As we have seen other cases where judges use their power to threaten an attorney with contempt, we have not seen the judge use her power to control him. There were numerous times the judge should have threatened Nurmi with contempt or theaten to report him to the attorney oversight board.
JSS is not using her power effectively as a judge to control him or her courtroom. The article has this part...
" tactics aimed at creating errors on purpose should be prohibited and that judges should report such actions to attorneys ethical oversight boards."
I'm generally okay with the judge not threatening nurmi with contempt, in open court. He would have on the record, on audio tape, on video (not to mention photocopied tweets, photocopied entries from numerous online blogs, comprehensive list of every single print or television media that mentioned Arias in any way) to then use on one if his many "I don't like your decision so I'm taking it to a higher court, so there", complete with a dozen 10 page motions addressing not just the issue at hand but including EVERY SINGLE gripe he has had since before he was even on the defense team, rehashing everything ad nauseum.
I so agree with you that she has not, in my opinion and from my completely non legal background, used her authority to control him. He has been an insistent bull charging to the sidebar, head down ready to ram his words down the judge's throat. He's been a bully to the court and to Martinez. He's mocked state witnesses, actually laughing at them (Dr. DeMarte comes instantly to mind).
He's (and I include Wilmott in this, just as much) have made egregious accusations against Travis, with absolutely no corroboration except that from his lying client. And as I've said often, I will never, ever, ever believe that he and Wilmott believe the garbage they are spewing for their client. Although I have had derogatory remarks and even worse thoughts about that team, I do not believe they are stupid, and one would have to be stupid to fall for Arias' web of malicious, every changing, laughably outrageous detailed account: her turning her head SW while her body faced north, 17 inches from the bathtub, while lunged upon with her left arm at a 64 degree angle, her right arm extended elbow bent 11 inches above her head while making a 3/4 westerly rotation of her lower body, with all of Travis' weight on her, but with miraculous speed and agile manipulation (although she wasn't "thinking" at that point, just reacting to this nightmarish and death defying danger)...... and ludicrous, made up detail after ridiculous detail.......I don't believe Nurmi/Willmott believe her garbage, despicable stories, yet they perpetuate them every freaking day, as often as possible, uttering every salacious word, every sex act, every stinking lie.
As much as I have screamed at my TV/computer at the defense, and at the judge for " allowing" the flying manure feet, I have come to understand that unless the state objects, the judge isn't going to say anything. However, she could in my opinion, use forceful words and recommendations to control his obnoxious recitation. I don't need to give any of the thousands of examples where the defense has acted, in court, like recalcitrant children. Why hasn't the judge admonished any of it: the uninvited races to the sidebar, the open arguing with the judge's rulings, the bizarre and uncooperative (not to mention blatantly dishonest) witness testimony. Surely this judge could exert control, without the state having to ask for it, and such control that might just tick Nurmi/Willmott off........but grow the heck up!
I've never had a job where I was the sole person responsible for my actions, my words, my decisions, my relationships and attitudes. Thankfully I've not had to be admonished for much, but that's only because I am exemplary (OH GOODNESS, THAT WAS HILARIOUS TO WRITE!!!). I have been told I should pursue another direction, try another tactic, spiff up my knowledge and attend workshops and seminars. During all my years as a teacher, the staff was almost always encouraging, helpful, realistic in goals. But every teacher had to, out of not just respect but out of wanting to keep the atmosphere friendly and productive, give special consideration to ALL support staff because we could only do our job well with their help. Then there were the bosses. A whole different story, learning early on that to be successful you have to choose your battles and always, always, always be on your best behavior when supervisors were around. I look at the courtroom similarly, although perhaps that's not judicially correct. To me, JSS is the courtroom boss. She has the right, the duty and the responsibility to uphold the law, all the time, and to expect counsel to do the same, all the time.
Someone posted many pages ago when we were discussing who was more at fault, the judge who IMO is woefully falling down on the judge duties, or Nurmi and team for using her to their advantage. The point was made that if a classroom is out of control, you can't blame the students. Yes they may be obnoxious, they may be 6' tall bullies, they may have no parental support, they may be mentally or physically challenged. But that's where the teacher comes in, the one to set the emotional , physical, and educational climate for every single student, to show preference for no one despite their needs or poopheadedness. The teacher will have to get stern, will make students mad and worry the rest of the day knowing the 6'5" logger father of the 6' bully will charge in after school and try to intimidate the teacher, threaten to call the principal, the superintendent, and even write a letter to the school board. And to that dad I listened, as calmly as possible explained my position (that stealing a 3rd graders crutches, throwing them out the window, slapping that child on the back of the head hard enough to cause him to fall, calling him unimaginable cruel names, before refusing to leave the building during a fire drill, calling me names I had not heard before) ......and then handed him the business card for all district personnel and told him to feel free to contact anyone and would you like to use my phone right now?
The boss, in my case other school personnel, has a job to insure each employee works their hardest, within the scope of all the laws, federal and state, school district policies, adheres to mandated curriculum, maintains a standard of professional conduct at all times that will bring swift recourse should this not be followed. The boss in the courtroom, IMO, is the judge. She has the right to insist on courtroom decorum, one immediate fault I have observed, both in the gallery, at the defense table, and through witness testimony. It is her job, again IMO, to follow judicial law, to make lawful and appropriate decisions and to insist and expect the same from the attorneys. Her flip-flopping indecision is startling. Her obvious and oft used cone of silence/secrecy is disturbing on so many levels. Although a good teacher adapts her teaching to the needs of all students, providing additional instruction and practice to students needing that, it doesn't mean she tells the rest of the class, all the support personnel and parents waiting for their kids to go out in the hall and wait. She learns how to do it all! PFFFFFT on the judge for giving the time management challenged Nurmi DAYS OFF from a trial already terribly bogged down with delays to pen his newest complaint/motion. Pooey on her for believing she can set aside the constitution for any reason at all, regardless of any of the hundred reasons Nurmi had for demanding super secret testimony. Poo poo on her for taking a huge risk losing more jury members by dragging the trial on long past the Christmas holidays, something that if they don't already know officially from the judge they must be getting an inkling of after being given an entire week off after only a few days of testimony. Boo to the judge for not stepping in to even politely admonish combative witnesses. I don't see why it requires Martinez to say something before the judge will intervene. Again, it's her courtroom. A witness in her courtroom is deceptive, refusing to answer, looking to defense counsel for hints and cues. Her courtroom. (The classroom analogy again: when a speaker, professional, amateur, volunteer parent, or school personnel would come to my class, the rules still applied. A student disrespecting or being disruptive was dealt with. I would wait just long enough to see if the speaker wanted to handle it his/her own way without me butting in, but I wouldn't wait long because despite who was speaking to the class the expectations of student behavior ruled. Immediately, swiftly, and fairly. I didn't wait for the speaker to ask me after trying himself a half dozen times to control the class. I spoke up, and firmly.)
So I apologize for the rant, and for the rushed and unedited rambling nature of my rant.
