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
What's not to like?

Hit the "like" button on Facebook to be notified of mini-blog entries and new posts and columns.

In Our Name
Test Drive the Book!
« 135. The deterrence assumptions | Main | 133. Anti-democracy »
Wednesday
Jul052006

134. Something in the water

Somebody should check the water system in the Brazos County Courthouse.   Back in December we had the debacle of a county court of law judge - one who hears misdemeanor and civil cases - caught red-handed coaching a lawyer appearing before him.  (See post 76.)  Now a district judge - one who hears felony cases - who works in the same building is going publicly insane.  Coincidence or conspiracy?  You be the judge. 

No, wait, on second thought, you don't want to be the judge.  His name is Rick Davis.  Just three months after ascending the bench he sent a bizarre letter to the district attorney.  The letter is described in the present tense in this timeline from the estimable Bryan-College Station Eagle :

Davis writes a five-page letter to District Attorney Bill Turner in which he compares [assistant district attorney Laura Cass] to a Nazi concentration camp guard and calls her "sneaky and surreptitious." Davis' correspondence also contains what seem to be veiled threats and profane passages, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct later will conclude after receiving a complaint from Turner. Among them, Davis contends that criticizing a judge's decision was "as if you defecated on Mount Sinai, holy ground." He adds that Turner is "mocking" his decision and doing so "is just as bad in God's sight as if you were to duck into one of your assistant's offices and fornicate with one of your assistants."

Cue the Twilight Zone theme.

The district attorney reported the nutso judge to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, which reprimanded the judge.  Judge Davis appealed to the state Supreme Court, which not only upheld the reprimand but ordered him to take anger-management classes, too.   Judge Davis responded by saying, in so many words, "Of course, you know, this means war."  Since-deleted pages from his website The Texas Inquisition can still be dug up, although the website's current homepage has been seriously tamed down. 

Judge Davis campaigned against his nemesis, the DA, and petitioned for something with the militaristic name of court of inquiry to investigate him.  When the court of inquiry sided with the DA, the judge took it as evidence  that the conspiracy against him had spread.  He even obtained proof:  a torn-up check retrieved from the dumpster belonging to media consultants who worked on the DA's reelection campaign.  (Another reason not to delay getting that shredder for the office - the dumpster-diving guy in the black robe might not be looking for food.)

Davis has recently requested a second court of inquiry to look into the failure of the first one to sustain his charges.  He seems to be suggesting that the judge who presided over the first one was corrupted by Ms. Cass, the attorney he compared to a Nazi prison camp guard,  who allegedly was seen wearing a "revealing blouse" while sitting on a table in front of the judge in a skirt "with her legs crossed".   (Judge Davis's idea of Nazi prison camps was apparently formed by watching a certain 1960s sitcom.)

Ms. Cass, now a defense attorney, not only denies that anything of the kind happened but points out that she was six months pregnant at the time.  But when all the sexual innuendo - remember the line about fornicating with an ADA in the judge's initial letter to the DA - is coupled with Davis's evident obsession with her,  it's hard not to believe that the judge's problem goes way back.  Way, way back: I was beguiled, and it's her fault

Reader Comments (2)

Wow. I must say that while I have problems with Virginia judges being appointed by the legislature at least our system seems to keep guys like this from getting to the bench.
July 6, 2006 | Unregistered Commenterken
While outsiders will read your article and say "WOW", they really have no idea. This is the tip of the iceberg with the Brazos County Judicial System. I have been trying to get the Brazos County Attorney to drop my protective order against my husband for over 4 months so I can go to counseling with him and they boldly and flat out refuse to do so. Because of who my husband was, the Brazos County Justice System flexed their muscles and showed who was in control. It scares me to think that we have handed these people the power to control our freedom. I have always been a sceptic, but now I am certain there are innocent people sitting in prison as a direct result of the munipulations and deal making done through our local courts. Maybe one day an investigation into the entire Brazos County Court system will take place.
July 9, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterBeverly

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.