Ye shall be as gods

The Judge Report ^ | 03/26/2005 | Robert N. Going

[Cincinnatus]

Whittaker Chambers called it the world's second oldest religion: "Ye shall be as gods." That temptation in the Garden has manifested itself in many forms over the centuries. Currently it's hanging out in a courtroom in Florida and similar places.

I've been on the bench. I know what it's like to be all-powerful. Every decision I rendered was with the sure knowledge that there was very little likelihood of being overturned on appeal, or even of an appeal being taken. Part of my training as a Family Court Judge came from Judge Judy. Several of us spent an afternoon with her in New York County Family Court and learned the importance of including certain phrases in our decisions: "This Court has had the unique opportunity to examine the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses in this case." That was a good one. What Appellate Court could overturn you on factual issues with language like that? The prevailing party has always "met the statutory standard of proof." From other judges I learned to dismiss strong opposing arguments by writing, "The mere fact that . . .", etc.

And so it is that Judge Greer can make life and death decisions based on conflicting testimony, and never be overturned. He, after all, had the unique opportunity to examine the credibility and demeanor of the witnesses. The mere fact that Michael Schiavo never mentioned his wife's wishes for seven years, and that no one else ever remembered them until after her court-appointed law guardian suggested Michael might not be credible, has no bearing on the decision. All a judge need do is reject the credibility of people he doesn't want to believe and accept the testimony of people he does, and then fill his decision with language from statutes and case law which support his result, and that is that! It's very easy. And it actually is "due process of law."

Once in a while a case like this comes along when very reasonable people can ask, "What judge in his right mind could find clear and convincing evidence of Terri's physical state or her intention to die based on this conflicting testimony?" But absent wrong-doing, the trier of fact will receive great deference from the courts above and the courts beside.

That's the way the system works. I HOPE everyone understands that now.

And yet, one need not have years of legal training and judicial experience to suspect that something is really wrong with a system that not only allows but even DEMANDS that an innocent disabled woman be starved to death.

[Cincinnatus]

ping NYer

[Enterprise]

I think many of us here caught on to this quite early. Ignore what doesn't support your decision, accept what does support it and stick with it. Simple!

[Dog Gone]

Findings of fact, whether they're made by a judge or a jury are rarely reviewable on appeal. That's just the way it is in our legal system. It's nothing new.

Occasionally, you can get a new trial. The Schindlers were offered that by Congress last week but chose not to accept it. They rehashed old, tired, and previously defeated arguments instead.

I don't know why. It made no sense to me, and it cost them their daughter's life.

But if they didn't want to reintroduce facts into the case, the law did all it could.