BS: Judge the Judge

Subject: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Mickey191
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 07:46 PM

Yesterday Dr. Phil had on his program a judge* who is currently serving his third term. He's innovative as far as sentencing goes. Some of his sentences: to a woman who had placed 40 kittens in the woods-she got to spend one night in those same woods. To boys who called a policeman a pig-stand on a busy street with a sign on a pig-"This is not a COP - this is a pig. One thing he'd like to do--make all who are DWI - wants them to have a scarlet license plate. What say you?

*Judge Michael Cicconetti, Painesville, Ohio

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 07:58 PM

As always, pros and cons. On the whole, I tend to like and approve of creative judges.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 08:04 PM

To an Englishman, this is madness and anarchy. Statute defines the permissible penalties, and official policy ("the tariff") sets the approved range.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Sorcha
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 08:09 PM

Well, Richard, as a Yank, I ask you if those permissable, offical penalties have changed anything at all? Perhaps the creative ones will.

Would YOU rather go to jail for a while, or stand in front of Tesco's with a sign saying

I Abanonded 40 Kittens

Humiliation does play a factor in rehabilitation, IMO

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Peace
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 08:10 PM

Maybe your courts aren't backed up the way ours are.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Mickey191
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 09:57 PM

The Judge stated with his innovative sentencing he has no repeat offenders. With jail time, he said he has repeaters. They become "better criminals."

Locally (Dutchess County, NY) I read about DWI's being rearrested. After a few of these-they become felons. A woman with 2 previous arrests had FOUR times the legal limit-killed a lovely Mom whose 3 kids were in the car. That ladies husband required 200 stitches on his face. One of the 3 kids had two broken legs.   The killer also died. GOOD! My husband was killed by a drunk driver.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Apr 07 - 11:44 PM

The apparent degree of judicial independence negates the "rule of law" - the predictabliity of judicial outcome irrespective of the identities of the parties - that most legal commentators assume is one of the distinctions between a democracy and an autocracy.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: gnomad
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 03:38 AM

I understand Richard's objections, though I feel "madness & anarchy" is pitching it a little strong. Major offences need a range of appropriate punishments.

Without looking at this judge's full sentencing record, I imagine that he is only getting creative in those cases where he feels that to do so will be effective. I believe that US judges are elected, surely he would be binned next time around if people felt he wasn't getting results. It also seems that he has limited powers [the red plate thing is only an idea so far] so anarchy seems out.

If getting creative on relatively minor offences gets results, then I would be in favour, just as long as it doesn't turn into some sort of bizarre entertainment. It has to beat locking up an increasing proportion of the population for longer periods, which didn't work for the victorians, and isn't working for us.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Leadfingers
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 05:33 AM

Richard - Our UK prisons , I am informed , are full to over flowing -
A little bit of humiliation resulting in NON repeat and NOT filling another cell for a number of minor offences may well be a good idea !

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 07:55 AM

Of course the area in which a judge does have some latitude, and apparently where this judge has exercised it in the examples given, would be where probation and "community service" are specified as acceptable dispositions. The judge usually has the option of approving, if not of specifying the "service" to be performed.

The kid with the sign identifying the difference between a cop and a pig is performing his "community service" by educating others so that they will know the difference and won't repeat the same mistake he made. If he's also (hopefully) embarrassed, that's a fringe benefit.

It's a little difficult to see what community service was performed by the lady spending the night in the woods, but if she'd been ordered to collect 40 pounds of trash (one pound per cat) and to do it in the dark, it might have worked more effectively within this interpretation.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 07:59 AM

"To an Englishman, this is madness and anarchy."

Not to every Englishman, Richard, only, I would suggest, to one who makes his living upholding the English law.

There are many legal systems, and each country uses what achieves best results for it.

It is one of the monumental arrogances of the English that we think nobody does it as well as we do, whatever IT may be.

You will doubtless be appalled to hear that the Authorities in several towns in the north of England, and also in Scotland, are punishing louts who urinate in public places by calling out a van loaded with cleaning materials, and making them very publicly clean up their mess....SHOCK, HORROR What will this madness lead to?

Well, probably cleaner streets after the pubs close.

What it certainly WON'T mean is the end of civilisation as we know it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: jacqui.c
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:11 AM

Sounds like a good idea to me. The one time that my nine year old daughter tried shoplifting I sent her back into the shop to return the item and apologise to the shopkeeper. She never did it again.

