Judge throws out rape case after prosecutor late to court

baleuf said:
It SHOULD be done the way you state, however in the case our court had years ago the Judge dismissed on the spot! Bad idea!


I have a feeling there was months and months of stuff that went on that you may not be privy to.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
I have a feeling there was months and months of stuff that went on that you may not be privy to.
Actually no, it was a Judge who later resigned that was infamous for doing goofy things. That is why he faced the disciplinary council and was disciplined by the supreme court. I wish it was as you said.
 
baleuf said:
Actually no, it was a Judge who later resigned that was infamous for doing goofy things. That is why he faced the disciplinary council and was disciplined by the supreme court. I wish it was as you said.


That sucks!! LOL But, I've heard of some pretty wacky things judges have done, both in and out of the courtroom, so nothing surprises me. Usually, the notices of cases being dismissed for want of prosecution go out without the judge even knowing that its been done. If there is no movement in a case for a certain amount of time, the clerks usually send them out in order to get a status.

In the case we're discussing here, I think its particularly disgusting when it was rape of a 10 year old girl the man was being tried for. This isn't some civil case where a huge company is going after another huge company for purely monetary damages. We're talking about a child rapist here. These guys already get too many breaks and rules in place to protect their rights. I hate to say this, but seriously, what comes around goes around and I wouldn't want to be standing too close to this judge when that karma comes back to bite her on the arse.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
That sucks!! LOL But, I've heard of some pretty wacky things judges have done, both in and out of the courtroom, so nothing surprises me.
This immediately made me think about the male judge that was...um...using a pump behind the bench to um...inflate his...gavel.
 
Paladin said:
This immediately made me think about the male judge that was...um...using a pump behind the bench to um...inflate his...gavel.

LOL way to funny I remember hearing about that!Sometimes bizarre behavior is on both sides of the bench.
 
This conduct doesn't surprise me. Here in Ohio our Judges and Attorneys are capable of anything. Like a judge hearing a case, listening to witnesses, keeping people in a courtroom for hours and then telling the attorneys to "work it out among yourselves." :furious:
 
BeeBee said:
This conduct doesn't surprise me. Here in Ohio our Judges and Attorneys are capable of anything. Like a judge hearing a case, listening to witnesses, keeping people in a courtroom for hours and then telling the attorneys to "work it out among yourselves." :furious:
I think that's true anywhere in a civil court context. Most judge's don't like to make decisions. I used to work for a judge, who would deliberately leave the attorneys in a conference room for hours before a trial just so they would settle. And it worked!
 
bykerladi said:
I think that's true anywhere in a civil court context. Most judge's don't like to make decisions. I used to work for a judge, who would deliberately leave the attorneys in a conference room for hours before a trial just so they would settle. And it worked!


LOL. If they're not going to "judge" then IMO, they shouldn't be one. It's their job. Because of this particular judge, I wound up with the attorney from the other side as one of mine, more or less due to blackmail.

If a judge isn't going to "judge" he should step down.
 
bykerladi said:
I think that's true anywhere in a civil court context. Most judge's don't like to make decisions. I used to work for a judge, who would deliberately leave the attorneys in a conference room for hours before a trial just so they would settle. And it worked!


It actually is better if the parties can come to agreement before a judge or jury makes a determination. That way, you don't have the courts tied up for years longer during appeals processes.
 
Jeana (DP) said:
It actually is better if the parties can come to agreement before a judge or jury makes a determination. That way, you don't have the courts tied up for years longer during appeals processes.

Then doesn't it only make sense that he should ask them to do it before witnesses are subpeoned, take the stand, have to stay milling around for hours after their testimony in case they need to be called back and having the attorney for the other side talk to you on the stand like your s**t?? A whole day was wasted for people who could have used that time only for this judge to wait a week and say "Work it out among yourselves or I'll get a third party to be Adminstrator of this womans estate." I guess you can tell I'm pissed, huh Jeanna?? LOL
 
BeeBee said:
Then doesn't it only make sense that he should ask them to do it before witnesses are subpeoned, take the stand, have to stay milling around for hours after their testimony in case they need to be called back and having the attorney for the other side talk to you on the stand like your s**t?? A whole day was wasted for people who could have used that time only for this judge to wait a week and say "Work it out among yourselves or I'll get a third party to be Adminstrator of this womans estate." I guess you can tell I'm pissed, huh Jeanna?? LOL


Yes and no matter what you just said, you're right and you got screwed and I'm not touching the rest of it with a ten foot pole! :blowkiss:
 
Jeana (DP) said:
Yes and no matter what you just said, you're right and you got screwed and I'm not touching the rest of it with a ten foot pole! :blowkiss:


Hahahahahahahahaaa!!!! :blowkiss: :blowkiss:
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
686
Total visitors
814

Forum statistics

Threads
625,648
Messages
18,507,536
Members
240,829
Latest member
The Flamazing Finder
Back
Top