But he was just fine with us when my client appeared. It needed to go to the presiding Fam.Ct. judge for later appearances. OK by me.

  49. John December 22, 2007 at 12:21 am #

    This whole incident has been a difficult situation. The people lost hours out of there day, and the Judge his career. Doesn’t seem right

  50. juctice December 30, 2007 at 7:29 am #

    The wheels of justice are still turning and all i can say is its about time he got his

Contribute To The Conversation

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: