Nali87
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2011
- Messages
- 5,309
- Reaction score
- 819
Hi everyone,
It's good to be back to WS and read all your thoughts. While I'm busy mixing your fancy drinks (dang! I just ran out of those little paper parasols), can I please share some of my thoughts about today's posts on this thread? I really, really don't intend to criticize anyone, but I'm troubled by all the criticism of Judge Stephens, in particular, and the justice system in general.
The judge has frequently been criticized as too lenient and/or too cautious. And the judicial process has been criticized as too slow. And some have even suggested Judge Stephens is therefore incompetent. But I think she's being very careful to foreclose any future appeals from the DT. In other words, she wants this trial to be concluded with no grounds for appeal. And that necessarily means a lengthy trial with drawn out and tedious processes. Shouldn't we respect that? And shouldn't we also applaud her efforts to see that JA has no grounds for appeal?
I was also troubled by the eye-rolls today about the judge's scheduling. Some here seem to assume that the JA trial is her only trial and therefore assume that she must devote all of her time to it. Others, who recognize that she is busy with other trials as well as JA's, seem angry that she "quits" at 4:00 and does nothing on Fridays. C'mon. As AZLawyer has repeatedly pointed out, much of her work is done in chambers. That is, just because she is not sitting at her official judicial bench, in her judicial robes, doesn't mean she's not working or that the legal process has the day off. In fact, I suspect she works well beyond a "regular" 40-hour week (or even a 60-hour week).
In other words, Judge Stephens strikes me as a very competent judge who knows the law and knows the legal system. She deserves our respect, not our scorn.
I didn't intend this as a pro-JSS post, but I get very troubled when citizens vacate their civic duty by not pausing to think.
I actually think it's troubling when cases drag on for this long. Not only the rights of the family and friends of the victims are violated, but also those the accused herself specifically her right to a fair and SPEEDY trial according to the US Constitution. It seems to me that the best way to avoid "an appeal issue" would have been to wrap this case up in a timely manner. I don't think it benefits anyone when trials drag on for so long. I can imagine that the judicial system as a whole can't function properly if trials start taking this long to be concluded.
I think that speaking up and (constructively) giving criticism on a judicial system/case/judge is part one's civic duty.Democracy demands the people's opinion on the way government/judicial system works.