Subj : Re: Yay Texas
To   : alt.tv.farscape
From : John I
Date : Tue Oct 04 2005 18:35:58

From Newsgroup: alt.tv.farscape

Trouble wrote:

> John I wrote:
> 
>> Trouble wrote:
>>>> Steve Brooks wrote:
>   
>>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1584270,00.html
>    
>>>> Justice in aciton.
>  
>>> Casting back a few years, that particular prohibition was part of the
>>> drug rehab program I was a guard for, as was the 10PM curfew for the
>>> few girls with permission to even go out on dates.
>  
>>> Put in that context the onlt thing that makes this a story is the
>>> fact the woman was a Sunday school teacher.
>  
>> and her extreme behavior on the bench.  don't make excuses for nuts.
> 
> She could have sent the girl to jail, = life over for one stupid mistake
> 
> OR
> 
> She could have sent her to rehab which would be the same as the probation 
> she got, and set her back a year in school

Or she could have put her on probation and not imposed silly and distracting 
limitations.  It was the stupid stuff that made the news.  The unnecessary 
imposition into her privacy and the private decsions of her family are the 
problem here.  Lawbreakers don't give up all of their civil rights and mercy 
is not an excuse for excess.  Never mind the draconian drug laws.

> 
> we have one lawyer's word for her other behaviors, and some transcripts 
> out of context... having been removed from the courtroom for his own 
> behavior, I really doubt the lawyer's version of the story resembles what 
> really happened.
> 

On what basis?   I've seen other whackos take similar positions on minor 
procedural concerns.  Extreme concern for decorum is not a good sign in  a 
judge.  The 'winger judge in Raleigh physically attacked a woman lawyer when 
one of her buttons was inadvertently unbuttoned.  Locking up a lawyer for 
minor breaches of decorum, particularly if the judge is making it up as she 
goes as this one is clearly doing, indicts the judge's powers of discretion, 
not the lawyer's.

.