Just tragic.
FREE SPEECH:
The Broward Blog has this quote posted (for obvious reasons):
The substantive evil here sought to be averted has been variously described below. It appears to be double: disrespect for the judiciary, and disorderly and unfair administration of justice. The assumption that respect for the judiciary can be won by shielding judges from published criticism wrongly appraises the character of American public opinion. For it is a prized American privilege to speak one's mind, although not always with perfect good taste, on all public institutions. And an enforced silence, however limited, solely in the name of preserving the dignity of the bench would probably engender resentment, suspicion, and contempt much more than it would enhance respect ... (Emphasis Added)
Hugo Black.
Bridges v. California, 314 U.S 252 (1941).
Query: How should we handle this? Lets say a judge was habitually late to court and rude to attorneys. Should we do a post on it? Should we contact the judge first and give them a chance to respond? There is a responsibility with writing a blog that the legal community reads. Reputations are at stake with every post and every comment.
Just try walking a mile in our moccasins.
See you in court.
21 comments:
The answer to your questions is simple...........yes, you should post on it. The Broward Blog is going MUCH further.......delving into people's personal lives, name calling, etc. The Broward Blog bears a greater resemblance to TMZ than any kind of remotely professional endeavor. It's become clear that the administrators/posters are more interested in bashing people than promoting ideas or change. Frankly, its disgraceful.
The victims (yes, I'll call them that) have families and deserve better than the blog is giving them.
BTDT
I don't think you should post personal details, and you don't - for the most part - but some things should and must be posted.
I think in the interest of fairness (though our courtrooms and the chieftains that inhabit it are hardly models of fairness) you should give the judges 24 hours to respond.
The Broward Blog does a vital service to its readers and the attorneys who practice there.
Walk a mile in your moccasins? Sorry but maybe in a pair of those spiffy new Church's with the flex soles.
I am assuming you mean YES to both questions, BTDT. I would email the Judge and explain what we have and ask if they care to respond or comment to the allegations.
As for Broward, while that blog may be a more "in your face" version of writing, everything they write is supported by facts. The attacks are against Satz and several Judges for what is happening inside their courtroom, not outside of it.
Scroll down the Broward Blog today. It has the past thirty days on the first page. Name one example of what you consider to be a disgraceful post. To the contrary, nearly every post that bashes the person or the process also discusses ways to hangs the system and make it better, fairer, more accountable.
Being late is a quirk.
Being Rude to Attorneys, and therefore litigants and the public, is Unacceptable and deserves being called out on.
Though, Politeness could allow you to give the Judge heads up. But How to do so from the shadows so it is not a threat ( stop or I blog it) nor seen as ex parte-ing?
A Judge that is Polite and considerate goes far in my book, even more important that Knowing Evidence or the Law; that can be taught, showed to the court via case-law.
Courtesy comes from within .
Harvey,
What's up with the new CJIS? It's terribly user un friendly
We talked about this at the symposium you "attended," Rump.
Anonymous posting is always going give some folks a sense of license -- or, more often, a dose of unaccustomed courage -- to say what they wouldn't say with their names attached. There are times when that's valuable, when things that need saying are said that wouldn't otherwise be said. There are times when that means cowards are going to spew nonsense.
The trouble with UNMODERATED anonymous comments, to my way of thinking, is a practical one: They are just an invitation for verbal vandalism and result in a blog space that looks like the bathroom wall in a middle school. I don't read the comments on the Broward Blog, because -- leaving aside that the simple fact that they are nasty -- they tend to devolve pretty quickly to a degree of nastiness where they are no longer useful. They just don't add much, so there's no point in reading them, except maybe for the prurient thrill.
(To take slight issue with BTDT at 5:36, and having been the "victim" of some anonymous nastiness back in my campaign, I can say that, for me at least, while the most vile things were said by anonymous posters, those were the comments that made the least impact. I get what BTDT is saying, but I question why an adult, a lawyer or a judge no less, would be measurably hurt by anonymous taunts.)
From the blogger's standpoint, I think there are two things to consider: First, if you allow anonymous comments but moderate them, you have the chance to keep them at least vaguely useful and keep your blog more or less on point. The key to a worthwhile blog, it seems to me, is real content with a particular voice. If you let random anonymous vitriol become the content and voice, why would anyone read it? Second, I don't think you can disavow responsibility for comments posted in space you control, so it's probably prudent to maintain some control over the comments.
Rump,
The cocktail of gun control and the mentally has reared its ugly head again...this time locally. If I were a religious person I would pray that our legislature do something before another tragedy. The Herald reports an apparently mentally ill/schizophrenic man shot a tow truck driver in the back of the head for towing his car and then fired at police officers. Family members were apparently aware of the mental illness. How can the NRA continue to defend their position? How long can we refuse to address our mentally ill?
Free speech, baby!
A report from the front lines today......I saw more justice handed out today by Judge De La O in an hour than I see in a year at REG......where did he come from??? Glad to see Governor Scott got one right!!
I do not understand the ex-wife of the chef crying and making such a scene. I am sure when they divorced she hated his guts.Now the turn around. She is looking to get into her childrens pockets when they collect on the wrongful death case agains Nikki''s. She probably regrets divorcing him now in that she has no standing to collect a dime from the lawsuit.
The problem with the Broward Blog is that asshole, disbarred lawyer, Jack Thompson writes in every fucking day and goes on and on.
to 2:03 PM:
JUDGE DE LA O .....
Judge De La O was elected by the voters and not appointed by Governor Scott..
Cap Out .....
captain4justice@gmail.com
939.......I admit that I haven't visited the Broward Blog in ages. I quickly tired about who was sleeping with whom and other salacious and malicious posts.
Robert.......It's not all about the you or the other adults attacked in the posts.
You, apparently, ignore or are not bothered by the malicious posts. That's not the issue. That doesn't make them appropriate, let alone professional. Further, and more importantly...... What about the children of the folks unfortunate enough to grace the blog pages? You think it's okay for some asshole to subject them to the details of their parents' poor relationships or their parents' adultery?
BTDT
I often disagree with Rumpole's posts, but that being said: I appreciate that this blog is moderated. Am willing to guess this blog gets all kinds of nasty comments to publish, but Rumpole really doesn't publish junior high school comments. It saves everyone in the system from nasty anonymous attacks. Thanks Rumpy.
Glad to hear good things about Judge DeLaO, cuz he was a total flamming .... As a practicing lawyer.
De la O was not elected, rather he was unopposed and attained the bench by default.
"Governor Scott got one right" in reference to de la O?
Except that de la O was elected.
Read a newspaper some time.
No anonymous papers should ever be published. Public order and control of the population demand that posters sign their name.
....said the writer using an alias. Classic!
Publicus in not just an alias, it is an alias lawyers should know. The Federalist Papers are a series of 85 articles and essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay promoting the ratification of the United States Constitution. They wrote under the name, "Publicus."
I think that post might have been sarcastic.
Here is the deal... If you moderate your comments two things happen. One is its no longer free speech, but secondly by moderating comments you are essentially placing your stamp of approval... and accepting some sort of liability...
"At the heart of the First Amendment is the recognition of the fundamental importance of the free flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. The freedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty – and thus a good unto itself – but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole. We have therefore been particularly vigilant to ensure that individual expressions of ideas remain free from governmentally imposed sanctions."
Flynt v Falwell
Post a Comment