About This Blog

Judging Crimes is a blog about criminal law, violent crime and the judiciary, dedicated to making the liberal case for greater democratic control of the criminal justice system.  It's a "view from the trenches" because it's written by a practitioner, not an academic or journalist.  It examines the changing role of the judiciary in American society by looking at what judges actually do, rather than what they say.  I know what they do because I deal with the consequences every day. 

Opinions issued by judges, from Supreme Court justices on down, are justifications for the exercise of governmental power.  But it is the exercise of power itself that should command our attention, not the justifications.  Judging Crimes is concerned with the reality of judicial power rather than the verbal formulas used to defend it. 

American law professors have long liked to say they teach their students "to think like a lawyer."  Learning to think that way is a matter of internalizing certain assumptions.  The practice of judging is likewise based on a foundation of shared assumptions, among them that the United States Constitution -- a document of 8,335 words, the length of a book chapter -- provides an answer to every question.  Rather like a Ouija board.

These assumptions are so ingrained -- and their internalization is so necessary to the successful practice of law -- that most people who subscribe to them aren't even aware of having done so.  Judging Crimes will try to engage not just with the expressions of judicial power, but with the assumptions on which those expressions  rest.  

Judging Crimes won't be filled with daily entries commenting on the day's events or provide a best-of-the-web welter of links.  Many other blogs already do that, far better than I could hope to do.  (Check out these.)  Instead, Judging Crimes will contain pieces of a length that might seem long for a blog but would be short in a serious magazine.  I hope to post new pieces several times a week.

Powered by Squarespace
Fan!

Become a Facebook fan to be notified of mini-blog entries and new posts and columns.

In Our Name
Test Drive the Book!
« 61. Defending one's authority | Main | 59. Comparative flash points »
Saturday
28Jan2006

60. How do you fire a judge?

It's hard to read about retired Rhode Island traffic court judge Marjorie Yashar without a twinge of sympathy.  She seems to have had some pretty persistent demons to battle.  Articles in the Providence Journal record her arrest for allegedly battering her husband, a heart surgeon, and throwing papers around his medical office; her arrest for allegedly colliding with another traffic judge's car in the traffic court parking lot(!), and then driving away without leaving a note; her screaming at police officers in the hearing of the media about not wanting to be in the newspapers; her leave of absence to attend to psychiatric issues.

This past week, Judge Yashar was arrested again for attacking her husband, and this time she spent the night in a Palm Beach Gardens, Florida slammer.  (Palm Beach Gardens jail guards are used to dealing with a high class of prisoner.  It's the place where ex-Montreal Expo closer Jeff Reardon got arrested, and the town recently saw one of its doctors sentenced in a gruesome fake-Botox case.)

But sympathy is tempered a bit when you read that her own chief judge filed a disciplinary complaint against Judge Yashar, and alleged that "she worked full days less than half of the time in 2004 while taking 12 full sick days and 93 half sick days."  For this she was paid $108,867 a year, with entitlement to receive the same amount for the rest of her life as a pension.

Meanwhile, in east Tennessee,  Thomas A. Austin, a General Sessions (= misdemeanors and small claims)  judge with 26 years of service on the bench, was charged in a kickback scheme.  Allegedly he received kickbacks for sentencing traffic offenders to attend a certain driving school

The amazing thing in cases like this is how long a sitting judge can get away with it.  You wouldn't have had to tell the people who took off work to appear in Judge Yashar's court, only to be told to come back in a week or a month, that she wasn't working full days.  And the thing about extortion is that it takes two to tango.  One of Judge Austin's alleged extortion targets was a Kingston city councilman.  That type of hubris doesn't develop overnight.

Knoxville News-Sentinel story began this way:

In Roane County Attorney Tom McFarland's view, it takes two things to take down a judge suspected of being corrupt.

"Somebody had to stand up to this guy and get it started, and somebody had to tell what they knew once it got started," McFarland said of a probe that led to the arrest Monday of Roane County General Sessions Court Judge Thomas A. Austin.

A third thing is an investigative body willing to look into the matter, and a fourth is a prosecutor willing to take on the case.  That's a lot. 

There's a tendency for lawyers to think: Well, thank goodness they were just traffic court judges.  At least they weren't real judges.  But if they had been more powerful, would they have gotten away with even more?

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.