Posted on 01/31/2006 2:23:59 AM PST by freepatriot32
Very true Jeff. If I violated a judges order, I would expect to have some extra tacked on. Don't know if that is legal or not but again I would expect it. Cheers!
FWIW, a far more detailed article at the link below seems to indicate that a new charge of contempt of court was not issued and the original sentences were only revised.
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060127/NEWS03/601270321/1005
The girls were idiots for going to court without a lawyer and thinking that just crying for the judge would smooth things over.
These girls are out of control but so is this jackass judge. He feels he's been dissed and wants revenge
Good point, but it was more of a condition of probation rather than an order. The girls were foolish for publicly mocking a judge, but do we really want judges that so easily get their feelings hurt and seek revenge? Judges are supposed to be above that.
I know that judges are only human, but this judge didn't even try to hide the fact that he took these actions personally. His original sentence was even too harsh for the crime so he should understand that a lot of young people are going to feel contempt for his rulings.
If he can't get past that then he should stop being a judge in cases involving teenagers and young adults.
I look forward to more of your anecdotal evidence.
Judges do not recuse themselves for contempt of court situations, nor will another judge intervene.
If the pressed the issue, they may well have gotten six months from another judge.
Why? The girls violated the terms of their sentencing. Rather blatantly. Are you suggesting that the judge should have ignored it?
Your response suggests that you didn't read the article.
The girl is doing 30 days for contempt of court, and violating the terms of her original sentence -- which called for community service, no jail, and no consumption of alcohol.
I did and I even posted a far more detailed article in this thread that suggests that the judge only revised the original sentences.
Recuse himself? On what grounds? He witnessed the kids violating the terms of their sentencing. I don't think the ridicule had anything to do with it, and even if it did, that isn't reason to recuse, AFAIK.
No doubt this girl was used to getting her way by acting vulnerable and turning on the tears. I seriously doubt that she has a drinking problem - she just wanted to appear very contrite, vulnerable and say what the judge wanted to hear.
I agree that she took the others down with her. With a lawyer she would have be informed what tactics work and which ones don't. Throwing yourself at the mercy of the court is never a good idea.
This judge should really stop hearing cases about underage drinking since he has such a personal stake in it. How can he really issue fair and unbiased rulings when he is an activist in the area?
Bad girls, Bad girls
Whatcha want, watcha want
Whatcha gonna do
When judge Martone come for you
Tell me
Whatcha gonna do, whatcha gonna do
Yeaheah
It's a pretty damned whiny article. None of the punishments doled out by the school are any different from the ones that were in effect when I was in HS. The kids were in obvious contempt of court. I don't see any problem with what the judge did.
The kids were violating the terms of their probation.
They were.... And they were also directly in contempt of court. There's no "over the top" in what the judge did -- the girls deserved what they got.
I agree that the judge acted properly. How stupid to post this kind of web site - but what can you expect when the parents are dumb enablers.
Perhaps the real problem is the unrealistic attitudes about alcohol that are becoming dominant in our society.
One is not supposed to touch a drop of alcohol until one's 21st birthday. In Maryland, the legislature toyed with the idea of making it illegal for parents to permit the consumption of alcohol by their own children in their own home at any time prior to a child's 21st birthday.
Which raises the question: Why do we believe that a magical fairy touches a person on the head on his 21st birthday with the fully-developed ability to drink in an appropriate way?
Myself, I began "drinking" at age 4. That's right. Age 4. A sip of my dad's beer, a sip of wine. As we got older, a sip of scotch, or of a whiskey sour, or of some other cocktail. As we got even older, sips turned into our own glasses of wine at dinner, maybe a half ounce or an ounce. A little older, a little more in the glass.
By the time we were of "drinking age," we all knew how to drink appropriately. Four kids. No drunk driving arrests, no alcohol problems. Of the four of us, we have our fair share of life's problems. We aren't perfect by any stretch of the imagination. But none of us have problems with alcohol. We're all hard-working, taxpaying citizens who drink socially.
Why? Because our parents didn't trust that the "Alcohol Fairy" was going to wave a magic wand on our 18th birthdays (that was the legal age when we were young) and make us responsible drinkers. Our parents TAUGHT US how to drink responsibly, how to prepare for adulthood, from the time we were small children.
sitetest
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.