I like the idea of 'making the punishment fit the crime' for minor infractions. I think that, for a lot of people, it would give more respect for the law. As for spending a night in the woods - I wouldn't want to do it - too many bugs and definitely not comfortable, as well as the psychological trauma of being out in the dark with all the strange noises - I trust that, like the kittens she abandoned, this lady was not given any of the amenities of camping! No light, no shelter, no bed? I would reckon that would stop her in her tracks.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: kendall
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:32 AM

The problem with most American judges is simply this. They are gutless because they live in fear that one of their rulings gets overturned by an appeal. Too many such reversals mean no promotion to a higher court.
Some judges are appointed, some are elected. The elected ones tend to go along whereever the wind blows. There is no perfect system

Some of the ideas here remind me of pictures I've seen of colonial times with people being confined in stocks and kids throwing things at them.Remember the Scarlet Letter? If we brought back that punishment for "fallen women" we would run out of red paint in no time. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 03:42 AM

The separation of powers - the cornerstone of constitutional democracy - requires that the legislature legislates, not judges, and that judges decide law (and make relevant decisions of fact if sitting without jury - if they are sitting with jury the judge defines law and the jury decides fact) not legislators.

A different problem with both the UK and US systems at this period of history is that the legislature is not properly independent of the administration, but htat is another story.

What you are talking about, DT, is a situation in which the government (administration) has proposed and legislature passed laws creating powers for the punishments of which you approve to be imposed on thos found guilty as a matter of law and fact.

It is not the same thing at all as a judge deciding to create a whole new range of powers for himself to impose penalties not set out in legislation.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 06:27 AM

No Richard, with respect, I am talking about law enforcement personnel imposing a penalty upon people who have NOT been found guilty of any crime, as an alternative to being prosecuted. If they were to opt for prosecution instead, I see nothing wrong in the judge imposing the same punishment by making them clean the streets after closing time on another night.

I still approve of such creativity in handling minor offences, which relieves the burden on the courts, and saves a mint of money.

Summary justice, without prior trial, such as this, and of course police cautions and section 5 fixed penalties, does have a part to play in reducing unacceptable behaviour and will not IMHO detract from the rule of law.


Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: kendall
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:34 AM

Don T. Give us an example of law enforcement dishing out punishment to someone who hasn't been convicted.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 05:34 PM

See my post of 07.59, Kendall, with reference to those caught urinating in the street.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: GUEST,HiLo
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 09:54 PM

It's the kind of absurdity that happens when judges have to get re elected.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 06:52 AM

A very dangerous road, Don - to allow "law enforcement officers" to demand that people who have not been convicted of anything (that is to say, are not guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt") do or suffer something to avoid prosecution. That is the kangaroo court with no legal basis for its decisions, and how long before it is a beating in a darkened room, or a donation to the Widows and Orphans fund?

I think I'll settle for a civilisation in which you have to be guilty of an offence before the law sanctions a punishment for you, and the sanction is determined by law not whimsy or prejudice.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 06:56 AM

Another name for it is vigilantism

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Jean(eanjay)
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 12:05 PM

I thought this seemed an excellent idea until I read Richard Bridges' posts and then I had reservations.

I do think you would need to be very careful with a scheme like this because there is always someone who will go too far.

I don't agree with humiliating people although I do think the van load of cleaning materials for people urinating in the streets is a good idea and would work well. I did see an example of this on a TV programme recently and the person coming out with the van was actually a volunteer. He was turning out at all hours of the night.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 12:17 PM

I think public washrooms would be a good idea, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 08:05 PM

I agree, Guest meself, and we've had public washrooms for about 100 years.

Unfortunately, the same drunken louts who are pissing in shop doorways have vandalised them to such an extent that the councils can't keep them open for two days at a time.

BTW Richard, all those being made to clean up have been caught, dick in hand, as it were, so perhaps a court appearance might be superfluous.

They are, however, offered that option. Seems that almost all of them prefer to clean up.

Anyway, what's the difference between that and a night in the cells followed by an official caution, or an £80 fixed penalty for drunk and disorderly, neither of which involves a court appearance.

Seems to me to save time and money, tho' of course it does mean a lawyer not getting a payday.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 02:10 AM

The difference is that the former are sanctioned by law, your preferred route is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Judge the Judge
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 05:47 AM

Someone must have told the police to go ahead with this, and funded the cleaning equipment. I know the driver in at least one case is a volunteer, but I'm reasonably sure he doesn't pay for the gear.

Don T.